Tertiari/.} PALEONTOLOGY OF VICTORIA. \_Mammalia. 



the anterior root of the carnassial {p. 4), or about one-fourth the length of the 

 tooth from front to back ; the length of jo. 3 is 4 lines and its width 3 lines ; p. 2 

 much smnller than p. 3; uo distinct trace of;?. 1. The great carna.ssial {p. 4) is 

 1 inch 7 lines from front to rear, the vertical height, of the enamelled crown is 8 

 lines in front and 4 lines behind, greatest thickness 7 lines ; the cutting edge pre- 

 sents a naiTow worn surface inclined downwards and outwards, narrowest in the 

 j^osterior third, at front of which the cutting edge is lowest, rising much to the 

 front and slightly to the posterior end ; it is curved outwards, the greatest convexity 

 being at the lowest point about one-third the length from the posterior end ; the 

 outer surface is nearly ilat, and slight!}' convex ; the inner suiface convex at base, 

 concave near cutting edge, with a slight thickened vertical ridge close to the ridge 

 of the anterior end, from which it is separated by a smaller groove, and with a 

 similar rounded thickening at the posterior end ; three or four faint obtuse vertical 

 ridges, more than a line wide, arise from the tumid base for about half the height of 

 the crown, beyond which they disappear on the concave surface approaching the 

 cutting- edge. First molar {m. 1), with two fangs, crown 7 lines from front to 

 back, and 5 lines wide in fiont, the anterior two-thirds rising into an anterior lobe 

 a little higher than the carnassial, the worn surface of which is continued on the 

 upper part of its outer side ; hind lobe one-third the length and less than half the 

 height of anterior lobe. Base of hind molar (?«,. 2) trigonal, about 3^ lines long 

 and 2J lines wide in front. The surface of the enamel of the carnassial and molar 

 teeth under the lens has a minute vermicular rugosity. 



Refehence.— (Owen), Phil. Trans. 1859, p. 318 ; Phil. Trans. 1866, p. 79. 



There is no fossil animal yet described has excited so much 

 interest and given rise to such animated controversies as that 

 named the " Marsupial Lion " by Professor Owen, from the general 

 resemblances, on a greater scale, which the teeth of this marsupial 

 animal show to those of the lion, and indicating, in his opinion, a 

 similar predaceous habit in each. Dr, Falconer, Mr. Flower, and 

 others, have advocated, with singular zeal, the opposite view, that 

 the creature was a harmless vegetalile feeder, because a premolar 

 of a sharp-edged compressed form, like the carnassial of Thylacoleo^ 

 is to be found in the living Rat-Kangaroos {Hypsiprymnus), and 

 overlooking the fact that these latter have a series of grinders of 

 the ordinary type of vegetable feeders behind the compressed 

 premolar, while all the teeth are of the carnivorous type in the 

 Marsupial Lion. I now have the pleasure of figuring a specimen 

 showing some of the teetli for the first time in situ, and suggesting 

 some modifications of the views published by Professor Owen as 

 to their character and homologies. The e-enus was first established 

 by Professor Owen in his first Memoir on the subject in the Philo- 

 sophical Transactions for 1859, in which he figured and described 

 a skull sent to him in 1846, by Mr. Adeney, from Lake Colun- 



[ 8 ] 



