FAUNA LOWER KEUPER SANDSTONE. 11 



prints that may possibly have been Amphibia, but we have 

 no proof whatever of it. 



Reptilia. — We will try for a moment to find some 

 more stable ground, and consider a form of which we have 

 both the bones of the foot and a print to match. 



We are no longer dealing with the Amphibia, but 

 with true reptiles. Rhyiichosaurus arbiceps was described 

 by Owen in 1842,* from remains found in the 

 quarries in the Lower Keuper Sandstone at Grinshill 

 in Shropshire. The sandstones in this quarry are a con- 

 tinuation in that direction of the beds at Storeton and 

 elsewhere in our district. In the same quarry numerous 

 footprints were found, and Owen, although he had none 

 of the bones of the extremities before him, suggested the 

 probability that the remains were those of the animal that 

 made the footprint. I was disappointed to find, however, 

 that the footprints referred to were not figured in his 

 paper nor described in detail, nor have I been able to find 

 any slab that can be identified as the one having been 

 seen by Owen, if in fact he did see them himself ; he only 

 quotes in his paper some correspondence with Dr. Ogier 

 Ward, of Shrewsbury. Dr. Ward says — " As they (the 

 " remains) have always been found nearly in the same 

 " beds as that impressed by the footsteps I have described, 

 " I am induced to believe they are the bones of the same 

 " animal." Owen adds — " And in this opinion, from the 

 " correspondence of size between the bones and the foot- 

 " prints, and from the circumstance of the absence of other 

 " observed bones or footprints in the same quarry, I 

 " entirely coincide." Farther on, after describing some 

 fragments of the pectoral arch, he says — " They indubit- 

 " ably indicate a mechanism for locomotion on land which 



♦Trans. Camb. Philosophical Society, vol. vii., p. 155, 1842. 



