190 Proceedings of the Royal Physical Society. 



side, of Mr Bennett's specimen of the Potto, (see woodcut, figs. 

 5, 6) ; and on comparing these sketches with those already 

 given of the Angwdntibo, which, for comparison, I here 

 repeat (figs. 1, 2), the differences will be seen more clearly 

 than could be brought out by any description. In the Ang- 

 wdntibo the hands and feet are small, round, and fleshy, with 

 several large pads ; in the Potto they are large, flat, and thin. 

 In both, as has been already carefully described, the index 

 fingers of the fore hands are undeveloped ; being represented 

 in the Angwdntibo by a simple/tubercle (see * fig. 1.) In the 

 Potto, however, as shown in the drawing, the index is not so 

 like a mere tubercle, but is more developed, and therefore 

 more resembling a finger, than in the Angwdntibo, (See * 

 %• 5.) 



Fig. ] . Hand. , Fig. 2. Foot. 



Angwantibo. 



Mr Carruthers says the tail is perhaps the most striking 

 distinguishing character. I have already in the body of my 

 paper sufficiently described it. 



Mr Carruthers informs me that when comparing the dif- 

 ferent species of Van der Hoeven's genus Stenops, in the 

 British Museum, he was struck with the great diversity of 

 their general appearance, and wondered at a zoologist like 

 Van der Hoeven grouping together what appeared to him to 

 be several well-marked Genera. Indeed, the only explana- 

 tion that occurred to him was, that Van der Hoeven intended 

 to give the character of a Sub-family to his Genus Stenops. 



Mr Carruthers tells me, that while comparing the specimens 

 of these two animals, he had on his table all that has been pub- 



