132 BULLETIN 3(5, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. 



Uulike as these two skulls figured iu the Osteographie are iu propor- 

 tions therefore, they fiud their counterpart in two skulls presumably 

 of the same species and from a single locality. It would seem that 

 something besides proportion of the skulls must be brought forward 

 whereby to distinguish the supposedly distinct Japanese Grampus. 



I did not have an opportunity of examining the skull of G. saliamata 

 when in Paris and can not affirm that it may not exhibit characters 

 which are not represented in Gervais' tigure. Until such characters are 

 discovered, however, I do not see any reason why G. salmmata should 

 be regarded as distinct from G. griseus.* 



Globioceplialus Rissi and G. CJiinensis Gray. 



This animal, which was described by an anonymous writer iu the 

 Chinese Repository, Vol. vi, pp. 411-414, appears to be unquestionably 

 a grampus, as is indicated by the size, the number, and the position of 

 the teeth, and the color and markings of the skin. Gray, following 

 Blyth, regarded it as a Blackfish, and founded his Glohioceiihalus 

 Chinensis upon it. That it was a grampus, and probably G. griseus, will, 

 I believe, be the opinion of any person who reads carefully the original 

 description in the work mentioned. 



Tahh of vuasitnmoits. 

 GRAMPUS GRISEUS. 



* In the foot-note {Oslvographie, p. 563) Gervais states that there is a mandible of a 

 grampus from Japan iu the British Museum, but none is included in Professsor 

 Flower's recent list of specimens of Cetacea in that collection. 



