MASTODONS, MAMMOTHS AND OTHER PLEISTOCENE MAMMALS 59 



larger leg bones and proceeded to take out the remains of the skeleton. 

 These bones lay largely in their natural position and while perhaps the 

 numerical two-thirds of the skeleton were preserved, the more conspicu- 

 ous bones were fragmentary or wanting. At the conclusion of the exca- 

 vation it was found that all four legs and feet, a large number of ribs and 

 vertebrae, parts of the shoulder girdle and one ramus of the lower jaw 

 with teeth had been recovered. The skull with tusks, greater parts of pelvis 

 and scapulae were gone. It would seem that the animal in sinking into the 

 mire had been left with the more protuberant portions of the body, the 

 head probably thrown up and back, exposed to the air and inviting the 

 attack of rodents. The absence of these parts when all the other bones 

 had so compactly kept together, left little likelihood of their being found 

 in any other part of the swamp. The preservation of the bones recovered 

 was excellent for mounting and it is to be regretted that the specimen 

 just missed being a desirable acquisition to a scientific museum. 



Suffolk County (?) 



1823. Riverhead or Southold. In 1823, according to DeKay, 7 

 there was found " more than one-half of a lower jaw, with the teeth, 

 on the shore of Long Island, between high and low water mark, 

 about 4 miles east of the county court house at Riverhead, Suffolk 

 county." The specimen is mentioned by DeKay as being in the 

 Cabinet of the Lyceum of Natural History, New York. It was 

 probably the same specimen recorded by Mitchill 8 which he states 

 was found at Southhold on the north side of Long Island, between 

 high and low water mark. Mitchill adds that the specimen had been 

 satisfactorily traced to Kentucky. In view of the fact that River- 

 head and Southhold are but 15 miles apart, there seems no doubt 

 but that the finds recorded from these two places are one and the 

 same. Moreover, since Mitchill once owned the specimen and it was 

 presented by him to the New York Lyceum, it is believed as stated 

 by him, that it was not originally found on Long Island and so 

 the find is referred to here, without number, simply as a matter of 

 record. 



Sullivan County 



90 1827. Wurtsboro. A brief account of this mastodon is given 

 in a letter written in December 1827 by Jeremiah Van Rensselaer to 

 Professor Silliman. The letter states 9 " That the fossil remains of 

 a mastodon giganteum were discovered last autumn, by the work- 

 men, while digging the Delaware and Hudson Canal. A consider- 

 able portion of the skeleton has arrived in this city, and I have 

 enjoyed an opportunity of examining it. The bones which I saw, 



7 Nat. Hist. N. Y.; Zool. 1842. pt 1, p. 103. See also record of this find in 

 A. A. A. S. Proc. for 1858 (1859), p. 233. 



8 Catalogue of the Organic Remains, presented to the New York Lyceum 

 of Natural History, New York, 1826. Cat. no. 1, page 5. 



' Amer. Jour. Sci., 1828, 14:33. 



