
1891.] A Reply to Professor Marsh. 777 
latter genus inaccurately. I would say, in reply, that Microcono- 
don is entirely distinct from Dromotherium in the structure both 
of the teeth and jaws, excepting only in the imperfect division of 
the molar fangs, which in this instance is not a generic but at the 
least a subordinal gharacter. The figure of Dromotherium syl- 
vestre was drawn with the utmost care, yet I will be glad to cor- 
rect any inaccuracies if the author will kindly point them out. 
2. That I attributed a pineal foramén and eye to Tritylodon, and 
later was compelled to retract it. The facts are that in a note 
to Science I based this suggestion upon Owen’s figure and 
description of an apparent “ fontanelle ” between the parietals and 
frontals. At the same time I wrote to the British Museum asking 
Dr. Baur to make a careful examination of the skull itself, and, 
upon my learning that there was no foramen, I immediately 
published a correction in CENA and moreover withdrew the 
suggestion in my memoir.° 
3. That my figure of Phascolotherium was inaccurate in four 
important points. In reply, I may say that three years ago I 
published’ a correction of the only error in this figure,—viz., the 
elevated position of the dental foramen. In regard to all three 
other inaccuracies the author of the “ Note” is mistaken: 1. As 
may be seen by. reference to Flower & Lydekker’s recent work,” 
the first incisor is present ; 2. The mylohyoid groove is correctly 
figured, as may be seen by comparison with figures published by 
Owen and others; 3. As stated in the explanation of the plates, 
the last molar was restored from Dr. Buckland’s figure,’ which 
was made before this tooth was detached and lost,—a perfectly 
legitimate proceeding. 
4. That I misquoted the title of “Discovery of Cretaceous 
Mammalia.” This is the only point in which the author is 
entirely correct. I find that inadvertently the article “the” was 
included in quotation marks. 
4“ Mesozoic Mammalia," p. 222. 
5“ Mesozoic Mammalia,” p. 220, foot-note. 
6“ No parietal eye in Tritylodon,” Science, 1887, p. 538. 
1 Proc. Acad. Nat. Sc., 1888, p. 294. 
8" Mammals: Living and Extinct,” p. 114. 

