178 
and the woolly fur, make apparent; the fur being generally more 
copious, may reasonably be expected to extend further upon the 
muzzle; and the generality of instances proves that the extent of 
naked surface may differ in very nearly allied species, and is not 
sufficient to warrant generic distinction. Therefore I do not think it 
advisable to adopt the genus Poephngus. 
Bubalus. 
Horns attached in a plane anterior to that of the occiput, flattened 
or trigonal, inclined outwards and backwards, with the point bending 
upwards. 
Hab. Southern Asia, its islands, and ikfrica. 
B. buffelus. B. depressicornis. 
B. brachycerus. B. Caffer. 
Although Major Smith was deceived as to the affinities of the 
Anoa, later as well as earlier naturalists have assigned it to its true 
place, and a glance at the stuffed specimen in the British Museum 
leaves the matter beyond a doubt. I have examined the skull in the 
Museum of the College of Surgeons, and cannot see that it has even 
a title to generic distinction. Naturalists seem at all times to have 
been prone to assign generic rank to whatever was mysterious or 
difficult to classify, and I can in no other way account for this species 
being made a genus. 
It will be seen that my endeavour has been rather to ascertain and 
demonstrate whatever natural degrees of relationship exist among the 
species of this family, than to compose a system for mere convenience 
of reference ; but so far from that being any hindrance to the prac¬ 
tical adoption of my views, I think that in arranging the specimens 
in a museum, or the materials of a work, it will generally be found 
more convenient to be able to dispose the members of a natural group 
in whatever order may suit our immediate object, than to be com¬ 
pelled to place them in accordance with the stringent laws of a purely 
analytical method ; and that for the purpose of referring a new species 
to its true location, when we have not the means of observing all 
characters that may be necessary for the determination of a series of 
natural affinities, the external characters which can be assigned to a 
group when its limits are well made out, will be found sufficient; 
while on the other hand, not only the external characters, but some¬ 
times even those of anatomical structure, will, in a group which has 
not been previously subjected to a full and careful examination, be as 
the letters of an unknown language, often leading into error and 
confusion. 
With regard to nomenclature, I have used such names as I find 
most generally adopted by later naturalists who have given attention to 
this subject, generally taking, where I had a choice, such as appeared 
to have been of earliest date; and as I only enumerate such species 
as I have seen, I must not be considered, although I have omitted a 
few which appear to be varieties, as rejecting all that are left out. 
