132 BULLETIN 36, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. 



Uulike as these two skulls figured iu the Osteoyraphie are iu propor- 

 tions therefore, they fiud their counterpart in two skulls presumably 

 of the same species and from a single locality. It would seem that 

 something besides proportion of the skulls must be brought forward 

 whereby to distinguish the supposedly distinct Japanese Grampus. 



I did not have an opportunity of examining the skull of G. sakamata 

 when in Paris and can not afi&rm that it may not exhibit characters 

 which are not represented iu Gervais' tigure. Until such characters are 

 discovered, however, I do not see any reason why G. sakamata should 

 be regarded as distinct from G. griseus.* 



Glohioceplialus Rissi and G. Chinensis Gray. 



This animal, which was described by an anonymous writer in the 

 Chinese Repository, Vol. vi, pp. 411-414, appears to be unquestionably 

 a grampus, as is indicated by the size, the number, and the position of 

 the teeth, and the color and markings of the skin. Gray, following 

 Blyth, regarded it as a Blackfish, and founded his Glohiocepludus 

 Chinensis upon it. That it was a grami)us, and probably G. grisens, will, 

 I believe, be the opinion of any person who reads carefully the original 

 description in the work mentioned. 



Table of iiieusnrtvuuts. 

 GRAMPUS GEISEUS. 



*In the foot-note (Osieographie, p. 563) Gervuis states that there is a mandible of a 

 grampus from Japan iu the British Museum, but none is inoluded lu Profcsssor 

 Flower's recent list of specimens of Cetacea in that collection 



