480 G. V. SMITH ON FOOTPRINTS OF VERTEBRATE ANIMALS 
The tracks on cast No. 2 are clearly those of different animals, for 
the imprints marked “‘ a” are, no doubt, those of a quadruped which 
used its fore feet as supports, much in the same way as that of cast 
No. 1. The impressions of the fore feet are only about half the size, 
and are situate between those of the hind feet. The imprints marked 
‘*6” on the cast, appear to be those of either an animal character- 
ized by a bipedal mode of progression, whose feet presented the 
form of a pad and three digits, or else of a quadruped whose fore feet 
were much smaller than its hind feet, and fell into nearly the same 
lace. 
i Cast No. 3 shows footprints which occur on the same stone as the 
impressions marked “a” and “6” of cast No. 2. The footprints 
in this case appear to be those of a much smaller or lighter animal, 
which placed its hind feet nearly in the prints left by the fore feet ; 
these tracks are slight and of a circular form. The next east, No. 4, 
was taken from a bed seven feet below that from which casts Nos. 2 
and 3 were taken. The footprints here being of 2 more uniform 
depth, would also appear to have been made by a four-footed animal, 
and one which threw its weight pretty equally on all four feet. 
The bed from which these impressions were taken had an inclination 
of 25° towards the west, and from the blurred appearance of the 
lowest imprints, which, however, became more distinct as they 
ascended, it would appear that the bed at the time the impressions 
were made was probably inclined and partially covered with water. 
The prints are not of a uniform size, probably from the above cause. 
Casts Nos. 5 and 6 were taken from a bed a foot and a half below 
that in which the last footprints occurred. It is doubtful whether 
each imprint on No. 5 is that of a single foot, or whether it is not 
rather that of both the fore and hind foot in coincidence. 
The imprints on cast No. 6 are no doubt those of a quadruped, the 
impressions of whose feet appear nearly in coincidence. 
All the foregoing footprints, except the first, were found 7 situ. 
The surfaces of the two last-mentioned beds were, in several places, 
so covered with footprints that it was impossible to get any additional 
sets of impressions, which in nearly every case took the same direc- 
tion, namely, from west to east. 
It seems doubtful whether each mark on cast No. 7 is that of a 
single foot, or whether it is not rather that of both the fore and 
hind feet nearly in coincidence; the appearance of a double row of 
toes and the abuormal number of six digits visible in some of the 
impressions, probably arises from the placing of the hind foot nearly 
in the impression of the fore foot. The imprints appear to be those 
of toes or claws, and take the form of a half-circle. 
In cast No. 8 we have something similar to the latter, the impres- 
sions of the toes or claws being visible in a double row. It is diffi- 
cult to say whether they represent the prints of a single foot, or 
are those of the fore and hind foot nearly together. They differ 
however from those on cast No. 7, in that the toes or claws take a 
slightly concave form, and turn alternately outwards. There are 
other marks on this cast than those described above, but they could 
not have been caused by the same animal; for on a close examina- 
€ 
4 
. 
4 
