112 BULLETIN 36, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. 



The skulls of Cephalorhynchus from New Zealand iii the Paris Mu- 

 seum are larger tliau those from the Cape of Good Hope. The rostrum 

 iu the former occupies oue-half the total length, but in the latter ouly 

 about 4G per ceut. It is possible that the Kew Zealand skulls belong 

 to the si^ecies under discussion. 



The relations of the^e two species to a third recently discovered will 

 now be considered. This species is 



CEPHALORHYNCHUS HECTOKI (Van Beneden). 



Elccira hectori, Van Beuedeu, Bull. Acad. K. Belgique, 3d ser., i, 1881, pp. 877-887, 

 PI. 11. 



The specimen figured and described by Professor Van Beneden was 

 captured iu New Zealand waters. His admirable figures and descrip- 

 tion leave no room for doubt as to its generic position, but its specific 

 relationships are not so readily made out. 



Externally the specimen differs from the figures of C. heavisidei in 

 having an ovate dorsal fin, and in that the throat and lower jaw are 

 white rather than black. On the other hand, it lacks the white fore- 

 head of C. albifrons, but agrees with that s[)ecies in the shape of the 

 dorsal fin. The skull, according to Professor Van Beneden, agrees 

 perfectly with that figured in the Ostcographie, PI. xxxvi, fig. 1, which 

 seems undoubtedly to belong to (J. Itearisidei. The vertebral formula, 

 however, does not agree exactly with that of C. heavisidei. In the lat- 

 ter species the normal formula is probably as follows : C. 7, D 13, L. 15, 

 Ca. 30=G5. Vau Beneden's specimen gives the following formula: 0. 

 7,D. 11, L. 15, Ca. 27=63. 



Eegarding the differences, it may jierhaps be said that the last-men- 

 tioncd is due to individual ^•a^iation. The color of the head and the 

 shape of the dorsal fin on the contrary can scarcely be so regarded. 

 But the color of the head is most like that of C. heavisidei, while the 

 sha[)e of the dorsal fin resembles that of C. aJbifrons. To put it in either 

 of these species, therefore, we must disregard one or the other of the 

 distinctions. For the present, it appears to me, it must stand as an 

 independent species, and I have ranked it as such in the Synopsis, 

 though with some misgivings, arising from geographical considerations. 



CEPHALORHYNCHUS EUTROPIA (Gray). 



DeJphinus euiropia, Gray, Proc. Zooi. Soc. Loudon, 1849, p. 1. 

 Eulropia dicklci, Gray, Proc. Zool. Soc. London, ISGG, p. 215. 

 Tursio eulropia, Gray, Cat. Seals and Whales, 186f), ji. 2G2. 

 Ccplial(>rhij)ichus catropia, Dall, in Scanunon's Marine Mamni., 1874, p. 289. 



The only specimens of this species hitherto recorded are the two 

 skulls in the British Museum reported to have come from the coast of 

 Chili. Of these the type (No. 936«) is somewhat the smaller, but 



