58 



THE GEOLOGIST. 



in Pebruary, 1858. At that time I liad not read Br. Falconer's 

 paper, yet from the remarkable appearance of the tooth, the conclu- 

 sion that it was a distinct species of elephant, closely allied to the 

 Indian type, forced itself on me. This opinion was confirmed by 

 Professor Owen, and after the name of JElcplias Texianiis had been 

 given to the species, the specimen was deposited in the British Mu- 

 seum, and now forms one of the most conspicuous objects in the 

 gallery devoted to Proboscidea. Professor Owen, in September, 1858, 

 thought fit to adopt the name of E. Texianus for the species, in his 

 eloquent address to the British Association (and also in the second 

 edition of ' Palaeontology,' p. J395). Prom a comparison of this tooth 

 with that already possessed by the Museum from the same locality, 

 described by Dr. Carpenter, I think decidedly that the remains in 

 the Museum are identical with JE. primigenius, while the tooth dis- 

 covered by Mr. Bollaert appears to belong to the distinct species of 

 I^. Texianus vel Columli. This is the only specimen which I have 

 seen of this type, as Dr. Palconer has not stated where the specimens 

 are on which he described his species. He appends as a doubtful 

 synonym, " Jaclcsoni?, Silliman's Journal, 1838, vol. xxxiv. page 

 303 ;" but after examination of the very bad drawings contained in 

 that page, I cannot make any distinction between them and E. pri- 

 migenius. The tooth of E. Texianus (m. 6, lower jaw) has enamel- 

 folds much wider and much more waved and undulated than that of 

 the E. Jachsoni. The canals of cement are consequently of much 

 greater width, and the whole aspect of the tooth is much more like 

 E. Indicus. 



As the British Association, in their Pules for Zoological Nomen- 

 clature, have authoritatively sanctioned the principle that names not 

 clearly defined, and likely to propagate important errors, may be 

 changed, and as the name of E. Coliimhi lays itself open to the grave 

 charge that it is not clear whetlier it is named in honour of Columbus, 

 or because it is found in Colombia (Venezuela y Xueva Granada), I 

 trust that this name will not be accepted. That of E. Texinmis, 

 founded upon a yet unimpeached geographical distinction, if it has 

 not the advantage of published priority, yet gives a more lucid idea of 

 the nature of the species which it indicates. 



The figure by Mr. Mackie gives a better idea of its appearance 

 than any mere verbal description. I however define it as Elephas 

 Texianus, deiiliuni molariiim (m. G), coUicuU undulati, magis remoti 

 quam in E. li/d/co. Its association with E. Indicus and Armeniacus, 

 by Dr. Palconer, seems warranted by its legitimate affinities. 



The greater widtli between the enamel-folds may indicate a more 

 sapid and juicy diet tlian that of the larch-eating elephants of Esch- 

 scliolt/. Bay. The nutritious prairie-grass of Texas did not require 

 sucli formidable apparatus for its comminution as was possessed by the 

 Siberian mammoths. The indication of this species, therefore, illus- 

 ti'at(>s tlie remarkable special adaptation of animals to external and 

 climatal conditions, and niay not be altogether irrelevant to the ques- 

 tions discussed by the physio-philosophers of the present day, with 

 regard to the origin of species. 



