X PREFACE. 



reasons in connexion with the views I have long since published in 

 the ' System of Nature,' but, waiving all considerations which may 

 be considered speculative, I would invite the attention of naturalists 

 to the figure of Ichthyosaurus as restored by geologists, to the shape 

 of the beak, the situation of the blow-holes, the character of the pad- 

 dles, the mammalian structure exhibited by a section of the vertebrae, 

 the extraordinary conformation of the sternum, and the smoothness 

 of the skin ; and when they have well considered these important 

 points, I would inquire whether these distinguishing features are not 

 rather mammalian than reptilian ? and, again, whether they are not 

 rather marsupial than placental ? I have already pointed out the 

 manupedine, ferine, glirine and brutine groups of marsupials ; why 

 should we not also have a cetine group ? Without making any other 

 use of this suggestion than that of temporarily separating the Enalio- 

 saurians from the reptiles, I now request the reader's attention to the 

 arguments of Mr. Morries Stirling (Zool. 2309) and of F. G. S. (Zool. 

 2311), both of whom support the opinion which I had previously 

 broached as to the Enaliosaurian character of the sea-serpent, — a view 

 controverted by Dr. Melville (Zool. 2310) and Professor Owen (Zool. 

 2316), on the ground that the Enaliosaurians are extinct; but here I 

 may perhaps be permitted to remark, that this fact, being only as- 

 sumed, does not touch the main question. 



Proceeding to Reptiles proper, and referring to the suggestion of 

 an anonymous contributor to the ' Times,' quoted by Dr. Cogswell 

 (Zool. 2321, note), we find it questioned whether the animal may not 

 have been a boa ; and I may observe that the evidence concerning 

 the head, which has been repeatedly described as precisely resem- 

 bling that of a snake or serpent, together with the fact of the animal 

 holding its head clear of the water, are so many points in favour of 

 its belonging to the Ophidia ; but, on the other hand, we must place 

 the non-observance of that undulating mode of progression which 

 every snake must employ, — and it amounts to more than non-observ- 

 ance, for Captain M'Quhac, who directed his attention to this point 

 especially, declares that such undulation did not exist. Again, the 

 enormous length — three times that of a boa — militates against this 



