452 M^Murtrie's Translation of the Regne Animal. 



covered with a hairy skin, continuous with that of the head ; nor 

 do the prominences fall, those of the giraffe excepted.''^ Cuvier says, 

 " la seule giraffe en a de teiles," " the giraffe alone has such pro- 

 minences :" i. e. with a hairy skin, and which never fall. Here 

 the translator has stated precisely the reverse of what his author 

 says. 



Whatever opinion Dr. M'Murtrie may entertain of his own 

 qualifications as a translator for such a work as Cuvier's Regne 

 Animal, I will do him the justice to suppose, he would not deem 

 any other individual capable of so important an undertaking, 

 who could commit the errors I have animadverted upon. It 

 would be deemed a bold thing of any man now living, in a trans- 

 lation of Cuvier's work, to make important changes in the no- 

 menclature, to suppress it in some instances, and to frequently 

 impute to this great naturalist, " this is a mistake.'''' Dr. M'Mur- 

 trie has felt confidence enough in himself to do all these things. 

 There are, it is true, a few blemishes in Cuvier's work, a,s there 

 are spots in the sun ; but the important ones have, for some rea- 

 son or other, escaped the vigilance of his translator. Speaking 

 of the suricats, {ryzcena Iliger,) Cuvier says, at page 158, 8vo. 

 edition, 1829, Vol. I, " they are distinguished from the mangousts 

 and from all the carnivorous animals which have hitherto been 

 spoken of, because they have only four toes to each foot,^^ forgetting 

 that he had just before, at page 154, said, " the hyena may be 

 placed after the dogs, as a fourth sub-genus, distinguished by 

 the number of its toes, which is four to every foot.^^ This error 

 we find translated, without remark from Dr. M'Murtrie. 



The third order of the mammalia, is called by Cuvier carnas- 

 siers, from their being addicted to flesh. This order was formerly 

 called carnivora ; but as some animals are merely addicted to 

 flesh, whilst others are voracious after flesh, Cuvier has trans- 

 ferred the term carnivora to these last. Dr. M'Murtrie has sub- 

 stituted carnaria for carnassiers, without giving his reasons, and 

 without apparently considering, whether there is any essential 

 difTerence between the meaning of the two words, carnaria and 

 carnivora. It was the duty of such a translator to have left 

 matters as he found them. In other instances this translator 

 has totally omitted important terms, apparently because he could 

 not make them bend to his classical powers ; this is a source of 

 serious inconvenience to his readers, who are thus obliged to re- 



