140 NATURAL SCIENCE. FEB., 
modify the statement that it was so named “in order to distinguish 
it from the Jchthyosauvus, and to record the fact that it was more 
nearly allied to the lizard than the latter.” What exact signification 
the author may attach to the term the lizard, we are, of course, quite 
unaware, but the sentence as it stands is certainly misleading to the 
uninstructed. Again, on page 58, we are totally at a loss to imagine 
what special resemblance the Plesiosaur presents to ‘the strange 
Ornithorhynchus ” (with which term, of course, all the readers of the 
book would be perfectly familiar!). If the author had written 
Ichthyosaur instead of Plesiosaur, there might have been something 
in the statement. 
Before leaving the subject of reptiles, we should like to know 
why the author retains the name Colossochelys for the giant extinct 
Indian Tortoise, seeing that it has been conclusively shown to be 
inseparable from Testudo ; and we also think he would have been better 
advised had he made no mention of the grossly-exaggerated restora- 
tion of its shell which still disfigures the fossil reptile gallery of the 
British Museum. Indeed, the whole fable of the mythological Indian 
tortoise, which Falconer sought to identify with this fossil, might well 
have been consigned to the oblivion it merits. 
Two plates are devoted to birds, the one representing the 
toothed Hespevornis of the North American Cretaceous, and the other 
two of the New Zealand Moas. In representing Hesfevormis with a 
steganopodous foot, that is to say, with the hallux connected with 
the other toes by a web, the artist has certainly no justification, 
this feature being at variance with the colymbine affinities of the 
genus. Here, then, we again meet with an instance where the 
author’s want of acquaintance with the most ordinary facts of 
zoology has renderéd him unfit for the task of supervision. We 
do not, of course, mean to assert definitely that this bird may not 
have had all the toes joined by membrane; but since its osteology is 
so close to that of Colymbus, it is probable that the hallux was separate, 
and it should have been restored accordingly. That the author 
adopts the view that the extermination of the Moas took place during 
the period that man has inhabited New Zealand, is evident from 
his plate; we regret, however, to find that he has not seen fit to 
follow the view of all living authorities on the subject that the two 
species of these birds selected for illustration belong to widely dif- 
ferent genera. 
In regard to mammals, we have not much to remark. One of 
the most striking illustrations is that of the Glyptodont in plate xviii. 
(herewith reproduced), where the proper form of the tail is given. 
Readers of the work are, however, likely to be somewhat puzzled on 
finding another member of the same genus depicted on page 174 with 
a totally different tail; and in common fairness they ought to have 
been informed that in this case the tail belongs to a totally different 
animal from that to which the carapace pertained. We do not, more- 
