354 



DH. R. BllOOM OX SOME NEW 



There is aDother palate recently discovered with which a 

 comparison may be made — viz., Whaitsia j^lcityceqjs. This new tj'pe 

 was recently described by Hanghton, and though it difiers greatly 

 from Moschorhi'mis, the snout has so much superficial resemblance 

 that a comparison seems advisable, even if only to clearly differen- 

 tiate the types. Whaitsia is a large Therccephalian — one of the 

 largest known. ]t has a broad flat snout, and if it were not for 

 the great difference in the palate, one might be inclined to think 

 that Moschorhinus was a liear ally. Furthei", in the type of 

 Whaitsia the number of incisors cannot be made out, though 

 there are four in what is regarded as a co-type. The palate, 

 however, is so very unlike that of any form previously known 



Text-figure 9. 



Diagram of palate of Whaitsia 'platyceps Haughtou. 



that Mr. Haughton very wisely puts Whaitsia in a new family — 

 the WhaitsidijB. 



Mr. Haughton has given an excellent description of the type 

 and a figure of both ujjper and lower sides. The description he 

 has given is so accurate that little need be added to it. But the 

 figure he gives of the palate is not very clear, and a new and 

 independent figure of this unique palate may not be regarded as 

 superfluous. 



If the palate, as I figure it, be compared with that of Moscho- 

 rhinus, it will be seen to differ in only tw^o important points. 

 The suborbital vacuity, which in all typical Therocephaliars is 

 large, is here practically closed, and the back part of the palate is 

 thus made to resemble slightly that of the Gorgonopsia. ]n 

 front, instead of there being a pair of large openings as in all 



