84 
BRITISH FOSSIL ELEPHANTS. 
they could not have had separate alveoli. Again, neither in extent nor in direction 
of wear do the planes of detrition of the upper and lower jaws, left side, agree. 
The extent of worn surface of the two teeth on either side of the maxilla is 46 
millimetres, but it is 60 millimetres on the left lower jaw and 40 on the right, 
so that the ^^-ante-penultimate tooth does not seem to have had an opposing 
grinder, although its crown, as may be seen in De Blainville’s plate iv, fig. 1, is more 
than half detrited. Further, the tips of the collines of the penultimate of the left lower 
ramus should present fewer abrasions than those of the right side from the additional 
tooth in front; but this is not so, the two being equally detrited. De Blainville’s figure 
shows three well-marked septa between the teeth of the left ramus, none of which, how¬ 
ever, remain in the specimen, excepting a remnant of the one in front of the penultimate ; 
besides, the ante-penultimate tooth of the right lower ramus is now wanting. Altogether, 
the specimen is at present hopelessly useless as an exponent,jyer se, of this so-called abnor¬ 
mality a conclusion I have arrived at after a careful re-examination of the specimen in 
consort with my friend, Mr. W. Davies, F.G.S. It is to be desired, therefore, that all like 
abnormalities should be carefully described, in order to further establish the existence of 
this so-called First milk-molar. 
Among the varied and interesting Mammalian remains discovered in Kent’s Cavern, 
Devonshire, is the remarkably diminutive milk-molar, No. 5774 (PI. IX, fig. 4). 1 
In a memorandum kindly furnished me by Mr. Pengelly, F.R.S., he states that the 
tooth was found “on the 2nd of December, 1871, in the Cave of Rodentia, in the four- 
foot level of cave-earth, with one tooth of Hyaena, and bones and bone fragments.” It 
is described by Mr. Busk, F.R.S., with his usual care and precision; and he surmises, I 
think justly, that it may be the //re-ante-penultimate milk-molar of the Mammoth. 8 It 
was originally entire, but a fragment of the crown has been recently lost. In dimensions 
this tooth is one of the smallest milk-molars of any Elephant with which I am acquainted, 
and is even more diminutive than the first milk-teeth of the Maltese Pigmy Elephants. 
It is 0-4 X 0-3 inch in breadth, the smallest from the Maltese Elephants being (P4X0-32, 
whilst the//re-ante-penultimate of the African Elephant is (P65X0-4. 
The crown-formula of fig. 4a, PI. IX, is x 2 x. The tips of one of the digitations show- 
signs of detrition, and the well-formed and consolidated fangs give evidence, at all events, 
that the animal did not die in the womb. The probability is, therefore, that this very 
small tooth may be a rare instance of the yjr<?-ante-penultimate appearing in the lower 
jaw of the Mammoth, its long divergent fangs leading to the belief that it belonged to the 
mandible. 
tor permission to figure this interesting object and other Mammoth remains from the above-named 
rock cavity I am under obligations to the Kent’s Cavern Committee of the British Association, and to that 
laborious and painstaking cave-digger, Mr. Pengelly, whose troglodytic researches have done much to 
advance our knowledge of the Pleistocene fauna of Great Britain, and to systematize cave-explorations in 
general. 
2 ‘ Report Brit. Association,’ 18/2, p. 37. 
