174 KANSAS UNIVERSITY QUARTERLY. 
ica, 16th Ann. Rep. U. S. G. S., pl. xxi, f. 8) and doubtless is con- 
specific with it. A front view of this specimen is shown in the ac- 
companying figure (Fig. 1), together with a photographic reproduc- 
Vig.1. Sacrum of Morosaurus grandis, from in front, AZ, anterior zygapophyses; 
FTA, hypantrum. 
tion ofaside view (Fig. 2). It will be observed that the first vertebra 
takes but little part in the iliac articulation and that the transverse 
processes of this vertebra arise much higher up than those of the 
following. The broad plate in front seems to represent in its 
upper bars, which are thickened, the transverse processes of the 
posterior dorsals. Marsh has figured in plate xxxii of the work 
cited what he believes to be a posterior dorsal of this species. It 
is very evident, however, that there are a number of vertebrae 
intervening between that and the one immediately preceding the 
sacrum. In all probability, as Osborn has suggested in Camera- 
saurus, there will be found a larger number intervening here than 
has been hitherto supposed, the posterior ones partaking more of 
the characters of the first sacral, even as it has been shown that 
the pygal caudals present the prominent characters of the last 
sacral. 
On plate xxxiu of the work cited, March has figured the discon- 
nected sacral vertebrae of JZ. /entus, Jam confident that there is 
something wrong in their interpretation. It is impossible that the 
vertebra there considered the first can be the same as the first of 
