258 T. S. Hall: 



is unfortunate, as the description gave no account of the surface 

 of the tooth, which the figure appears to indicate as smooth. 

 As regards the form of the tooth, it seems to have relatively 

 much more slender roots than M'Coy's type molar, and in the 

 size and arrangement of its cusps it resembles a specimen from 

 Mount Gambier, figured below. I think that this form of tooth 

 must indicate an animal quite distinct from M'Coy's, as such 

 a marked difference in the proportionate size of the roots would 

 probably be correlated with differences in the strength of the 

 jaws. 



As regards New Zealand, we find two records of the serrated 

 teeth characteristic of Zeuglodonts and Squalodonts. The first 

 is by Sir James Hector, who in 1S8U described Kekenodon 

 onamatcfl as a Zeuglodont. He had fragments of a lower jaw 

 and of ten imperfect teeth, but figures only the latter. In 

 1888 J. W. Davis founded Squalodon serratus on a tooth partly 

 hidden by matrix. He says that it closely resembles that 

 described by M'Coy as S. wilhinsnni, but differs in the number 

 of lateral denticles or cones. 



This is, of course, a variable featui-e depending on the position 

 of the tooth in the series. I would doubtfully put this under 

 the synonym}^ of Sanger's species, Z. harwoodi. Besides these 

 records a Squalodont tooth was found some years ago at Table 

 Cape by Prof. Baldwin Spencer, and was handed over to Prof. 

 Ralph Tate at the time. The specimen is in the Adelaide Uni- 

 versity Museum, and I have to thank Mr. W. Howchin for an 

 opportunity of examining it. It bears a label with a MS name 

 of the late Professor Tate's, namely, Zeuglodon hrevicusindatus. 

 In the same drawer was found a paper with the following note 

 in Tate's handwriting: — ''Zeuglodon s., distinguished from 

 Z. Hai-woodi and Z. [blank] (Alabania) by its small cusps 

 and deep ang-ular rugosities, also from Squalodon Wilkinsoni by 

 the same characters apart from its prob. diff. generic location." 



As Mr Howchin tells me, it is not known Avhether the above 

 description was intended to apply to the present specimen. 

 The probabilities are, I think, that it was so. 



1 Trans, and Pioe. N. Zealand Inst., v. 13, 1881, p. 435, pi. 18. 



2 Zittel in his Handbook misspells both the generic and specific name, and gives a 

 puzzling variant of i>. wilkinsoni. The errors are repeated in the French edition. 



