MUSEUM OF COMPARATIVE ZOOLOGY. 17 



The other section is divided into four " tribes," which are named respec- 

 tively, (1) Callorhinina, (2) Arclocephalina, (3) Zalopliina, and (4) 

 Eumetopiina. The first embraces the single genus Gallorhinus ; the 

 second, Phocarctos, Arctocephalus, Euotaria, and Gypsophoca ; the third, 

 Zalophus and Neophoca ; the fourth, Eumetopias and Arctophoca, — ten 

 genera in all. The short generic diagnoses given are drawn almost 

 entirely from two exceedingly variable features of the skull, namely, the 

 form and relative length of the palatal bones and the form and position 

 of the teeth. The geographical distribution of the supposed genera is also 

 indicated, in which the habitat of Zalophus is given as " South America," 

 whereas it was founded solely on the Olaria Glllespii McBain of the 

 North Pacific. Three alleged species are mentioned whose skulls, he 

 says, are not known. These are, (1) Arctocephalus falklandicus, habitat, 

 "New Georgia"; (2) A. nivosus, habitat, " Cape of Good Hope"; (3) 

 " A. Forsteri Fischer " habitat, " New Zealand." The character of the 

 latter I cannot satisfactorily determine. I have never seen an " Arcto- 

 cephalus Forsteri Fischer " elsewhere mentioned ; the Otaria Fischeri 

 Lesson and the Phoca Forsteri Fischer* have usually been referred to 

 the A. falklandicus. Gray's A. Forsteri seems to be based, judging 

 from his references, exclusively on the "sea bear" of Dr. J. R. Fors- 

 ter.f whose habitat was the Cape of Good Hope, as Gray in another 

 place specially states. But this species Gray in this paper regards 

 as the same as the Phoca antarctica Thunberg % and Fischer, § which, 

 he says, is the same as what he had called Arctocephalus Delalandii, 

 the name of which species he now consequently changes to A. antarc- 

 ticus. Although Forster regarded the New Zealand fur seal as the 

 same as the one he saw at the Cape of Good Hope, Gray's A. 

 Forsteri seems to refer, from the habitat given, only to the New 

 Zealand animal. I can see no evidence, however, of the New Zealand 

 fur seal being specifically different from the fur seal of South Australia 

 {A. cinereus auct.). 



In this paper the dental formula of the eared seals is, for the first 

 time correctly given by the author. || 



* Synop. Mam., p. 232. 



t Cook's Voyages, Vol. I, p. 174 ; Vol. II, p. 528. 



| Mem. de l'Acad. de St. Petersbourg, 3d Series, Tome III, p. 322, 1811. 

 § Synop. Mam., p. 242. 



|| For more than fifteen years, through some strange inadvertence, the dental 

 formula of the molars of the eared seals was given in Dr. Gray's papers as " | — 4." 

 VOL. II. 2 



