north. From the accounts publifhed in Europe, 1 fuppofe it to be decided, that thefe are of the fame kind with thofe found in Siberia. Inftances are mentioned of like animal remains found in the more fouthern climates of both hemifpheres; but they are either fo loofely mentioned as to leave a doubt of the fad:, fo inaccurately defcribed as not to Ruthorize the claffing them with, the great northern bones, or fo rare as to found a fufpicion that they have been carried thither as curiofities from more northern regions. So that on the whole there feem to be no certain veftiges of the exiftence of this animal further fouth than the falines lafh mentioned. It is remarkable that the tufks and fkeletons have been afcribed by the naturalifts of Europe to the elephant, while the grinders M have been given to the hippopotamus, or river horfe. Yet it is acknowledged, that the tufks and Skeletons are much larger than thole of the elephant, and the grind- ers many times greater than thofe of the hippopotamus, and eflentially different in form. Wherever thefe grinders are found, there alfo we find the tufks and fkeleton;
but no fkeleton of the hippopotamus nor grinders of the elephant. It will not be faid that the hippopotamus and elephant came always to the fame fpot, the former to depofit his grinders, and the latter his tufks and fkeleton. For what became of the parts not depoiited there? We mufl agree then that thefe remains belong to each other, that they are of one and the fame animal, that this was not a hippopo- tamus, becaufe the hippopotamus had no tufks nor fuch a frame, and becaufe the grinders differ in their fize as well as in the number and form of their points.
That it was not an elephant, I think af- certained by proofs equally decifive. I w^ill not avail myfelf of the authority of the celebrated^' anatomifl, who, from an * Hunter.