704 General Notes. [July, 
Professor Marsh is apparently not aware that this group has been 
actually discovered, defined and extensively illustrated under the 
name of Condylarthra by Cope, and that its discovery was antici- 
pated on hypothetical grounds by the same author as long ago as 
1874.1 The unwary reader may be still further impressed with 
the idea that all this is new, by the array of new names which 
are attached to these well-known natural divisions. The Condy- 
larthra figure under another name, and those of Amblypoda and 
Pantodonta are changed on the pretext that they are preoccupied, 
though Professor Marsh does not state when or how. 
examination has failed to reveal any real preoccupation. The 
nearest name to Pantodonta is Pantodon, a genus of fishes, and 
to Amblypoda is Amblypodia, an unused synonyme in Lepidop- 
tera. We do not believe, however, even were the names identi- 
cal, that a generic name can be preoccupied by the name of an 
order, or other mononomial word, or vice versa. The name Dip- 
larthra (the Ungulata of Gill and Flower) is changed for a new 
one, and other terms are employed for the time-honored and 
generally used Perissodactyla and Artiodactyla of Owen. We 
forbear comments, remarking only that even a handsome volume 
like this one will not suffice to obliterate history.” 
On p. 169, one is surprised to read the following statement: 
“No Cretaceous mammals are known.” Two species were des- 
cribed from the Laramie Beds of Dakota, two or three years 
ago. 
Professor Marsh corrects by implication a good many errors 
made by himself several years ago when criticising the work of 
another author on this group. Thus he adopts the species Zox- 
olophoden cornutus Cope, and no longer considers it identical with 
a species subsequently described by himself. But he cannot avoid 
making a misrepresentation as to a photograph of this spe- 
cies of which a few copies were circulated at the time of its dis- 
covery. The statement that the canine tooth was attached to the 
skull by a plaster base so as to increase its apparent length is 
erroneous. The tooth was made to adhere to its base by a piece 
gures which have since appeared, is apparently designed 
to substantiate this statement. Professor Marsh, moreover, does 
not recede from the erroneous position he took at that time on 
the question of nomenclature, but still uses generic names which 
have been repeatedly shown to have no right to exist if the ordi- 
