﻿570 
  

  

  PROCEEDINGS 
  OF 
  THE 
  NATIONAL 
  MUSEUM. 
  

  

  of 
  this 
  species. 
  This 
  tooth 
  is 
  now 
  in 
  the 
  American 
  Museum 
  of 
  Nat- 
  

   ural 
  History 
  and 
  has 
  the 
  catalogue 
  No. 
  9202. 
  The 
  tooth 
  selected 
  by 
  

   Gidley 
  is 
  in 
  the 
  same 
  museum 
  and 
  bears 
  the 
  number 
  9200. 
  

  

  Mr. 
  Gidley 
  concluded, 
  furtliermore, 
  that 
  the 
  type 
  tooth 
  selected 
  by 
  

   Cope 
  has 
  no 
  characters 
  by 
  means 
  of 
  which 
  it 
  can 
  be 
  distinguished 
  

   from 
  Equus 
  complicatus. 
  The 
  present 
  writer 
  agrees 
  with 
  him 
  tliat 
  

   this 
  tyi)e, 
  figured 
  by 
  Leidy 
  ^ 
  and 
  again 
  by 
  Mr. 
  Gidley, 
  with 
  some 
  

   restoration,^ 
  is 
  too 
  large 
  to 
  belong 
  to 
  the 
  same 
  species 
  as 
  those 
  teeth 
  

   represented 
  by 
  Leidy's 
  figures 
  8 
  and 
  16 
  of 
  the 
  plate 
  referred 
  to, 
  and 
  

   those 
  figured 
  by 
  Gidley 
  and 
  designated 
  as 
  C 
  and 
  D. 
  The 
  fore-and-aft 
  

   diameter 
  of 
  the 
  crown 
  is 
  27 
  mm.; 
  but, 
  inasmuch 
  as 
  the 
  tooth 
  had 
  

   been 
  worn 
  down 
  to 
  within 
  35 
  mm. 
  of 
  the 
  root, 
  this 
  diameter 
  was 
  

   originally 
  probably 
  somewhat 
  greater, 
  29 
  mm., 
  or 
  even 
  30 
  mm. 
  Tlie 
  

   width 
  is 
  29.5 
  mm., 
  somewhat 
  greater 
  than 
  that 
  of 
  the 
  t3rpe 
  of 
  E. 
  

   complicatus. 
  This 
  is 
  too 
  great 
  to 
  permit 
  us 
  to 
  suppose 
  that 
  the 
  

  

  Figs. 
  1-3.— 
  1, 
  Equus 
  frateknus. 
  X 
  1. 
  Right 
  upper 
  premolar. 
  114S9, 
  Yale. 
  2, 
  

   Left 
  upper 
  premolar. 
  11489, 
  Yale. 
  3, 
  Right 
  upper 
  premolar. 
  11483, 
  Yale. 
  

  

  tooth 
  belonged 
  to 
  the 
  Floridan 
  horse 
  with 
  teeth 
  of 
  medium 
  size 
  

   which 
  the 
  name 
  fraternus 
  has 
  generally 
  been 
  supposed 
  to 
  designate. 
  

   Whether 
  or 
  not 
  we 
  ought 
  to 
  regard 
  the 
  name 
  E. 
  fraternus 
  as 
  a 
  

   synonym 
  of 
  E. 
  complicatus 
  is 
  another 
  question. 
  We 
  may 
  not 
  be 
  

   able 
  to 
  distinguish 
  the 
  larger 
  teeth 
  found 
  in 
  that 
  region 
  from 
  those 
  

   of 
  E. 
  complicatus; 
  neither 
  does 
  our 
  insufficient 
  knowledge 
  of 
  them 
  

   enable 
  us 
  to 
  say 
  positively 
  that 
  they 
  belong 
  to 
  the 
  last-named 
  species. 
  

   Figures 
  of 
  some 
  of 
  these 
  teeth 
  of 
  questionable 
  species, 
  found 
  on 
  our 
  

   south 
  Atlantic 
  coast, 
  are 
  here 
  presented. 
  Figure 
  1 
  represents 
  the 
  

   grinding 
  surface 
  of 
  a 
  right 
  upper 
  tooth, 
  apparently 
  a 
  third 
  or 
  fourth 
  

   premolar, 
  which 
  is 
  in 
  the 
  Yale 
  collection. 
  No. 
  11489. 
  It 
  is 
  stated 
  

   that 
  it 
  was 
  found 
  in 
  the 
  phosphate 
  beds 
  near 
  Charleston, 
  South 
  

   Carolina. 
  It 
  had 
  suffered 
  only 
  moderate 
  wear, 
  the 
  crown 
  having 
  yet 
  

   a 
  height 
  of 
  75 
  mm. 
  The 
  fore-and-aft 
  diameter 
  of 
  the 
  gi'inding 
  sur- 
  

   face 
  (called 
  the 
  length 
  of 
  the 
  tooth 
  in 
  this 
  paper) 
  is 
  31 
  mm.; 
  the 
  

   width, 
  27 
  mm. 
  Another 
  (fig. 
  2), 
  having 
  the 
  same 
  number 
  and 
  from 
  

   the 
  same 
  place, 
  is 
  more 
  strongly 
  worn, 
  the 
  height 
  being 
  only 
  55 
  mm. 
  

  

  I 
  Proe. 
  Amer. 
  Philos. 
  Soc., 
  vol. 
  34, 
  pi. 
  15, 
  fig. 
  6. 
  

  

  a 
  Bull. 
  Amer. 
  Mus. 
  Nat. 
  Hist., 
  vol. 
  14, 
  p. 
  112, 
  fig. 
  8, 
  B. 
  

  

  