104 THE WHALEBONE WHALES OF THE WESTERN NORTH ATLANTIC. 



" A fine specimen of this species \Balmnoptera rostrata], over 30 feet long, went 

 ashoi'e dining the autumn of 1866, on the Long Beach, N. J. It was much injured, 

 probably by the killers. This species has not been before noticed on our coasts." 



It is evident that he thought the whale to be B. acuto-rostrata at this time, but 

 in the same Proceedings, 1868, p. 159, he is quoted as making the following state- 

 ment on June 23d, 1868: 



"He [Prof. Cope] mentioned that he had opportunity of examining a por- 

 tion of a specimen of the Scrag AVhale of Dudley, Bidcena gihhosa of Erxleben, 

 and ascertained that it represented a genus not previously known. It was a fin-back 

 wliale, but without dorsal fin or throat folds, resembling superficially the genus 

 Balmna. The baleen short and curved. The genus was called Agapiielths. 



"A second species of the genus was to be found in the 'gray whale' of the 

 coasts of California. Tlie baleen of this species, compared witli that of the A. 

 gihhosus, was longer and had narrower basis. The plates moderately and simply 

 concave, while those of the latter are sigmoidal, most curved near the outer margin 

 in cross section. The bristles of the California species were very coarse, vai-ying 

 from one to three series between the enamel plates. The bristles of the A. gibhosris 

 much finer, three series together. Length of the latter, 8.5 inches, width at base, 4.4 

 inches. In the gray whale or Agiqthelus glavais Cope, 22 inches in length, width 

 at base 6 inches. In the former nearly 6 in an inch, in tlie latter 2^. The baleen 

 of the A. gibhofius belonged to an immature specimen of 35 feet in length." 



I understand this to be the specimen that Cope referred to in 1867 under the 

 name of B. rostrata, as appears from the same Proceedings, 1868, p. 224, where he 

 cites that reference in synonymy. He now calls it Agaplielus gibhosus Cope, and 

 gives the estimated length of the specimen, which was young, as 43 feet. 



At the beginning of this article, on p. 221, he makes the following statement: 



"During the autumn of 1866 a whale was cast ashore on the Long Beach, 

 Ocean Co., N. J., opp(isite Westecunk, on the other side of Little Egg Hai'bor. neai- 

 the residence of Wm. A. Ci'aue. A recent visit to the spot furnished me with the 

 means of determining the species to which this monster of tlie deep belonged, 

 although not with the completeness desirable, as the tide had a short time previ- 

 ously taken off the most bulky part of the carcass. Thus the ci'anium, cervical and 

 dorsal vertebras, with the fii'st ribs, the most important portions for its identifica- 

 tion, were lost. There were preserved, however, the mandibular aix-h, ear-l>one, one 

 scapula and both fins, numerous ribs, many lumbar and caudal vertebne, with the 

 baleen from one side of the maxilla. These portions, with a few prominent points 

 dependent on the observations of Wm. A. Crane, serve to indicate a species not 

 only new to our fauna, but new to modern science. The evidence of my informant, 

 as that of au old and experienced coaster and waterman, and one familiar with the 

 appearance of our cetaceans, confirmed b}^ his sons and by the specimens pi-eserved, 

 so far as they went I consider reliable. 



" In general features this Cetacean seems to be an intermediate form of the 

 toothless whales; and au additional feature, which depends on the observation of 

 my friend AV. Crane, and in which I cannot conceive it possible that he should be 

 mistaken, indicates still more conclusively that it pertains to a genus not before 

 characterized. The whale was first driven on shore on its back, and the gular and 



