TETRACONODON OR CH(EROTHERIUM. 1 5S 



and whether it swept round on the mner side of the shaft, as 

 in the last molar. 



The leno-th of the tooth is o^reater on the coronal surface 

 than at the base of the shaft. 



The dimensions of the fossil are as follows : — 



Inches 



Lpngtli of the fragment .,....•• 3'38 



Ditto of the last molar ........ 2'05 



Ditto ditto excluding the spur 1'68 



Width of ditto (greatest) _ . • • 1'48 



Height of the outer hillocks of ditto (greatest posterior) . . -75 



Ditto of the inner side ditto . . -76 



Length of the anterior molar . . . . . • . 1'2 



Width of ditto 1'3 



Anterior width of hind molar, top of coronal . . . . 1'2 



Now to determine the animal to which the teeth belonged. 



The fragment is a unique specimen in a large collection of 

 fossil bones, got within the last few months in the valley of 

 the Mm-kunda and other small adjoining valleys, from the 

 upper deposit of the tertiary line of hills, west of the Jumna, 

 forming the flank of the Himalayahs. Of heads and jaws 

 alone we have upwards of 300 fragments, more or less perfect, 

 of three species of Hippopotamus, two of which are as- 

 certained to be distinct, and a third doubtful ; as many of 

 the Mastodon Elephanto'ides and fossil Elephant respectively ; 

 several of a Ehinoceros ; of Hogs, of a great variety of Eumi- 

 nants, and of some other animals. The fragments of other 

 bones amount to several thousands. This will give an idea 

 of the richness of the collection, yet among the whole there 

 is no other specimen with teeth resembling that now described. 

 There are, therefore, at present, but the two molars to go 

 upon ; but these are suflaciently well marked to discriminate 

 the animal. 



That the fossil belonged to an herbivorous animal of the 

 family Pachydermata is at once evident from the form and 

 detrition of the teeth. 



The subdivisions of the family, dependent on dentition, 

 give further aid in making it out. From all Pachydermata, 

 which have transverse or flexuous lines, or crescentic plates 

 of enamel in the teeth, such as the Horse, Ehmoceros, 

 Anoplotherium, Palseotherium, &c., it is distinguished by the 

 division of the coronal into four hillocks or tuberosities. 



The comparison is, therefore, reduced to those genera 

 which have rounded prominences on the back molars. 



Of these it differs from the Tapir and Lophiodon in the 

 prominences not being in the transverse crests, which form 

 so distinctive a character of these genera. 



