Skull of the so-called “ Bunyip." 
277 
the cranium, and the extraordinary development of the frontal, 
parietal, and occipital bones, are even more remarkable in this 
foal’s head than in the animal from the Murrumbidgee. The 
grand distinction between the two skulls is, that while in this the 
occular orbits are as far as possible apart, almost touching the 
molars, in the Hawkesbury skull the eyes converge so as to unite 
and form one circular orbit in the middle of the forehead, the 
animal being thus a true Cyclops. This most astonishing struc¬ 
ture is occasioned by the nasal bones being totally wanting, by 
the inter-maxillaries being reduced to a mere rudimentary tubercle, 
and by the single orbit in the forehead being formed below by the 
junction of the lacrymals, and above by that of the post-orbitary 
apophyse of the frontals—all enormously developed, for the 
purpose of filling up the vacancy occasioned by the want of the 
nasal bones. In the Murrumbidgee skull, the bones that are 
deficient in the other one are here excessively developed, so as to 
force the eyes down on the upper jaw. I am thus inclined to 
consider it to be likewise the skull of a mis-shapen foal or foetus 
of a mare; its peculiar monstrosity consisting in the eyes being 
located in a manner exactly opposite to that which prevails in 
the Hawkesbury foal. This is monstrous by extreme convergency 
of the eyes, the Murrumbidgee foal by the extreme divergency 
of the same organs. I argue for this skull being a lusus natures , 
on the ground of its being absolutely identical in some Tespects 
with that of a foal, while in others it is totally different from the 
cranium of all known mammalia; and naturalists will here 
recollect the Linnean apophthegm, “ Natura non facit saltus.” 
Besides, I may advance another proof of the animal having been 
mis-shapen or imperfect, in the fact of there being no super¬ 
orbitary foramen, such as exists in the horse and ruminantia. 
The excessive development of the hinder part of the cranium is 
the result also of the malformation of the bones of the face, as we 
see in the Hawkesbury monster. 
If the Murrumbidgee skull should eventually be proved to 
belong to a distinct species, this new animal must be placed 
between the horse and the llama, only close to the horse. But I 
do not imagine that, even then, it can be identical with the 
