| Locality of Tiger. | Purneah | Southern India | ||
| ft. | in. | ft. | in. | |
| Length. | 11 | 0 | 10 | 2 |
| Girth of Chest. | 4 | 6 | 6 | 1 |
| Girth of Head. | 2 | 10 | 3 | 5 |
| Tail. | 3 | 4 | 3 | 1 |
| Round Fore-arm. | 2 | 2 | 2 | 10 |
| Height. | 3 | 7 | 3 | 9 |
| Total of feet and inches. | 27 | 5 | 29 | 4 |
The shorter tiger has an advantage of nearly two feet in all-round measurement.
Sir Joseph Fayrer has also been called in question for his belief in twelve feet tigers, but what he says is reasonable enough. "The tiger should be measured from the nose along the spine to the tip of the tail, as he lies dead on the spot where he fell, before the skin is removed. One that is ten feet by this measurement is large, and the full-grown male does not often exceed this, though no doubt larger individuals (males) are occasionally seen, and I have been informed by Indian sportsmen of reliability that they have seen and killed tigers over twelve feet in length." ('Royal Tiger of Bengal,' p. 29).
Sir Joseph Fayrer in a letter to Nature, June 27, 1878, brings forward the following evidence of large tigers shot by sportsmen whose names are well known in India.
Lieutenant-Colonel Boileau killed a tiger at Muteara in Oude, in 1861, over 12 feet; the skin when removed measured 13 feet 5 inches.
Sir George Yule has heard once of a 12-foot tiger fairly measured, but 11 feet odd inches is the largest he has killed, and that twice or thrice.
Colonel Ramsay (Commissioner) killed in Kumaon a tiger measuring 12 feet.
Sir Joseph Fayrer has seen and killed tigers over 10 feet, and one in Purneah 10 feet 8 inches, in 1869.
Colonel J. Sleeman does not remember having killed a tiger over 10 feet 6 inches in the skin.
Colonel J. MacDonald has killed one 10 feet 4 inches.