540 
EEPOET ON THE EXPECTATION OF BEIXHAM CAYE. 
Table I. — Dimensions of Teeth of Bears from the Brixham Cavern. (0 ,,- 01.) 
Can. 
pm 4. 
m 1. 
m 2. 
pm 4. 
m 1. 
m2. 
I m 3. 
1 
140 x 72 
135 x 80 
110 x 75 
135 x 80 
120 x 71 
140 x 70 
91x61 
90x62 
100 x 65 
90x60 
100 x 65 
120 x 71 
120 x 72 
100 x 65 
105 x 65 
110x70 
100 x 70 
120 x 75 
115x68 
85 x 65 
100 x 65 
90x60 
86x52 
60x50 
65x56 
75x63 
66x55 
85x70 
90 x 70 
105 x 75 
110x60 
135 x 73 
155 x 80 
154 x 80 
153 x SO 
150 x 70 
150 x 75 
152x79 
48x30 
58x31 
56x31 
100 x 50 
100 x 50 
105x55 
110x55 
115x55 
100 x 50 
105 x 52 
110 x 75 
105 x 63 
100x63 
110x66 
105 x 70 
109 x 64 
110x65 
115x70 
110x69 
109x68 
92x67 
98x70 
95x70 
80 x 65 
Mean. . 
108x67 
67 x 55 
95x64 
150 x 77 
54x31 
105 x 53 ; 
108 x 67 
91x68 
Canines . — The canine teeth in Bears appear to differ a good deal in size in the two 
sexes, as might be expected perhaps in animals not altogether carnivorous ; and conse- 
quently, from the mere size of these teeth, within certain limits no very sure conclusions 
as to difference of species can be drawn. In the Brixham Collection, besides numerous 
incomplete or broken teeth, there are between twenty and thirty canines whose characters 
can be accurately determined. Their dimensions are given in the above Table ; and as 
regards the types of form presented among them, the principal varieties are exhibited in 
figs. 1, 2, 3, 4 in Plate XLVI. From these it will be seen that they exhibit what may be 
termed three distinct forms, one distinguished principally by its small size, as shown in 
fig. 3, and one by its slenderness of shape, fig. 4. 
If the forms of teeth here represented are compared with those given by M. Schmer- 
ling from the Belgian bone-caves, they will all be found amongst the latter. For in- 
stance, figs. 1 & 2 of the Brixham teeth appear to correspond very closely with M. 
Schmerling’s figs. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ; whilst fig. 4 strongly resembles his figs. 8 & 9, and 
fig. 3 his fig. 7. Whether, as M. Schmerling and many others suppose, these differences 
in the canine teeth are of specific value, and to what extent they are so, is by no means 
an easy question to determine ; and I fully agree with him that sufficient attention has 
not as yet been directed to the dental, amongst other differences dependent upon sex. 
It is not at all improbable, therefore, that figs. 1 & 2 (Plate XLVI.) may represent merely 
the male and female canines of the same species, although it is just as likely they may 
be specifically different. But, so far as I have had any means of judging, it appears 
