204 



milieu dout Factivite n'est plus dirigee vers Thematopoiese, mais vers 

 un besoin plus imperieux: la restauration osseuse. 



En resume, les figures decrites par M"" Coenil ne repondent pas 

 ä un mode de division special, elles reproduisent des cas pathologiques 

 de la division. 



Note on the systematic position of Monitor 



by F. E. Beddard, London. 



In the principal schemes of Classification of the Lacertilia, such 

 as those of Dumeril and Bibron '), J. E. Gray ^), Cope ^), Boulenger*) 

 and others, the Monitor lizards are invariably associated with more 

 or fewer of the other families of Lacertilia. Dumeril and Bibron 

 separate the family more widely from other Lacertilia than is done 

 in the remaining schemes but nevertheless consider them as being 

 particularly allied to Heloderma. 



M. Boulenger, however, (in my opinion rightly) states that the 

 Monitors form an isolated group. 



There are several features in the organisation of the Moni to- 

 res, which tend to separate them widely from other Lacertilia, some 

 of which at the same time ally them to a certain degree with the 

 Crocodilia. 



1) Prof. Hoffmann ^) remarks upon the similarity which not 

 only the arrangement ^) but also the development of the teeth show 

 to those of the Crocodiles. 



2) Pagenstecher') has pointed out that in a species of Vara- 

 n u s the hepatic and cystic ducts form a complicated network like 

 that which exists in certain snakes. This condition does not appear 



1) Erp^tologie generale 1834 — 45. 



2) Catalogue of the specimens of Lizards in the Collection of the 

 British Museum 1845. 



3) Proc. Acad. Philadelphia 1864. 



4) Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist. 1884. 



5) 'Bronn's Tierreich'. Reptilien p. 908. 



6) The absence of teeth from the palate is of course not confined 

 to the Monitore s. 



7) Würzburg, naturwiss. Zeitschr. I. 



