380 Geological Society : — 



GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY. 



[Continued from p. 310.] 



April 13th, 1870.— Sir P. de Malpas Grey Egerton, Bart., M.P., 

 F.B.S., Yice-President, in the Chair. 



The following communications were read : — 



1. A letter from Dr. Gerard Krefft, dated Sydney, 29th January, 

 1869, accompanying a model of the left lower incisor of Thylacoleo 

 camifeoo, Owen, and the original fragment from which the model 

 was made. Dr. Krefft also referred to the fossil remains of Herbi- 

 vorous Marsupials in the Museum at Sydney, which included, ac- 

 cording to him, besides a great number of Wombats (Phascolomys), 

 many wombat-like Kangaroos or "Wallabies (Halmaturus). He pro- 

 posed to divide the Kangaroos into the following groups : — 



(1) Meter opus, dentition as in Macropus major. 



(2) Halmaturus, with the premolar permanent, divided into two 

 subgroups : — 



a. True Wallabies, with the premolars long, narrow, and com- 



pressed, and the rami of the lower jaw but slightly anchy- 

 losed. 



b. Wombat-like Wallabies, with the premolars compact, 



rounded, and molar-like, and the rami of the lower jaw 

 firmly anchylosed. 



Illustrative sketches and photographs accompanied this paper. 



2. "On the Fossil Eemains of Mammals found in China." Bv 

 Prof. Owen, LL.D., F.R.S., F.G.S. 



The specimens of teeth described by the author were obtained by 

 Bobert Swinhoe, Esq., late H. M. Consul at Formosa, chiefly by 

 purchase in the apothecary's shops at Shanghai. They included two 

 new species of Stegoclon (named S. sinensis and S. orientalis), a new 

 Hyama (H sinensis), a new Tapir (Tapirus sinensis), a new Rhino- 

 ceros (R. sinensis), and a species of Kaup's genus Chalicotherium 

 (G. sinense). The author remarked that the whole of these teeth 

 presented an agreement in colour, chemical condition, and matrix 

 which led to the conclusion that all belonged to the same period. 

 But for the presence of the Chalicotherium, they would have been 

 referred either to the Upper Pliocene or to the Postpliocene period. 

 The author did not consider that the occurrence of one Anoplothe- 

 rioid species need affect the determination of the age of these fossils, 

 especially as Chalicotherium departs in some respects from the type 

 genus Anoploiherium, and is not known from deposits older than the 

 Miocene. 



