40 



BRITISH FOSSIL CETACEA OF THE RED CRAG. 



There is a vagueness, unfortunately, in Mr. Ray Lankester's announcement of 

 M. Van Beneden's discovery that of itself begets hesitation. Mr. Brown's old fossil cannot 

 be one of the " teeth of the bident lower jaws of ' all ' these Ziphioids wliose remains occur 

 with them in the Red Crag." At least, the analogy of the range of variety in size, shape, 

 direction, and position, of the teeth in the bident lower jaws of existing species (genera) of 

 Ziphials would lead us to infer something of the same kind in the fossil species (genera). 

 Then, again, recurs the undoubted fact that Cetacea of another family, so far as cctotolite 

 cliaracters teach, have also left their remains in our Red Crag. 



When M. Van Beneden adduces as an argument, removing all doubt of the 

 l)elonging of a Balocnodon tooth to the Red Crag Zipkii, that it " occurs with them in the 

 Red Crag," does he mean to say, as his reporter would have us to understand, that they 

 are so associated in closer and more demonstrative relation with the unquestionable snouts 

 of Ziphii than they are with the unquestionable ear-bones of Balfenoids ? I have not, 

 as yet, obtained the requisite evidence of the fact, and I may aver to have had as much 

 personal experience in exploring and cellecting from Red Crag localities as either M. Van 

 Beneden or Mr. Ray Lankester. 



Again, the latter affirms, on M. Van Beneden's authority, wqth respect to the 

 second kind of cetacean Red Crag teeth, " more elongate and with an emarginate nipple- 

 like crown of enamel," that they are, without doubt, the teeth of a species of Squalodon} 



The grounds that lead me still to entertain doubts on this point are given at page 26, 

 in connection with comparisons with a recent Ziphial tooth (see PI. I, 6gs. 4 and 5) 

 having unquestionably the character above cited ; and I may add that, of the truly cha- 

 racteristic and most numerous compressed, two-fanged, serrated teeth of ZeugJodon (= 

 Squalodon, V. B.), I have not as yet seen any specimen from our English Red Crag 

 deposits. No doubt it is a telling, as it is a sweeping, conclusion from the on dit of the 

 experienced and accomplished Louvain cetologist that ' Balanodon pJiysalo'ides ' must be 

 " removed from the list of our British fossil Mammals — but it is not science. 



1 'Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc.,' 1865, p. 231. 



