46 Two New Species of Fossil Footmarks. 
Art. VIL.—Description of Two New Species of Fossil Foot- 
marks found in Massachusetts and Connecticut, or, of the Ani- 
mals that made them; by Rev. Evwarp Hrrcxcocx, President 
of Amherst College, and Professor of Natural Theology and 
Geology. 
I nave long wished to describe several new and peculiar fossil 
footmarks which have been brought to light in the sandstone of 
the Connecticut Valley in Massachusetts and Connecticut. But 
a constant pressure of more important duties, has delayed the 
work, not months merely, but years. I have determined, how- 
g et 
by my friend, Mr. James D. Dana, is the true one by which 
I have been surprised, however, to learn that some object to 
giving scientific names, either to these footmarks, or to the atl- 
mals that impressed them; because they think the characters by 
which they must be described too indefinite for distinguishing 
ies, or even genera. My reasons for a contrary opmon are 
briefly as follows. lose 
1. The existence of these tracks demonstrates the existence 
of certain animals that made them during the triassic perio’ 
2. The facts well known concerning organic remains, render 1t 
almost certain, that these animals have never been described, 
either in the living or fossil fauna of any country. 3. 4 who 
have seen a good collection of these tracks, will be satisfied that 
they were made by several species of animals. Now this convic- 
tion must result from some diversity of character, which we wit- 
ness in these footmarks. And if that diversity could produce 
such a conviction, it can be expressed in words; and thus the 
different species, at least many of them, be distinguished from one 
another. If they cannot thus be distinguished, then they must 
be regarded as only varieties of the same species. But no © 
parative anatomist will admit this to be possible. 4, Compara- 
tive anatomy teaches us that some of the surest and most ps 
stant characters by which animals are distinguished, are ssi 
