The udder of Bubalus is said to have four mammae; they are not stated to be in a square, but, on examination, I find they are so; the udder of Taurus has likewise four teats in a square. Thirteen pairs of ribs are set down as a distinguishing character of the sub-genus Taurus; but the Cape Buffalo, Domestic Buffalo, and the Manilla Buffalo (in the sub-genus Bubalus), and the Gaur (in the sub-genus Bison), all possess thirteen pairs of ribs. In the sub-genus Bison the tail is said to be _shorter_ than the tail of Bubalus; but on subjecting them to the infallible test of feet and inches, I find the tails of the Aurochs, Gaur, Yak, and Gayal, to be decidedly _longer_ than those of the Cape or the Manilla Buffalo. The legs of Bisons are stated to be more slender than those of Buffaloes,--the reverse of this is the fact in the instances which I have had an opportunity of observing. SPECIFIC DETAILS. The details of a system of scientific classification should be precise, methodical, and consistent; but the method observed by Col. Smith, in describing the lengths of animals, can scarcely be called either precise or consistent; for example, he states:-- 1st. That the Cape Buffalo is nine feet from _nose to ROOT of tail_. 2d. That the Gaur is twelve feet long _to the END of tail_. 3d. That the Aurochs is ten feet three inches _from nose to tail_. 4th. That the Domestic Buffalo is eight feet six inches long, _without mentioning either nose or tail_. In none of these cases can we be even proximately certain of the length of the animal. In the first instance we may err to the amount of the length of the head; as it is not stated whether the measure was taken when the head was extended in a line with the back, or in a position at right angles with the back, or in any intermediate position. The following outline will illustrate this:-- [Illustration] It is obvious that the length of a line from the nose to the tail will vary according to the different positions of the head of the animal. In the second instance (taking it for granted that the measure was taken from the nose), the same difficulty exists with respect to the head, and another difficulty presents itself in our being left to guess the length of the tail, which might be eighteen inches, or it might be four feet. In the third instance, the same difficulty exists with respect to the head, and the difficulty is further complicated by our being left to guess whether the ROOT or the END of the tail is meant. In the fourth we are completely "_at sea_." The true value of these characteristic distinctions, definitions, or descriptions, are left to the appreciation of the judicious reader. Colonel Smith may doubtless be, what he has been styled, "an indefatigable naturalist," and "in general" an exact one; but in this special instance of the _Genus Bos_, his warmest admirers must allow that his accuracy and precision have not kept pace with his industry.