653 
attention to the evidence they give in favour of two conclusions — first, that the saurian 
member of the past fauna was not identical with either of the two crocodilians in the 
present one ; second, that it was not even nearly allied to them.” Portions of the skull, 
both young and adult, jaws, teeth, and scutes are described. 
Mr. De Vis’ conclusions are — “ No doubt remains that the fossil species was 
one distinct from the Indo-Australian, and probably ecdemie, Grocodilus porosus on the 
one hand, and from the saurian peculiar to our northern tableland on the other . . 
. . . it appears that the portions of skull examined do not, in their imperfect 
condition, present a combination of characters exclusively alligatorian, nor on the other 
hand distinctly crocodilian ; but that if we allow this seeming equilibrium of testimony 
to be disturbed by the weight derived from the imbrication of the scutes, the beam must 
sink at once on the side of the American family. 
Loc. and Horizon. Chinchilla, Gowrie Creek, -Wiembilla Creek, Condamine Kiver, 
and Eight-mile Plains, near Brisbane (C. W. He Vis Colin. Queensland Mus.) 
Eluviatile deposits. 
Class — A ves. 
Ols. According to Mr. C. AV. De Vis,* twenty-four genera of birds, containing 
twenty-eight species, are now known from Queensland deposits. Seven of the genera 
and the whole of the species are considered by him to be extinct. Mr. De Vis 
remarks The extent of the change which the Nototheriau avifauna of Queensland 
is thus shown to have undergone is very much the same as that observed in the case of 
the marsupials. With two or three very doubtful exceptions, all these have submitted 
to specific metamorphosis, and of twenty-six of the old genera but fourteen survive. 
Has the change been rapid ? Then, from what cause? Not from the advent of man; 
savages do not exterminate. Have we hitherto considered this fauna younger than it 
really was? Possibly ; but for the solution of these questions we must look to further 
accumulation and study of palmontological evidence. So far as the Writer can see at 
present, the Age of the fauna preserved in the Darling Downs Deposits cannot well be 
later than Early Pliocene.” 
Order-CAKINATiE. 
Eamily — EALCONID.^. 
Oenus — TAP H.^TTTS, He Vis, 1891. 
(Proc. Linn. Soe. N. S. Wales, vi. (2), p. 123.) 
TAnn.®Trs beacuiaiis, He Vis. 
Urocetus brachialis, De Vis, Loo. cit., 1889, v. (2), Pt. 4, p. 162 
Taphatus brachialis, De Vis, Loc. cit, 1891, vi. (2), Pt. 1, p. 123. 
Obs. The distal half of a humerus and a femur of a diurnal bird of prey are 
recorded under the above names respectively, given in the synonymy. The humerus 
was “ the first relic of an arborial bird of flight hitherto recognised amongst the remains 
of the extinct birds of Queensland.” The femur, on which Mr. De Vis appears to lay 
the greatest stress, is compared with that of several living genera, and the following 
desertion offered:- “Femur stout (index circ. 9-4), proximal end transversely 
expauLd, shaft compressed, pneumatic foramen small; a rudimentary third trochanter, 
entepicondylar pit between condyle and epicondylo. _ n n n 
^ Loc^and Horizon. King’s Creek, Darling Downs {G. W. He Vts-Co\ht Que^ens- 
land Mus.) ; Neighbourhood of Warwick, Darling Downs (H. ifarsii— Colin. Queensland 
Mus.) 
*Proc. Linn. Soo. N. S. Wales, 1892, vi. (2), Pt. 3, p. 455, 
