OF THE SIVALitr HILLS. 139 



base ; and the section is seen to be the same as in \he Tiger. The cheek 

 teeth had consisted of two false molars, a carnassier aiA a tuberculous 

 tooth on either side. The tuberculous and the first false molar ha^ dropped 

 out. The socket of the tuberculous tooth is distinct on one side. Tho&o gf 

 the first false molars are more ambiguous. In all the specimens of the 

 F. Spelcea observed by M. Goldfuss,* this false molar was invariably want- 

 ing, and he was induced to consider it as a specific distinction of the fossil. 

 But CuviER attributes its absence to dropping out at an early period. 



In our fossil we were at first led to think that there was no small false 

 molar, from the very contracted space between the canine and the large 

 false molar not admitting of room for it. In the fossil the space is 

 0.3 inch whereas in the Tiger it is 0.7 inch. But on carefully clearing 

 the interval we have detected on the left side an alveolar cavity. In this 

 respect therefore the fossil does not differ from the existing large species, t 

 The great false molar and the carnassier tooth resemble in form, those of 

 the Tiger exactly. But they differ considerably in two respects which 

 we consider as distinctive marks of the fossil. 1st, The length of the two 

 teeth in the fossil is exactly equal to that of the full grown Tiger No. 2, 

 although it measures 10.9 inches in length of head, while the Tiger is 

 13.1 inches ; 2d, the large false molar is directed inwards, so that its long 

 axis makes a considerable angle with that of the carnassier. This position 

 of the false molar holds in a slight degree in the genus Felis generally, 

 but it is very marked in the fossil. 



The obscurity of the sutures, and the extent to which the fossil is 

 still enveloped in stone, do not admit of our determining precisely the limits 

 of many of the bones of the cranium and face. 



* Quoted in Cuvier Oss. Fossil. Vol. 4, p. 452. 



t The presence or absence both of the tuberculous and the first false molar, appears to 

 be very uncertain in aged Felinae. In a very old Tiger, No. 1, of the measurements, with the 

 canines and all the teeth much worn, both the tuberculous teeth, and the small false molar of 

 one side are present. Upon the opposite side all trace of alveolus has disappeared. AVhereas 

 in younger animals with unworn teeth, we had the tuberculoxxs, and first molars, loss complete- 



