LIFE OF FLOWER 119 



the modern families Macropodid* and Phalangistidx, and 

 differs completely from the carnivorous marsupials." 



After alluding to the small size of the brain-cavity 

 and the large space for the attachment of the powerful 

 muscles which worked the lower jaw, and suggesting 

 that these features may be only to be expected in a 

 large form as compared with the smaller members of 

 the same group, Flower concluded that the habits of all 

 species with the same general type of dentition must 

 necessarily be similar. And, on these premisses, it was 

 urged that Thylacoleo must in all probability have been 

 a vegetable-feeder. The large premolar may seemingly 

 have been " as well adapted for chopping up succulent 

 roots and vegetables, as for dividing the nutritive fibres 

 of animal prey." It is further suggested that the 

 nutriment of Thylacoleo "may have been some kind of 

 root or bulb ; it may have been fruit ; it may have been 

 flesh." While in conclusion it is argued that the 

 organisation of the animal did not countenance the idea 

 of its preying on the large contemporary marsupials. 



Omitting reference to Owen's reply to this reversal of 

 his conclusions, and also to certain comments and addi- 

 tions to the arguments by other writers, we may pass on 

 to a paper by Dr. R. Broom, published in the Proceedings 

 of the Linnean Society of New South Wales for April 

 1898, and entitled "On the Affinities and Habits of 

 Tt>ylacoleo." 



In this the author admits that the animal in question, 

 as suggested by Owen in his second paper, and more 

 fully determined by Flower, was undoubtedly a dipro- 

 todont, and that it was nearly allied to the modern 

 phalangers. With the 'latter it is indeed closely con- 



