rOLiOMCTYLISM IN THE CAT. 
671 
Reduced outline of the uterus, showing the position of the foetuses. 
Viewed from above. 
Foetus No. 2 had the ordinary number of digits. 
Foetus No. S was also normal. 
Foetus No. 4, the first of those occuping left uterine horn, 
was also normal. 
Foetus No. 5 possessed six digits on each of the fore feet, 
being normal or tetradactylous behind. 
Foetus No. 6 in like manner possessed six toes to each 
fore foot, and four to each hind foot. 
Foetus No. 7 was perfectly normal. 
It thus appears that of the seven unborn kittens, one only 
exactly corresponded with its multidactylous mother, four 
being normal like their father, and two being slightly 
abnormal in the fore extremity and normal behind. 
To add to the interest of the above facts, I may mention 
that in a previous breeding the mother had two kittens, 
doubtless also begotten by a normal father. These two 
kittens were both slightly abnormal. Both were females, 
and both had six toes to each of their fore feet, and five to 
each of their hind feet. One was considerably larger than 
the other. In this larger one all the digits were pretty well 
developed, but in the smaller kitten the right fore foot had 
the second toe very large, whilst the first or innermost toe 
was merely rudimentary. On the left fore foot these pecu¬ 
liarities were exactly reversed. 
The larger of these two kittens having been retained by 
ine (the other was given away) she in her turn became 
pregnant by another normal tom cat. 
As obtained in her parent’s case, her first pregnancy 
resulted in the birth of two kittens only. These were both 
hexadactylous in front and normal or tetradactylous behind. 
Both were females. The mother was* exceedingly wild. 
She and one of her offspring were destroyed before I had 
completed my observations. The other kitten was given 
away, and I have since ascertained that up to the present 
