124 PROCEEDINGS OF THE GEOLOGICAL SOCIEXr. [Jan. 22, 



of the other, the length being 1 inch 9 lines. This similarity is 

 striking, though jDcrhaps it is a mere coincidence. An antler with 

 rounded beam and brow- antler ansing close to the base, and having 

 a circumference at the base of 3 inches 3 lines, and at mid-beam 

 2 inches 6 lines, probably belonged to Cervus Tarandus. There are 

 also numerous pieces of palmated antlers, which either belonged to 

 Cervus Dama, C. Tarandus, or C. Guettardi. There are also teeth, 

 fragments of carpals and tarsals, and other fragments, which are 

 undoubtedly cervine, though I have not been able to make out the 

 species. 



Of Eleplias jprimigenius the only remains found were a portion of 

 a tusk of a large, and the second molar of a small individual*. Of these 

 latter, one has not been used at all, and the other is hardly worn. 



Of Ursus Sjpelceusf, the only representative of the Plantigrade 

 family in the cave, were found the left humerus (of the same size as 

 some from Gailenreuth), also canines and molars. The latter are 

 larger than any from Quinger or Gailenreuth, in the Oxford Museum. 

 The humeri and tibiae of the Fox indicate a creature of the average 

 size. On the other hand, the upper jaw and sectorial upper molar, and 

 humerus of Canis lupus are much larger than any of the recent spe- 

 cimens with which I have had an opportunity of comparing them. 

 But, to pass from the Oanidce to the cognate family of Hycfnidce, as 

 at Kirkdale, the normal inhabitants of the den, numerous teeth of all 

 ages, the ilium and metacarpals and jaws, which were in various 

 stages of decay, rewarded our research. The great preponderance of 

 teeth X may perhaps in some degree be accounted for by the decay 



* Length of crown of perfect molar, 



in. lin. 

 2 5 



Breadth of ditto 1 



It is broader posteriorly than a molar from Kirkdale, in the Oxford Museum, 

 and figured in the ' Reliquiae.' 



t The third molar of the upper jaw (M. 3) is 2 inches in antero-posterior 

 length, and in breadth 0'875 of an inch ; while the largest from Quinger 

 and G-ailenreuth (in Oxford) measures but 1-875 in length and 0-75 in breadth. 

 The canines are smaller than the largest from Quinger, but of equal size with 

 others : — 



in. lin. 



Length of perfect canine 4 3 



Circumference at base of crown 2 3 



\ In identifying the premolars, I made out the following points which may 

 perhaps be found useful. A ridge passing over the crown in the lower-jaw series 

 divides it into two equal or subequal parts, while in the upper jaw it circum- 

 scribes the inner third only of tlie crown, or at least divides it very unequally. 

 Of the lower jaw, premolar 2 (P. M. 2) is characterized by the small crown, large 

 posterior talon, and by having its anterior fang suddenly reflected to afford room 

 for the root of the canine ; premolar 3 (P. M. 3) by the slight backward curvature 

 of the anterior fang, coupled with the transverse compression of the posterior 

 talon ; premolar 4 (P. M. 4) by the straight diverging fangs and the enormous deve- 

 lopment of the posterior talon, the posterior and inner side of which is bevelled 

 off obliquely to allow of the close apposition of (M. 1 ) the molar. In the upper 

 jaw, the first premolar has its single root incurved, the second has its crown 

 divided into two unequal portions and its fangs divergent ; while the length and 

 great curvature of the fangs, the incurved crown, and the ridge circumscribing 

 its inner tliird characterize the third premolar. About the fourth no mistake 

 can be made. 



