OF EECENT CKOCODILIANS. 127 



and facts requiring verification, when the old and the newly acquired specimens are 

 submitted to a reexamination and study. It is this experience that makes me inclined to 

 place less reliance than other naturalists upon essays prepared by persons who come and 

 look at a series of specimens for the first time, and describe them offhand. Yet such 

 works are often regarded as of authority, very often on account of their length, or the 

 beautiful manner in which they are printed or illustrated. 



The references to the catalogue of the osteological specimens in the College of 

 Surgeons are based on the examination of the specimens in that collection ; and I have 

 to thank the Council of the College for their permission to examine them, and Mr. 

 Flower, the energetic Curator of the collection, for his kindness and assistance in 

 determining them. 



If any evidence were required of the difficulties of determining the species of this 

 family, I need only refer to the nomenclature of the skull in the catalogue above 

 referred to, which was prepared by the late Curator of the collection, Professor Owen. 



In this collection, for example, I found what I consider to be three distinct species 

 in one case, and two distinct species in another, confounded under the same name ; and 

 on the other hand, I found what I regard as skulls of the same species inserted under 

 three different names. 



The skull of a Crocodile which is found in the internal rivers of India, is named 

 Crocodilus rhomhifer, Cuvier (which is an American species), though the specimen in the 

 College Museum was received fi-om Bengal. 



I do not by any means regard my determination of these skulls as infallible ; biit I 

 have taken every care to make it correct by repeated examination. I first arranged 

 the skulls as they appeared to be alike, according to the characters here assigned to 

 them, without paying any attention to the names given, placing them in order according 

 as the size showed the change in the growth ; and Mr. Flower, Mr. Gerrard, and some 

 other zoologists who are used to the examination of bones, agree with me in my 

 determination, and were much interested in observing how gradually the skulls of 

 different ages glided into each other ^ 



I must observe, if there is this difference of opinion in the determination of skulls of 

 recent Crocodiles, where the series of skulls for different-aged animals can be compared, 

 and where the skulls are in a perfect state, how much more difficult it must be to have 

 confidence in the determination of the skull of the fossil, or some fossil species where 

 the skulls are generally more or less imperfect, and perhaps only single specimens 

 (often very imperfect specimens) have been examined ! 



' The following is the result of my examinations of the specimens of Crocodiles in the Museum of the College 

 of Surgeons (the numbers refer to the numbers in the catalogue) : — 

 682—707. Oavialis gangetictis=Gavuilis. 



710. Crocodilus cataphractus=Mechtops mtnphraclus, the type specimen. 



711, 712, 714, 716. Crocodilus acutus=Moliipu americaiui, from America. 



T 2 



