282 MESSRS. HANCOCK AND HOWSE 



IX. — On Proterosaurus Speneri, von Meyer, and a new species, 

 Proterosaurus Huxley i, from the Marl- Slate of Midderidge, 

 Durham. By Albany Hancock, F.L.S., and Eichaed Howse. 

 (Plates VII., VIII.) 



In the preceding paper it has been stated that the requirements 

 of a railway company for increased accommodation of their traf- 

 fic, and the continuous indefatigable exertions of our friend Jos. 

 Duff, Esq., to enlarge the knowledge of the Marl- slate fauna of 

 Durham, have led to the discovery of some fossil remains which 

 are certainly the most interesting palaeontologically of recent ac- 

 quisitions. These consist of a considerable portion of the ske- 

 leton of that earliest - recorded and still oldest -known reptile, 

 Proterosaurus Speneri, v. Meyer, and also in close association 

 with it of the greater portion of the skeleton of a smaller species, 

 for which we propose the name Proterosaurus Huxleyi. Through 

 the obliging kindness of Mr. Duff these specimens have not only 

 been placed in our hands for description, but have also been 

 added to the collection of the Natural History Society of New- 

 castle, Durham, and Northumberland. 



Perhaps we may be allowed to reflect that in England we 

 have now arrived, after the lapse of more than a century and a 

 half, at the same point of palasontological discovery, bathymetri- 

 cally considered, which was attained in Germany in the year 

 1706 through the intelligent observations of a learned physi- 

 cian of Berlin, whose name has been properly attached to this 

 earliest discovered reptile ; and also to consider this fact, that 

 after the expiration of one hundred and sixty-four years, and 

 notwithstanding the exertions and multiplication of observers 

 and enlarged fields of inquiry, these reptilian remains, described 

 by Spener, and compared by him to the Crocodile and Lizard, 

 still continue to be the highest organisms up to this time re- 

 corded from the palaeozoic rocks. And thus this discovery, 

 though it increases our knowledge of the geographical distri- 

 bution of ancient reptiles, adds nothing to our knowledge of 

 their bathymetrical range if we admit, as is generally done, that 



