40 MAMMALIA. 



p. 310) says R. megarhinws (R. leptorhinus) occurs in the Val 

 d'Arrio upper beds, and Prof. Dawkins {loc. cit, p, 214) also says 

 the species is abundant in that locality ; but Dr. Forsyth Major 

 (Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc, Vol. XLI., p. 1, 1885) excludes it from 

 bis latest list of Val d'Arno Mammals. M. Deperet (Vert. Foss. 

 Plioc. Roussillon, Ann. Sci. G^o!., Vol. XVII., p. 177, 1885) 

 would refer our Red (Jrag Rhinoceros to R. leptorhinus, Cuv, {R. 

 megarhinus, Christol.). It seems open to grave doubt whether the 

 forms called by M. Deperet R. levtoi-hinus, Cuv., would be 

 accej)ted by British palaeontologists .is evidence of that species 

 (Lydekker, Geol. Mag., Dec. 2, Vol. III., p. 329, 1886). There 

 is doubtless great difficulty in the correlation of the English and 

 continental species of this genus, and possibly, as Prof. Dawkins 

 seemed to think in 1865 (Nat. Hist. Rev., Vol. V., p. 403), the 

 forms called R. Schleiermacheri and R.- megarhinus may be but 

 one species ; this, however, has yet to be proved. 



Gtenus TAPIEUS, Cuvier. 



TaPIUUS AEVEENENSIS (?) DEVEZE §• BOUILLET. 



(=T. PRISCUS, OWEN.') 



Plate VI., Fig. 10, a, h, 11, a, h. 



The genus Tapirus was first recognized as British by Sir R. 

 Owen (Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc, Vol. XII., p. 222, 1856), certain 

 lower and upper teeth from the Red Crag of Suffolk being 

 referred to T. priscus, Kaup, and this determination has since 

 been very generally accepted ; but Mr. R. Lydekker (Cat. Foss. 

 Mamm. Brit. Mus., Pai t iii., p. 3, 1886, and Quart. Journ. Geol. 

 Soc, Vol. XLIL, p. 366, 1886) has noticed that the Tapir 

 teeth from the English Crag are smaller than those of T. priscus, 

 and agree better with those of T. arvernensis and T. elegans. 



T. arvernensis, Dev. and Bou. (Essai sur la Montagne de 

 Boulade, 1827), was the first name used for a fossil Tapir ; 

 the T. elegans, Pomel (Catalogue Mdthodique, p. 84, 1853) has. 

 teeth a trifle smaller, but its title to specific distinction is very 

 doubtful ; T. priscus, Kaup. (1832) is said to be generally 

 larger than T. arvernensis, although, judging from the measure- 

 ment given by Deperet (Vert. Foss. Plioc. Roussillon, Ann. Sci. 

 Geol., Vol. XVII., p. 180, 1885), the difference is not very great; 

 and should the two species prove to be identical, the name 

 T. arverne^isis will have to be adopted. 



The species of fossil Tapirs having been founded on such 

 slender evidence, their distinctness is very doubtful, and it might 

 have been better to let Sir R. Owen's determination of the 

 English specimens remain for the present; but as Air. Lyddeker 

 has made the alteration (loc. cit!), and the English specimens 

 agree rather more nearly with the Tapirus arvernensis, this name 

 is here adopted. 



