86 Mv. A. S. Woodward on 



who described three undoubtedly Lacertilian vertebrse from 

 the alluvial deposits of the Condamine Eiver, west of More- 

 ton Bay, Queensland, discovered by Dr. George Bennett and 

 presented by him to the British Museum. They were shown 

 to be very similar, except in size, to the vertebrae of the 

 existing Australian Monitors ; and it still remains doubtful 

 whether the differences they present are really of generic 

 value. The vertebrse " rival in bulk those of the largest 

 living crocodiles." More than twenty years after this dis- 

 covery Sir Richard Owen added a description of a complete 

 dorsal vertebra from the same district of Queensland, and of 

 a sacral vertebra from the neighbourhood of Melbourne, 

 Victoria, as also of an occipital skull-fragment and associated 

 caudal vertebra from Gowrie, Darling Downs *. Interesting 

 portions of a large cranium were also described, which had 

 been found by Mr. G. F. Bennett in King's Creek, associated 

 with bones of Diprotodon^ though not with vertebrae of the 

 Megalania type. The latter fragments were hypothetically 

 assigned to the same genus and species as the original fossils 

 discovered in 1858, and the presence of bony horn-cores upon 

 the skull led to a comparison with the small Australian 

 Moloch Jiorridus, which is also provided with dermal horns, 

 though never of an osseous character. A restoration of Mega- 

 lania was given, upon the assumption that the extinct and 

 surviving types were closely allied. In 1881 a tail, com- 

 pletely ensheathed in bony armour like that of Glyptodon, was 

 found at the same spot in King's Creek, whence had been 

 obtained the fine portion of skull described in the previous 

 year, and this, too, was determined f as belonging to what 

 had now become known as the ^' Great Horned Lizard." 

 Uromastix princeiJSj from Zanzibar, was next compared with 

 the fossil, and Sir Richard Owen pointed out that the caudal 

 armour of this lizard only differed from that of Megalania in 

 the same manner as the horns of Moloch were distinguished 

 from those upon the Queensland skull, namely, in the absence 

 of bony tissue in their structure. The tail of Moloch horridus 

 was also shown to be encased in horny scutes similarly dis- 

 posed, these even '* more closely repeating the number and 

 arrangement of Megalania " than the scutes of Uromastix. 

 Still another contribution to the subject was made in 1886 1, 

 when a sacral vertebra from Gowrie, Darling Downs, was 

 described, and also a number of foot-bones, supposed to show 



* Ibid. pf»t ii., Phil. Trans. 1880, pp. 10.37-1050, pis. xxxiv.-xxxviii. 

 t Ihid. part iii., Phil. Trans. 1881, pp. 547-556, pis. Ixiv.-lxvi. 

 t Hid. part iv., Phil. Trans. 1886, pp. 327-330, pis. xiii.-xv. 



