h kind they belonged to, but I
never remember any mixture of the two. As regards the difference in
appearance of the adults there can be no question. The one is a higher,
longer animal, with smooth shiny hair of a light golden fulvous, the
spots being clear and well defined, but, as is remarked by Sir Walter
Elliot, the strongest difference of character is in the skulls, those
of the larger pard being longer and more pointed, with a ridge running
along the occiput, much developed for the attachment of the muscles,
whereas the smaller pard has not only a rougher coat, the spots being
more blurred, but it is comparatively a more squat built animal, with
a rounder skull without the decided occipital ridge. There is a mass
of evidence on the point of distinctness--Sir Walter Elliot,
Horsfield, Hodgson, Sir Samuel Baker, Johnson (author of 'Field
Sports in India'), "Mountaineer," a writer in the _Bengal Sporting
Review_, even Blyth and Jerdon, all speak to the difference, and yet
no decided separation has been made. There is in fact too much
confusion and too many names. For the larger animal _Felis pardus_
is appropriate, and the _leopardus_ of Temminck, Schreber and others
is not. Therefore that remains; but what is the smaller one to be
called? I should say _Felis panthera_ which, being common to Asia
and Africa, was probably the panther of the Romans and Greeks. Jerdon
gives as a synonym _F. longicaudata_ (Valenciennes), but I find on
examination of the skulls of various species that _F. longicaudata_
has a complete bony orbit which places it in Gray's genus _Catolynx_,
and it is too small for our panther. We might then say that we have
the pard, the panther, and the leopard in India, and then we should
be strictly correct. Some sportsmen speak of a smaller panther which
Kinloch calls the third (second?) sort of panther, but this differs
in no respect from the ordinary one, save in size, and it is well
known that this species varies very much in this respect. I am not
singular in the views I now express. Years ago Colonel Sykes, who
was a well known naturalist, said of the pard: "It is a taller,
stronger, and slighter built animal than the next species, which I
consider the _panther_."

The skull of the pard in some degree resembles that of the jaguar,
which again is nearest the tiger, whereas that of the panther appears
to have some affinity to the restricted cats. In disposition all the
pards and panthers are alike sa