54 Miller — .1 New Foasil Bear j'r<iiu Ohio. 



and large cheekteeth. The exthict North American species 

 liitherto described are Arciodns pristiaus Leidy, Ursus amplklens 

 Leidy, U. aiiierlcanas fossilis Leidy, Arctotheriumsimum Cope, and 

 Ursus haplodon Cope. These may be examined chronologically. 



Ardodus pristinus Leidy (Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadel})hia, 

 VII, p. 90, June, 1854), from the sands of the Ashley River, South 

 Carolina, is a small-toothed species in no way closely related to 

 that represented by the Ohio specimen. 



Ursus amplidens Leid}'^ (.Journ. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, 

 N. S., Ill, p. 168, November, 1856), from " a ravine in the vicinit}^ 

 of Natchez, Mississippi," is known from a penultimate upper 

 molar, and a left mandibular ramus with the posterior tooth in 

 place. The specimen is thus exactly complementary to the Oliio 

 skull. The only common ground for comparison between the 

 two is the size of the molar figured by Leidy and the space for- 

 merly occupied by the homologous tooth in the Ohio speci- 

 men. Although the two correspond in a genei'al way, this fact 

 alone is obviously insufficient to establish specific identity. 



Ursus aviericanu.s fossilis Leidy (Journ. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila- 

 deli)hia, N. S., Ill, p 169, November, 1856), discovered in the 

 same ravine that contained the remains of Ursus amplidens, is a 

 small-toothed bear closely related to the existing black l)ears, 

 though ])robably distinct from any recent species. 



Ardotheriuin sim:uvi Cope (American Naturalist, XIII, }>. 791, 

 December, 1879; ibid., XXV, p. 997, November, 1891), from 

 Shasta County, California, is readily distinguishable from the 

 Ohio specimen by its generic characters and exceedingly short 

 rostrum. 



Ursns Jiaplodou Co[)e (Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, 1896, 

 p. 383), from Port Kennedy, Pennsylvania, is a very large animal, 

 the jaws of which " exceed the average dimensions of the grizzly 

 l)ear." Through the kindness of Mr. Witmer Stone I have Ijeen 

 enal)led to examine some of the material on which this species 

 was based. This shows that the skull of Ursus haplodon was 

 even more massive than that of the grizzl}' bears, and therefore 

 nearly doul)le the weight of the Ohio specimen, with which, 

 therefore, the s[)ecies requires no special comparison. 



The animal represented l)y the Ohio s[)ecimen, as none of the 

 names based on fossil North American l)ears are ap[)licable to it, 

 ma}' I)e called : 



