54 KNOWLTON 



Much confusion has arisen concerning this species, which can only 

 be eliminated by a review of all the earlier references to it in the 

 literature of the subject. It was first mentioned but without 

 description in a list published by Cope in 1875, 6 an ^ was ^ U ^Y 

 described later in the same year in an obscure paper published 

 as an appendix to Dawson's Report on the Geology and Resources 

 of the Region in the vicinity of the Forty-ninth Parallel, etc. 7 

 Still later in 1875 this description was copied word for word, but 

 without reference to either of the two preceding places of publica- 

 tion in Cope's Vertebrata of the Cretaceous Formations of the 

 West. 8 In the Report where it was first described the locality was 

 given as The Bad Lands south of Woody Mountain, latitude 49 , 

 a locality confirmed by Dawson in his description of the geology 

 of the region. 9 Dawson also mentions other vertebrate remains 

 with which it was found associated, as well as several species of 

 plants, and refers the beds to the "Lignite Tertiary," and in the 

 latest published geological map of Canada, 10 the area is still colored 

 as "Laramie," which in the writer's opinion is the approximate 

 equivalent of the Fort Union of the United States. 



The confusion dates from the moment when Cope transferred the 

 original description to his "Vertebrata of the Cretaceous Formations 

 of the West," where as regards the locality he says: "This species 

 is found .... near the Milk River in British America," where 

 it was "collected by George M. Dawson .... near Woody 

 Mount." As a matter of fact Woody Mountain (or Woody Mount) 

 is more than 150 miles east of the valley of Milk River where it crosses 

 the international boundary, and there is not the slightest evidence 

 that it came from Milk River. But because it was supposed by 

 subsequent writers that Woody Mountain was in the Milk River 

 Valley, it was assumed that the age must be Judith River! Thus 

 Hatcher, 11 who was apparently in ignorance of the original place of 

 publication says: " This species is founded on fragments . . . . 



6 Acad. Nat. Sci., Phila., Proc, 1875, p. 9. 



7 Brit. N. A. Bound. Com., Montreal, 1875. Appendix B, p. 337. 



8 Rept. U. S. Geol. Surv. Terr., vol. 2, 1875, p. 92. 



9 Brit. N. A. Bound. Com., Montreal, 1875, p. 105. 



10 Western Sheet, 1901. 



11 U. S. Geol. Surv., Bull. 257, p. 74. 



