REVIEWS. 241 
which will rebut them. Whether he is really right or wrong, how- 
ever, I do not pretend to say. I merely say that the evidence is 
insufficient, and.I only object to his taking for granted what may 
be a question in dispute. 
HI. ‘Ears short and broad,” in Trichophocine ; vs. ‘the ears 
much longer than in Trichophocinee,” in Oulophocine. 
Thinking that no fairer meter of the length of the ears could be 
found than in their ratio to the head, I gave, after the measure- 
ment of the skulls, those of the ears. 
Mr. Allen, in answer, remarks that I seem “to have forgotten 
that the bulk of Eumetopias is several times that of the largest of 
the fur seals. So that, while the ear is absolutely but little longer 
in the fur seals than in the longest-eared hair seals, it is relatiy ely 
much longer.” 
I will only reply in the expressive language of Mr. Allen, that 
the idea of determining the slenderness of the ears — rudimentary 
structures, too— by their ratio to the *‘ bulk” of is animal, “is, 
to say the least, a novel one to me.” 
Mr. Allen has declined to discuss the taxonomic value of these 
distinctions, 7. e. to prove that they are of sub-family value. I 
shall not attempt to prove that they are not. Every well-informed 
therologist, from his own knowledge of the differences éxhibited 
by otherwise homogeneous genera in the character of the pelage, 
the variation in size, and the comparative smallness of very small 
ears, the only characteristics still urged for the differentiation of 
the “ sub-families,” will decide for himself. 
I felt constrained—my great respect for the abilities of Mr. 
Allen constrained me—to examine the basis of Mr. Allen’s classi- 
fication before dissenting from it and exposing my own, views. 
The great respect which I entertained I endeavored to manifest in 
my review of his work; in the mode of presentation of objections, 
Mr. Allen has furnished abundant precedents. 
As to my own views, I shall leave to others to decide whether 
they are more tenable than Mr Allen’s or othérwise. I shall only 
add that after mentioning the combination of characters common 
to Zalophus (which Mr. Allen has apparently overlooked), I pre- 
sented a dichotomous synopsis exhibiting the subordination of the 
groups, making special use of the form of the profile, whether 
decurved, or whether straight or incurved, and the dev elopment of 
the sagittal crest. 
