gO THE AMERICAN NATURALIST. [Vor. XXXIV. 
ascertaining the position and angulation of the limbs in fossil 
quadrupeds, and especially of the fore limb. Professor Marsh's 
criticism refers to the fact that, in the restoration referred to, 
the humerus is only slightly bent backwards, and this does not 
indicate sufficient flexure at the elbow. 
In cases of this kind our material for study lies in the artic- 
ular surfaces of the fossil limb bones and a comparison of these 
4 surfaces with those in the nearest allied living 
ATN types. My ground for restoring the limbs of 
* b Loxolophodon was the close likeness which 
exists between the articular surfaces and shafts 
of the humerus and radius 
and ulna of this type and 
^ those of the elephant. 
In order to test the 
forceof Professor Marsh's 
criticism and to guard 
st 
ee ee aen 
Fic. 1. Fic, 2. Fic, 3. 
ANGULATION OF FORE LIMB. 
Fic. 1. — Elephas indicus, 1 git dinal ti of humerus, ulna and radius 
Fic. 2. Uintatheri C t longitudinal i f humerus, ulna and radius. 
Fic. 3. — R Az 7 's, longitudinal secti fh , ulna and radius. 
against what might be a misleading resemblance, full-sized 
vertical sections were made of the fore limbs of Uintathe- 
rium (Loxolophodon) cornutum and of Elephas indicus in the 
Princeton collection. A section of a rhinoceros fore limb was 
also made for comparison. These were reduced by photog- 
raphy to a scale of 1 in 18 and are copied in Figs. 1, 2, and 3. 
In each humerus a line (a-a) is drawn through the central 
axis of the shaft and two lines (6-4) are drawn through the 
