FOSSIL MAMMALIA FROM THE STONESFIELD SLATE. 421 



cess as angular and small. Phillips (24) and Osborn (14) 

 followed him in this ; but in his second paper Osborn recog- 

 nised the fact that the angle is " precisely as in Phascolothe- 

 rium" (15), — that is to say, it is inflected and confluent with 

 the condyle. 



Owen described the molars with their three high-pointed 

 cusps in a line (much more pointed than those of Phascolo- 

 therium), their well-developed internal cingulura rising in two 

 fore-and-aft cusps, and one internal median cingulum cusp. 

 The premolars have no cingulum, and possess one main median 

 cusp with a small cusp in front and behind. There are five 

 molars in situ behind, separated by a gap for one tooth from 

 three premolars; in front of these all the teeth are missing 

 except one incisor, which I have exposed from the matrix. 



The jaw is much damaged posteriorly, but the impression of 

 the condyle and coronoid process is still visible in the matrix. 

 The process is seen to resemble in shape that of Phascolothe- 

 rium, although it is relatively smaller. 



The first specimen in the Oxford Museum; a left ramus 

 with its outer surface exposed, reversed (PI. 26, fig. 6). 



Professor Phillips first figured this jaw in outline in his 

 ' Geology of Oxford ' (24), probably soon after its discovery. By 

 mistake he put one more molar in the figure than the number 

 exposed in the fossil.^ Osborn also mentions this specimen (15). 



The coronoid process, condyle, and angle are unfortunately 

 broken. I have exposed an entire fifth molar behind the four 

 molars previously visible, the broken base of an anterior in- 

 cisor, and have rendered what remains of the other incisors 

 more distinct. The molars have no cingulum on the outer 

 surface, but the sharp lateral cingulum cusps are well seen, 

 especially the hinder one. 



The second specimen in the Oxford Museum; a portion 

 of the right ramus seen from the outside (PI. 26, fig. 7). 



* Apparently this eminent and keen-sighted geologist " could see through 

 a stone wall " better than most people, for the fifth molar which he thus 

 figured has now been brought to light, twenty-two years after (see figure 

 here given). 



