[ 203 ] CEPHALOPODS OF NORTHEASTERN COAST OF AMERICA. 
Additional specimens examined. 
d 
o 
+2 
C8 
tfl 
Locality. 
CD 
a 
o 
r=l 
d 
& 
Date. 
Keceived from. 
No of specimens 
and sex. 
Off Martha's Vineyard. 
1881. 
918 
S. 1 W., 01 miles from Gay Head. 
45 
July 16 
U. S. F. C. 
1 1., from fish. 
919 
S. | W., 65 miles from Gay Head. 
51J 
July 16 
_do. 
2 1., from Lophius. 
923 
90 
924 
110 
925 
224 
July 16 
939 
S. by E. 1 E., 98 miles from Gay Head. .. 
258 
Aug. 4 
....do.. 
1 1. ; 1 juv. 
940 
S by E. J E., 97 miles from Gay Head... 
130 
Aug. 4 
-do . 
1 1. ; 1 juv. 
949 
100 
1025 
S. S. W. J W., 95 miles from Gay Head 
216 
Sept. 8 
... do . 
1 1., in fish. 
1033 
S. S. E. A E., 106 miles from Gay Head .. 
183 
Sept. 14 
-do. 
1 1., in Merlucius. 
1038 
S. by E. 1 E., 891 miles from Gay Head - 
146 
Sept.21 
... do . 
1 1 . 
Newfoundland.Surface. 
1880. 
H. L. Osborn .. 
3 1. cT ; 10 1. $. 
Mr. H. L. Osborn, in the American Naturalist, vol. xv, p. 36C, May 
1881, lias given an account of the habits of this squid, at Newfoundland, 
and of the methods of capturing it there for bait. 
Enoploteuthis Cookii Owen. (See p. [53].) 
Trans. Zool. Soc. London, xi, p. 150, pi. 30, figs. 1-3; pi. 31, figs. 1-4; pi. 32, figs. 1-6; 
pi. 33, fig. 1 (restoration), June, 1881. 
Seppia unguiculata Molina, 1810 (no description). 
Enoploteuthis Molinas D’Orbigny, Ceph. Acdtab., p. 339. 
* Enoploteuthis Hartingii Verrill, this vol., p. [53], pi. 12, fig. 4; pi. 15, fig. 5, 1880. 
Professor Owen has very recently described in detail, and has given 
excellent figures of most of the existing parts of this large and remark¬ 
able cephalopod, which have been preserved so long and have so often 
been referred to, but hitherto have never been scientifically described, 
(see p. [53]). It is to be regretted, however, that Professor Owen has 
neither described nor figured the dentition of the radula in a manner to 
enable it to be used as a systematic character. His statement in regard 
to it is of the most general kind, and shows only that there are seven 
rows of teeth. It is also a matter of surprise that he has not compared 
any of the portions described with the corresponding parts of the equally 
large and very closely allied Enoploteuthis , carefully described and 
figured by Halting in 1801 (see p. [53J), and to which I have given the 
well-merited name, E. Hartingii. It is not improbable that the two 
forms are really identical, but this cannot be certainly determined from 
the figures, because the corresponding parts are not always represented 
in the same positions, and it is uncertain whether the corresponding arm 
is preserved in the two cases. Harting figures, rather poorly, the teeth 
of the radula, which appear to be very peculiar, if his figure is correct, 
(see my Plate XV, fig. 5, c, d). 
The shape of the mandibles appears to be different in the two species, 
however, and the large hooks also differ in form. 
