] 04 
Records of the Geological Surrey of India. 
' [VOL. IX. 
Rhinoceros: a new species of this genus, founded on upper molar teeth, has also been obtained. 
Tetraconodon magnum , hitherto known by the drawing only of the Dadupur specimen, is 
represented by the jaw noticed above. 
Lntra a portion of a lower jaw, which seems to be larger than Lutra palceindica, and may 
perhaps bo distiuct. 
Bramatherium. —Of this genus we have obtained a very perfect cranium, not yet cleaned 
from its matrix; the teeth are complete, and the cranium seems only lacking the horn-cores to be 
also complete : this is, I believe, the first perfect cranium discovered. 
Dorcatherium sp.—A number of molar teeth and jaws; the upper molars iudicate the existence 
of two species. 
Camelopardalis sivalensis. —Part of a lower jaw, and two upper molars. 
Merycopotamus sivalensis. —Several portions of lower jaws, and an astragalus. 
Ursitaxus sivalensis. —The first true molar, and the last premolar from the maxilla of each 
side; these teeth are Valuable additions to our collection, as the genus lias been hitherto known only 
by Falconer’s two specimens : the oue a cranium, and the other a fragment of a lower jaw. 
ITijrena sivalensis. —Several fragments of lower jaws. 
Fells sp.—One lower carmissial tooth. 
Tlrsus u. sp. cranium. 
In addition to the Mammalian specimens, I have also to notice the discovery of a very perfect 
cervical vertebra of a bird belonging to tlie order Grallatores. Falconer also had one or more 
specimens of bird-bones, which he referred to the same order ; and it is not improbable that our 
new specimen may be closely allied to Falconer’s. Falconer considered that liis specimens belonged 
to a bird which must have exceeded in size the gigantic Bengal adjutant Leptoptilvs argala. 
Remains of Ophidians have not hitherto been recorded from the Tertiary Fannse of India; 
it is therefore interesting to have to notice their discovery from two localities in the present year. 
Mr. Theobald has brought four dorsal vertebra.'of a species of snake allied to, but smaller than, 
the Indian l’ytlion from the Shvaliks of the Potwar district; while Mr. Fedden has collected two 
very similar vertebrae from the Shvaliks of Sind. 
I shall hope on a future occasion to give descriptions and figures of the more remarkable of 
these novelties. 
Note on Camelopardalis from the Shvaliks. In looking over the collection of ruminant teeth 
from the Shvaliks in the Indian Museum, the great rarity of the teetli of this genus struck me 
as being very remarkable, especially as Falconer had determined two species, viz., Camelopard dis 
affinis and Camelopai dal is sivalensis. The former of these species was founded upon molars closely 
resembling those of the living African species, while the latter was founded upon a cervical 
vertebra. (The specimens are figured in the “ Palaeontological Memoirs, ” Vol. I, p. 198.) 
It then occurred to me to consider why separate species had been made from these two series 
of remains, which on prim a facie grounds it would have seemed natural to refer to one species. 
I then found that in the catalogue of the Fossil Mammalia of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, there 
were certain teeth which had been entered by Dr. Falconer as the lower molars of the second 
species of' Camelopardalis ( C. sivalensis). These teeth are numbered in the collection ii'_ and 
on examining these specimens 1 was greatly surprized to find that they belonged to Bos or 
some allied form, and not to Camelopardalis at all. (The teeth are much narrower in proportion 
to their length than in Camelopardalis; they have a long slender accessory lobe between tbe two cy¬ 
linders, which reaches to the summit of the crown, whereas in Camelopardalis there is only a 
minute tubercle at the base of tbe cylinders; and finally tbe outer walls of tbe cylinders are placed 
nearly parallel to the long areas of the teeth, instead of very obliquely, as in Camelopardalis). These 
