SIWALIK CAMELOPARD ALID2E. 
15—113 
of the median ‘costae,’ which in the posterior ‘lobes’ are scarcely recognizable at 
all. At the base of each of the inner ‘ crescents ’ there is a slight, though well- 
marked, ‘ cingulum ; ’ no tubercle exists in the ‘ median valley.’ 
The general plan of structure of these teeth shows that they belong to 
some member of the giraffe family, in the extended sense in which it is employed 
here ; they, however, differ from the corresponding teeth of all described members 
of that family, this difference being mainly shown by the want of development 
of the ‘costae ’ and the presence of the ‘ cingulum.’ These points of difference will 
be more particularly pointed out when we come to consider the other larger mem- 
bers of the family. 
The teeth, though considerably larger, present a certain resemblance to those 
of the elk {Alces palmatus), but are distinguished by the smaller development of the 
antero-external angles of the ‘lobes,’ whereby the centre of the outer surface 
of each ‘ lobe ’ is less depressed than in the elk. The fossil teeth are further dis- 
tinguished by the presence of the ‘ cingulum ’ and by the greater rugosity of the 
enamel ; they, however, undoubtedly approach the molars of Alces more nearly than 
do those of any other member of the family. 
The dimensions of the two teeth are as follows : — 
Length of two teeth 32 
„ of second true molar 1’62 
Width of „ P75 
Length of third „ . . .1*67 
Width of .1 „ 1-56 
Height of anterior crescent of ditto 1'12 
If these dimensions be compared with those of the lower molars of Vishnuthe- 
rium iravadicum given in the first volume \ it will be seen that the upper and lower 
teeth correspond well enough in the matter of size to have belonged to the same 
species. They further correspond in their general plan of structure as closely as 
do the upper and lower molars of the same species of ruminant, and agree in the 
structure of their enamel, and in the presence of a ‘cingulum.’ Both specimens 
are further unique examples of their respective series, and therefore, evidently 
belonged to a very rare animal ; this removes any difficulty of associating the two 
specimens which might be felt on account of the distance of the localities where 
they were respectively obtained. 
Erom the above circumstances it appears highly probable that these two speci- 
mens belong to the same species, or at all events to the same genus of ruminant, and 
they are accordingly provisionally associated. Should this association eventually 
prove erroneous, the upper teeth must be referred to a new species, or genus, as the 
case may be, though there is a very strong presumption that the genus is correctly 
determined. 
Metatarsus — In figure 3 of plate XVII is represented, of one-fiftli the natural 
size, the nearly complete metatarsus of a large and long-limbed ruminant, evidently 
1 P. 57. 
