THE WHALEBONE WHiLES OF THE WESTERN NORTH ATLANTIC. 103 



(Proc. A. N. Sci., Phila., 1867, p. 32) to be a Megaptera. Certain it is that 

 a Megaptera is found at Baliia, as I bave seen lai'gei- and smaller portions of two 

 skeletons of one, but whether it be the ' Bahia Finner' and P. Immliensis, Gra_y, is 

 quite doubtful. In the first place, fishermen and whalers never call a ' hump-bjick' 

 (Mega2)te?u) a ' finner ' ; if they have done so in the case of this species, it evidently 

 has a noticeable doi-sal fin, which is wanting in the present whale. In the next 

 place, baleen of the 'Bahia Finner' has a commercial value, being exported to 

 England, while that of Mega^ytera has none, being coarse and twisted." {29, 107.) 



From a comparison of these tv^'o paragraphs it would appear that Cope first 

 brought forward his specimen as indicating that Gray's Balcenoptera brasiliensis, or 

 " Bahia Fiunei-," was a Megaptera, but afterwards concluded that though a Megaptera 

 unrpiestionably occurred in the vicinity of Bahia, it was " rpiite doubtful " whether 

 the same was Gray's B. hrasiliensis after all. We may properly consider that 

 Cope's remark that " it should be called Megaptera brasiliensis''^ means mei'ely that 

 when he first wrote, in 1867, he thought Gray's Balcenoptera hrasiliensis shoidd be 

 transfeired to the genus Megaptera. The Megaptera hrasiliensis is not, therefore, 

 to be considered as one of Cope's new species, and the skeleton which he presented 

 to the Philadelphia Academy is not a type. Disposed of in this way, as I believe 

 it should be, there is still a matter of interest in determining what the skeleton was 

 which Cope presented to the Academy. 



So little is left of the specimen and it is so young, that it is hardly worth con- 

 sideration. The skull is veiy immature and lacks the right maxilla. The spines 

 and processes of the vertebrae aie all sepai'ate, showing immaturity. I have found 

 37 vertebrae in all, apparently without the atlas and axis, and numerous caudals are 

 doubtless lacking. 



The skull, so far as can be judged, does not differ notably from that of 21. 

 hellicosa. The breadth across the squamosals (greatest) is 38 in. ; the orbit, point 

 to point, 6 in. What Cope means by saying that the " orbital processes of the 

 frontal are nairowed extei-nally," is not evident. The orbits are very large rela- 

 tively, as is to be expected in so immature an individual. Length of mandible, 

 straight, 5 ft. l\ in. ; curved, 5 ft. 5 in. 



There are 14 pairs of ribs, all very fragile. The first is broad distally, as in 

 M. hellicosa. Measurements of the limbs are as follows : 



Scapula: Breadth, i ft. lo in. 

 Height, I " 3i " 

 Humerus: Length, o " gi " without epiphyses (straight). 

 Radius: Length, i " 8f " " 

 Uhia: Length, i " si " " 



The total length of the skull (as well as can be made out) is 5 ft. 2 in. 

 Leno-th of rostrum, 3 ft. 2^ iu. Breadth of rostrum at middle, estimated, 14 in. 

 Depth of mandible at middle, 6-^ in. Nasals are lacking. 



Note on Agaphelus gibbosus (Ersleben) Cope. 



The first mention of this whale by Cope is in the Proceedings of the Academy 

 of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, 18C7, p. 147, where he says in a foot-note: 



