502 DR W. S. BRUCE 



.MURDOCH we have both come to the conclusion that it was better to reproduce 

 faithfully the drawings of twenty-two years ago rather than to court even slight 

 errors by redrawing them in finished diagrammatic form. The drawings are a very 

 faithful representation of the freshly killed specimen. 



On my return to Dundee I entrusted the skeleton to Professor D'ARCY AV. 

 THOMPSON, C.B., who accepted it for his excellent Museum at University College. 

 Dundee. Professor D'ARCY THOMPSON has recently looked through the Museum, 

 but has failed to find the specimen. lie suggests that " during a long period some 

 vcars ago when the Museum was not well served, possibly this small skeleton, 

 which had got somewhat injured by rats, was either thrown out or was made 

 use of for class purposes, in the belief that it was only a common porpoise." 

 The loss of this skeleton removes the only concrete facts beyond Mr BURN 

 MURDOCH'S drawings and my measurement, and with Professor D'ARCY THOMPSON 

 I can only regret its loss. 



Consulting with Dr S. F. HARMER, inquiries have been made at Cambridge, but 

 no trace of the animal is at this time to be found. Neither does any other specimen 

 appear to exist in British or foreign museums. In his report on the seals of the 

 Dixcoren/ the late Dr WILSON * describes a porpoise which he frequently saw in 

 subantarctic seas ; but its length, to my mind, precludes the probability of it being 

 the same species. Dr JACQUES LIOUVILLE t describes a school of eight brown-and- 

 white " Delphinides," the colour and position of the markings of which appeared to 

 him to be characteristic. 



Dr LIOUVILLE gives the length of those animals seen by him as I'lO metres, i.e. 

 about 44 inches, but presumably this was estimated and not actually measured. It 

 may be noticed that this compares somewhat with the size of my Falkland Islands 

 specimen, which had a measured length of 52 inches. Dr WILSON'S specimens were 

 estimated at 8 to 10 feet long, i.e. 96 to 120 inches, or fully double the length of my 

 specimen. Dr LIOUVILLE is of opinion that the animals seen by himself and Dr 

 WILSON are of the same species but different ages. But in shape as well as in size 

 my specimen resembles Dr LIOUVILLE'S rather than Dr WILSON'S. The snout is more 

 truncated than beaked, though it is somewhat depressed above, as can be seen in 

 Mr BURN MURDOCH'S outline sketch, as well as by the shading in his other drawings. 

 The pectoral and dorsal fins are more like those in Dr LIOUVILLE'S sketch, and indeed, 

 considering that the latter was drawn from a distant and active specimen, they may 

 well prove to be in reality identical. The main difference is in the dorsal fin, which 

 Dr LIOUVILLE has shown to have a sharp point, whereas Mr BURN MURDOCH indicates 

 a blunt termination. The characters of the tail in the two drawings are almost 

 identical. In size and shape, therefore, making allowance for drawings made from 



* (Brit <sl<) National Antarctic /_>/.. i/rtt'on, ii. 19<t7. 



t "Sur le polymorphisme d'uu Delphinidd des mers australes : Del phi H us iruciyer, Quoy et Gaymard" : Note de 

 M. JACQUKS LIOUVILLE, Complex rendus, t. 156, p. 90, seance du Janvier 1913 de 1'Acad. des Sciences. 



