\ mkmoir upon the genus 
wlu-n- llu. palulin™ , a, ly foi nUhe extreme posterior border of ^ 
l/W/zi/^— The lorni of the lower jaw of P. pahidosus belongs to the less 
H.M^-iali«Ml tviH-of nmn.lihle limi.d .so generally distributed among Eocene forms; 
that is the TsTtion Ix-aring the te-eth is more elongated than in recent forms, and the 
Mirfac-e of the angular iHirtion of the jaw is correspondingly enlarged for muscular 
attachment 'I'he external face of the mandible is nearly flat, becoming slightly 
„„.ndar at the anterior Is.rder of the masseteric fossa. The inferior border of the 
jaw is slightly a.scending fi-oni below the la,st molar. This portion is convex, becom- 
ing .-oncave |K.steriorIv, and then suddenly expanding into the Avide and thin angle. 
Tin- fonn of the inferior Isirder ol’ the jaw is very characteristic, and is quite differ- 
ent fn.in that of Tclmalolhcrinm where the jaiv is straigliter, Avith a much more 
..|..ngated symphvsial jM.rtion. The iiostm-ior half of the loAver margin of the jaw is 
stn.ngly intlei-ti-cf; its inUwnal lime Ixdow the alveolar border is strongly convex, and 
the loAviT isirtion of this liice thins out very niiich more than the upper part. The por- 
tion of the jaw inferior to the last molar is very large and its angle is strongly everted. 
'I’lie ina.-s«-t**ric fossa is not stnuigly marked, and the internal pterygoid fossa is less 
develo|M-d than in the jaw of the I'apir. The middle portion of the ascending ramus 
is very much hn)ader than in the Tapir’s juAV, and the condyle is placed farther pos- 
ti-rioriv from tin* coronoiil priM*esst*s than in the latter. The coronoid process is 
quite sle'nder. elongated and si*parated from the condyles by a long, slender 
notcli. 'I’lie condyles an* much hniader transversely and heavier than those of the 
'I’apir; they liave also not the ohlicjuc position as in the latter form. The angular 
ridp* limiting the inass«*h*ric fossa anteriorly and becoming continuous Avith the 
mronoid pna-ess alsive is very strongly dcA'eloped in this mandible, much more so 
than ill the 'I'lipir's jaw. 'I’he a.scending ramus of the jaAV is much broader in propor- 
tion to its height than in the 'I'apir. 
Till* syniphysial jMirtion of the mandible is broad and short; it differs consider- 
ably ill form fmiii that of the 'I’apir’s juAv. The inferior margin beloAv the premolars 
slo|M*s gradually up to tin* incisor Ixmler, and presents no abrupt angle as seen in 
Suillim*s. 'I’ln* syniphvsis lH*tween the second and third premolars is not prolonged 
far lM*yoiid the caniin*s for the insertion of the incisors. Thus this species dift’ers very 
niiirli from I'clttutMhcrtum in the characters of its symphysis, Avhich in the latter 
p*mis is nion* Stiilline and moit* horizontally placed than in P. paludosus. The 
mental fommen is situat4*d lx*low the second pi'emolar and a smaller posterior one 
may U* |in*s«*nt. 
CompiinsoH u>i(h the lapir's Skid/. — From the foregoing description Ave may 
sum up tin* affinities and diff’emices of the skull of P. pahidosus as compared AAUth 
that of laptrus. 1. — In the nasal region there is little similarity betAA^een the Iaao 
skulls, as the extivniely highly six*oialized nasal region of the Tapir for the insertion 
of Its larp* pmlKMH-is is entin*ly wanting in Palceosyops pahidosus. We may add 
lu*n* that from the charactei-s of the nasals of P. pahidosus Ave may conclude that it 
pmimhiy had no prols>s«>is, or if any, an extremely rudimentary one. 2.— The 
