PHOCHNA CRASSIDENS. 519 
ated between the Stamford fossil and that large British 
species of Delphis, which is so nearly similar in size. The 
skull, with the numerous minute teeth, of the Porpoise 
forms the subject of the vignette at p. 476; and the 
characteristic cranium of the Beluga is figured at p. 491 
of the same work. 
I have seen no specimens of these existing British Del- 
phinide meriting to be regarded as fossils; the subject 
of the present section presents characters by which it 
differs not only from the known existing Delphinide of 
our own coasts, but from all the species that have been 
so described and figured as to admit of a comparison. 
Of the fossil Delphinidae, described in other works, the 
Phocena Cortesit, which Cuvier* defines as allied to the 
Ph. orca and Ph. melas, is readily distinguished from the 
Ph. crassidens by its more numerous and smaller teeth. 
The fossil Delphinus, allied to the common species,f is 
distinguished by its still smaller teeth ; and another extinct 
species, from the Faluns of the ‘‘ Département des Landes,” } 
by the long symphysis of the lower jaw; that of the 
Stamford fossil being as short as in the Grampus. The 
fossil Dolphin, described by M. Von Meyer under the name 
of Avrionus servatus,§ had a mandibular symphysis not 
shorter than one-third the entire length of the skull. 
The Delphinus from the “ caleaire grossier,” du Départe- 
ment de Maine-et-Loire, had seventeen teeth in each 
alveolar series of the upper jaw. Other recorded extinct 
Cetacea present still wider differences from the Stamford 
fossil. 
Whether the species or variety of the Grampus indicated 
* “Un Dauphin voisin de /’epaulard et du globiceps.”” * Ossemens Fossiles,’ 
4to., 1823, t. vy. pt. 1. p. 208. 
+ Ib. p. 316. + Ib. p. 312. 
§ Leonhard and Bronn, Jahrbuch fiir Mineralogie, 1841, p. 315. 
