79 
in the Alum- Sliale near Whitby. 
posterior extremities are nearly entire ; and it is observable, that 
the bones of the one leg are laid directly over those of the other. 
The osfemoris of each leg is entire, as are also the tibia and fibu- 
la. The tarsal bones are likewise in their places ; but the pha- 
langes were broken into numerous fragments in taking out the 
skeleton, that part of the rock being very soft. Yet the extre- 
mities of part of the phalanges are preserved, shewing two claws, 
with part of a third claw ; as also the termination of one of the 
small toes, which, as is usual in crocodiles, has had no claw. If 
these have all belonged to one foot, we have the terminations of 
all the phalanges of that foot, the crocodile family having only 
Jour phalanges in the hind-feet, with only three claws. The 
ossajemoris are nearly in their proper place ; and, at the spot 
where they are connected with the body, we see some part of the 
bones of the pelvis resembling the corresponding bones in the 
skeleton of the Nilotic crocodile. 
Additional Observations. — The discovery of this valuable relic 
of a former world, is not only highly interesting in itself, but 
serves to throw light on other discoveries. When the geologi- 
cal survey of the Yorkshire coast was published, I was inclined 
to think that no genuine crocodile had been found in our alum- 
shale ; but that the fossil animals, so called, had all been fishes, 
or marine animals furnished with fins ; except, perhaps, a few 
very imperfect specimens. But, on comparing this new disco- 
vered animal with the one found by Messrs Chapman and 
Wooler, in January 1758, described and figured in the Philoso- 
phical Transactions, vol. 1., in the Gentleman’s Magazine, vol. 
xxx., and in the Scarborough Catalogue, it would appear that 
both animals have belonged to one family, and probably to one 
species, as the head and vertebrae (as far as can be ascertained 
from Wooler’s incorrect drawing), seem to correspond, and as 
the gentlemen who discovered the animal of 1758, assure us that 
they observed part of an os femoris , with other bones belonging 
to a quadruped. The fossil animal of 1791? found between 
Staiths and Bunswick, as noticed in the Geological Survey, 
p. 263., appears to have been another crocodile. Till the late 
discovery, I could not explain the lozenge- shaped marks, ap- 
pearing on the side of that animal, as figured in a rude drawing 
