134 APPENDIX. 
Page 78. 3. Cheirogaleus Smithii. Change to 
Azema Smithii, p. 132. 
Skull:—brain-case globular; nose conical; orbits very large ; pa- 
late very contracted in front, much wider behind; upper cutting- 
teeth 2. 2, in an arched series, nearly equal in height and size, 
erect. 
Skull in shape very like Lepilemur murinus, but differs in the 
inner upper cutting-teeth being scarcely larger and very slightly 
bent, tending toward the central line; and the tails of both animals 
are slender and covered with short hairs. 
Page 78. Add:— 
a. Cheirogaleus samati, Grandidier, Rev. et Mag. Zool. 1868, 
p- 50; and Ann. Se. Nat. 1867, vol. viii. p.294. Hab. West 
coast of Madagascar. 
Page 82, Add:—See 
a. Galago elegantulus, Slack, Proc. Ac. Nat. Sc. Philad. 1867, 
p- 37, which he considers to be distinct from Otogale crassi- 
caudatus. 
Page 86. LEPILEMUR. 
Erase the character of this genus as not being the genus so 
named by I. Geoffroy. The species are referred to other genera as 
follows :— 
8. LEPILEMUR. 
Head round; nose rather short, broad; ears moderate, hair at 
the base external. Fur soft, woolly, with an obscure dorsal streak 
forked on the forehead, uniform. Nose broad. Tail slender, with 
short hairs (like those on the back) at the base; rather thicker and 
with long hairs at the end. Thigh elongate. Hind feet short. Skull:— 
Nose broad, truncated in front. Palate broad, broad in front, scarcely 
wider behind. Intermaxillary bone very narrow, with asharp front 
edge. Upper cutting-teeth none; lower 6, projecting. The front 
upper false grinder slightly higher than the second, with a slight 
lobe at the base of its front edge. . 
Lepilemur, I. Geoffroy, not Gray, Cat. p. 86. 
The absence of cutting-teeth is the peculiar characteristic of this 
genus, and not an unusual peculiarity as I thought it might be (Cat. 
p- 88). There are several specimens in the British Museum con- 
firming this peculiarity. 
