228 | Prof. H. G. Seeley on a 
associated a tibia and fibula, indicating long and slender hind 
legs; but I am not aware of any evidence of association, and 
am disposed to refer the limb-bones to the crocodilian genus 
Theriosuchus. On at least three other occasions references 
were made to these teeth. In the Palxontographical Society’s 
volume for 1861 they are said to be like teeth of Megalo- 
saurus, finely serrated back and front, and attached by partial 
anchylosis to the inner side of an alveolar wall. Of this 
character I have not seen any evidence; but I have not had 
the opportunity of examining the original specimens. In 
1854 Nuthetes was said to differ from Megalosaurus in showing 
no trace of alveolar divisions for the teeth. ‘This may be 
quite true, and yet not bear the construction that the teeth 
were not in sockets, for the bones of the jaw are extremely 
thin and havea denseness and thinness which are only known 
in bones of Ornithosauria and Saurischian reptiles, and 
genera like Ardstosuchus. Sir Richard Owen further states 
that the thickest part of the crown is not the middle, but is 
nearer the anterior border, as in Varanus and Megalosaurus. 
In Sir R. Owen’s ‘ Paleontology’ the known facts are 
summarized and the fossil grouped under the Lacertilia 
(second ed., 1861, p. 807) and described as a carnivorous or 
insectivorous lizard. 
Subsequently, in the Paleontographical Society’s volume 
for 1879, further remains discovered by Mr. Beckles are 
figured (pl. ii.) and described. The genus is grouped with 
the Crocodilia, and the teeth (p. 16) are said to show an 
excavation or longitudinal depression on the side of the base. 
Jn the British Museum Catalogue of Foss. Rept. pt. 1., 1885, 
Mr. Lydekker groups the genus as “ordinal position un- 
certain,” placing it after the animals which are massed 
together as Dinosauria, and remarking that the teeth are 
more like those of dinosaurs than lizards. 
The jaws indicate a very small animal, being (as stated by 
Sir R. Owen) in the fragments preserved only 6 lines deep, 
while the largest fragment of jaw is 1dinch long. Ihave no 
doubt, if ordinal affinities can be inferred from teeth, that these 
animals are Saurischian and nearly allied to Streptospondylus, 
Megalosaurus, and Aristosuchus. The teeth are essentially 
diminutive forms of a Megalosaur. This identification is 
based upon the shape of the crown, the condition of its 
surface-enamel, the serrations at the anterior and posterior 
margins of the crown, and the general form of the root, which, 
however, is shorter than in Megalosaurus; and the com- 
parison would probably be closer with Streptospondylus, to 
