Dawson—New Carboniferous Batrachians of Nova Scotia, 447 
and Hylonomus. This I think is an error in so far as the first 
genus is concerned. I may add my continued conviction that 
Hylonomus and its allies present many points of approach to 
the lacertian reptiles, which I hope in future to be able to 
work out more in detail. 
Several masses of Coprolite, filled with small broken bones, 
were obtained in ing e material surrounding the 
skeletons. I presume these bones belong to one or other of 
any of them to be sufficiently characteristic to warrant any 
confident statement on the subject. These Coprolites must 
have been produced by Dendrerpeton or Hylerpeton, most prob- 
ably the former. 
The above statements must be regarded as imperfect, and 
preliminary to more detailed description and illustration of the 
specimens. These will require long and patient work and 
microscopic examinations of the bones and the teeth, and when 
this is completed they will be placed in relation, as far as pos- 
sible, with the remains previously found in Nova Scotia, and 
with what is known of coal batrachians elsewhere. | 
Ithink it quite possible that further examination may en- 
i I have been 
guided mainly in the reference of the specimens to species by 
the structure of the teeth and the cranial bones; but ‘some z 
s 
ler the same conditions, 
there is less liability here, than in most cases, to multiply species 
ick 8 have swarmed upon us 
of which we proba- 
Which has already afforded remains of i 
Some precursors of the Carboniferous batrachians. 
* Paleontology of Ohio, vol. ii. 
