Liml-bones ofMnfmoHiwndyhxs {?) Biowni. 125 



so imicli expaiulcd ; the condyles are less developed back- 

 ward, and the inner lateral trochanter appears to be more 

 ])roxinial in ])osition. The external proximal trochanter is 

 rather better marked than in Massospoudi/hts cm-t'natus, but 

 rather less marked than in Eushdesaurus. Tiie inner lateral 

 trochanter is not quite so near to the |)roxiuial end as in 

 Belodon or Pulceosaurus, the bone in the latter genus being 



Fig. 13. Fi{r. 14. 



Massospondi/lus (?) lirotcni. 

 Fip. 13. — Right femur, anterior aspect. 

 Fig. 14. — Right femur, internal aspect. 



more slender, more compressed above the external trochanter, 

 and otherwise of different character. On the whole, the bone 

 aj)]n-oximates nearest to Massospo7id?/lus, indicating an animal 

 about three fifths of the dimensions of the type, with the 

 femur not more than half the diameter of the larger bone at 

 its extremities. 



It is not certain that these i-emains may not be referable to 

 Jlortalotarsus. That could only be determined by discovery 

 of the tibia or other distinctive element. While there is this 

 possibility that the remains may belong to the Eagle's Crag 

 genus, 1 prefer, in the absence of evidence, not to affirm the 

 identity. The differences from Massospondylus are sufficiently 

 obvious to prevent inconvenience from recording the species 

 as (?) Massosjwndyhis Browni. 



I am indebted to Mr. Brown for the opportunity of 

 making this description. 



