NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY OF GLASGOW. 27 



ham. The beaked shape of the head was very marked, the upper 

 lip projecting 1J inches beyond the head, which had a gradually- 

 rounded outline. On each side of the upper lip were four black 

 bristles, which projected but slightly through the skin. 



The general colour above was a beautiful purplish-black, the entire 

 beak from the furrow dividing it from the head, and the ventral 

 surface till within 21 inches from the cleft of the tail, was of a 

 satiny-white, slightly yellowish on the under surface. Above the 

 pectoral fins and behind the eye was a greyish-white spot, thickly 

 splashed or streaked with brown; a similar linear-shaped spot ran in 

 an oblique direction from slightly before the dorsal fin, in the 

 direction of the vent, and a larger one, which measured about 13 

 inches long and about 3 inches wide, ran along the side behind the 

 dorsal. 



The ear-opening was very small, and could be detected with diffi- 

 culty, barely admitting an ordinary pin. 



The number of teeth in the upper jaws was 23 on each side, and 

 in the lower jaws 24 and 25; but some of them were barely through 

 the gum, one or two at the front being mere denticles. They were 

 sharp, conical, and curved inwards, and had a slight longitudinal 

 groove on their anterior and posterior surfaces. They seemed to be 

 quite free and movable. The lower jaw projected slightly beyond 

 the upper. 



Owing to insufficient facilities for maceration, a few of the teeth 

 were lost ; and, for a like reason, I have been unable with certainty 

 to note the number of vertebrae, some of the smaller being merely 

 cartilage. Previous to maceration, I had counted 90 vertebrae. The 

 first two cervical vertebrae were anchylosed, the remainder free. 



I have not any doubt that this individual is a young Delphinus 

 albirodris, or, more properly, Lagenorhynchus albirostris. Gray. 



I may remark that the figure given by Brightwell, and copied by 

 Bell in his "British Quadrupeds," is very far from correct, that of 

 Mr. Clark, as I have already said, approaching nearer to the one 

 now described. 



Some interesting anatomical peculiarities have been noted by Mr. 

 Clark and Drs. Murie and Cunningham in their respective papers. 



