CHAPTER III. 
A REVIEW OF COPE’S AND SCAMMON’S SPECIES. 
In the history of American cetology two names will always stand out with 
special prominence, — those of Professor E. D. Cope and Captain C. M. Scammon. 
Cope’s observations on existing Lalenidw cover a period extending from 1865 to 
1891. During this time he described as new four species and one genus from the 
east coast of the United States, one species from the West Indies, and four species 
and one genus from the west coast of North America. In the present chapter I 
propose to give a list of these various species, to indicate the nature and condition of 
the material on which they are based, and to state the present whereabouts of the 
types. The original descriptions and measurements will be given in some cases and 
in others a summary of differential characters. The west coast species will be 
given further consideration in a separate chapter. 
Scammon described but a single species, Balwnoptera davidsoni, although, as 
already seen, he furnished the information and material on which Cope’s various 
west coast species were based. 
Cope in his first essays gave scientific names to such stranded specimens of 
Atlantic whales as accidentally came under his observation. His intention was not 
to found species additional to those of which specimens are commonly captured or cast 
up on our shores, but to give these a place in zodlogical nomenclature. Thus he speaks 
of his Balena cisarctica as “the Black whale of the whalers of our coast,” ete. That 
these several species received new names was because he thought they were distin- 
guishable from the species frequenting the coasts of Europe,and not because they were 
rare American forms unknown to whalers and others whose business was with the sea. 
The same is largely true of the Pacific species. Cope’s Megaptera versabilis was 
“The North Pacific hump-back.” His Lalenoptera velifera was “The Finner 
Whale of the Oregon coasts,” his Sibbaldius sulfureus was “The Sulphur-Bottom 
of the North-West Coast.” On account of this circumstance I have not thought it 
necessary to present extended arguments to prove that the types of Cope’s species 
were the same specifically as specimens from our coast which have accumulated since 
the former were described, except in cases in which, from an examination of the 
types, I have found that the species were not properly characterized at the start. 
In the subsequent chapters the types will be examined along with other specimens. 
It is obvious that if they do present special characters, these will make themselves 
noticeable. 
