58 
THE GEOLOGIST. 
in Februarv, 1858. At that time I bad not read Dr. I'alconer'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 Elcplias Texianus 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. Ji95). From 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 E. primigenius, while the tooth dis- 
covered by Mr. Bollaert appears to beloncr to the distinct species of 
E. Texianus yel Columhi. This is the only specimen which I have 
seen of tliis type, as Dr. Falconer has not stated where the specimens 
are on which he described his species. He appends as a doubtful 
synonym, E. Jaclcsoni?, Silliman's Journal, 1838, vol. xxxiv. page 
3(33 ;" but after examination of the very bad drawings contained in 
that page, I cannot make any distinction between them and E. pri- 
migenins. 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 Rules for Zoological IVomen- 
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. Columhi 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 jS"ueva Granada), I 
trust that this name will not be accepted. That of E. Texianus, 
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, dentium molarium (m. 6), colJiculi undulati, magis o^enioti 
quam in E. Indico. Its association with E. Indicus and Armeniacus, 
by Dr. Falconer, seems warranted by its legitimate af&nities. 
The greater width between the enamel-folds may indicate a more 
sapid and juicy diet than that of the larch-eating elephants of Esch- 
scholtz Bay. The nutritious prairie-grass of Texas did not require 
such formidable apparatus for its comminution as was possessed by the 
{Siberian mammoths. The indication of this species, therefore, illus- 
trates the remarkable special adaptation of animals to external and 
climatal conditions, and may not be altogether irrelevant to the ques- 
tions discussed by the physio-philosophers of the present day, with 
regard to the origin of species. 
