462 H. G. SEELEY ON A MAMMALIAN FEMUR AND 
the femur described is 1,2; inch and the humerus 1,4, inch. Thus 
it is evident that there is not much ground for choice in affilating 
the specimens to one genus or the other on the ground of proportion 
between the jaws and the limb-bones, though the presumptive evi- 
dence is strong, so far as size goes, that they might be referable to 
one of them. On the whole I am inclined to believe that the some- 
what insectivorous and strong character of the lower jaw of Phas- 
colotherium may perhaps be taken into consideration in connexicn 
with the resemblance which the head of the femur described offers 
to the bone in some Insectivores, as indicating a habit which would 
justify us In suspecting that the remains are rather to be referred to 
that genus. If the three specimens may all be referred to the same 
genus, they indicate a generalized Marsupial, which certainly suggests 
evolution from a Monotreme stock, and cannot be placed in any 
division of the existing Marsupial order. 
If the affiliation of these limb-bones to the jaw of Phascolo- 
- thervum be accepted as an identification sufficiently probable to excuse 
me, in the absence of evidence of their generic distinctness, from the 
task of founding a new genus and species for the fossils, then a certain 
appositeness may be recognized in the association of a Marsupial jaw 
of generalized character with limb-bones indicating a generalized 
Insectivorous type, modified from a Monotreme stock in the direc- 
tion of the Marsupial plan, as one of those harmonies which the 
general truths of the doctrine of evolution would lead us to antici- 
pate ; for the researches of Profs. Owen, Gaudry, and Marsh have 
gone far to prove that every type of mammalian life becomes more 
generalized when it is traced backwards in time, and presents affi- 
nities towards less specialized orders; from which we infer that 
these, or similar orders, were the parent stock from which the sur- 
viving types were derived. Similarly I am inclined to suggest that 
these remains from Stonesfield justify us in inferring the exis- 
tence of a generalized order of animals, which were not Marsupials, 
but from which the Marsupials became evolved. 
Discussion. 
The Presiprent congratulated the author upon the discovery of 
the importance of these specimens, which had been so long over- 
looked. 
Prof. Prestwicn remarked on the interest attaching to the dis- 
covery of these remains among old specimens from Stonesfield, 
since at present the slate-pits at that place are little worked. He 
suggested that if other store-collections of Stonesfield fossils (like 
those of Oxford) were overhauled, they might yield equally valuable 
results to so careful a worker as Prof. Seeley. 
Dr. Murre expressed doubts whether the humerus was a right 
one, and also as to the validity of conclusions derived from a com- 
parison of the lengths of the limb-bones and the lower jaws. 
