INTRODUCTORY OBSERVATIONS. 
xxi. 
Java . — Herr. K. Martin^ has described some fragments of molars of a stegodont 
elephant from Java, which it is suggested may not improbably belong either to 
Elephas insignis or E. homhifrons. 
Borneo. — The present writer^ has described and figured a last upper true molar 
of Mastodon latidens from Borneo, which indicates the occurrence of a small race of 
this species in that island ; a small-sized figure of this tooth is given in woodcut fig. 
7 (page xvi.). 
China .- — From China a lower molar of a species of Hymnarctos (fig. 11) has 
been described and figured by the present writer,® which 
may perhaps be identical with one of the Siwalik species. 
Part of the left maxilla of a species of Sus from a cave 
in Sechuen, N. W. China has been provisionally identi- 
fied by the writer^ with Sus giganteus. Dr. Ernst 
Koken® has recently described and figured a considerable 
series of Mammalian teeth collected by Baron von. 
Richthofen from caves in the .province of Yunnan, 
which lies immediately south of Sechuen (Szechuen), whence the greater number 
of the original specimens described by Sir Richard Owen® were obtained. In- 
cluding the forms previously identified by the present writer (indicated by an 
asterisk). Dr. Koken gives the following list of Siwalik species which range into 
China, viz. 
Fig. 11. Hymnarctos. sp Second 
right lower true molar ; from the 
Pliocene (?) of S. China, 
British Museum (No. 28588). 
Mastodon perimensis, var. sinensis.^ 
>> (‘^/•) pandionis. 
^Elephas clifti. 
* „ insignis. 
Elephas {cf.) bombifrons. 
Rhinoceros blanfordi,® var. hipparionum. 
,, sivalensis. 
A species of Hipparion is described under the name of E. richthofeni and is 
considered to be very close to H. antilopinus. Additional teeth of Hycena sinensis^ 
Owen, are described ; and that species is considered distinct from 11 . felina, but ex- 
tremely near to an unnamed Siwalik maxilla figured in vol. II. pi. XXXVA. fig. 4 
of this work.® In regard to Rhinoceros sivalensis it may be mentioned that the last 
true molar figured by Owen in the ‘ Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc.’ vol. XXVI. pi. XXIX. 
figs. 1, 2 under the name of R. sinensis is identified with that species; but that the 
outer lamina of an upper premolar represented in fig. 3 of the same plate is con- 
sidered distinct, and the name R. sinensis retained for it : under the latter name Dr. 
Koken figures (pi. VI. fig. 1) a perfect upper premolar, which precisely resembles 
Owen’s specimen. Now since it is most probable that the two specimens figured by 
1 ‘ Beitr. Geol. Ost. Asiens u. Australiens,’ vol. IV. pt. I. (1884). 
2 ‘Proc. Zool. Soc.’ 1885, pi. XLVIII. 3 “Cat. Foss. Mamm. Brit. Mus.” pt. I. pp. 156, 157 (1885). 
4 Ibid. pt. II. p. 270. No. M. 2462 (1885). 5 . ‘ Palaeontologische Ahhandlungen,’ vol. III. pt. 2 (1885). 
6 ‘ Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc.’ vol. XXVI. (1870). 
7 The writer is hy no means sure that the specimen on which this determination rests (Koken, op. cit. pi. VII. fig. 1, 
erroneously described in the description of the plate as belonging to the left side) is not the imperfect inTs of a trilophodont 
species. 
8 Syn. Aceratherium blanfordi. 9 Dr. Koken misquotes the plate as XXVIa. 
