THE WHALEBONE WHALES OF THE WESTERN NORTH ATLANTIC. 103 



(Proc. A. N. Sci., Phila., 1867, p. 32) to be a Meaaptera. Certain it is that 

 a Megaptera is found at Bahia, as I have seen larger and smaller portions of two 

 skeletons of one, but whether it be the ' Bahia Finner' and P. brasiliensis, Gray, is 

 quite doubtful. In the first place, fishermen and whalers never call a 'hump-back' 

 (Megaptera) a ' finner ' ; if they have done so in the case of this species, it evidently 

 has a noticeable dorsal fin, which is wanting in the present whale. In the next 

 place, baleen of the 'Bahia Finner' has a commercial value, being exported to 

 England, while that of Megaptera has none, being coarse and twisted." (29, 107.) 



From a comparison of these two paragraphs it would appear that Cope first 

 brought forward his specimen as indicating that Gray's Balaenoptera brasiliensis, or 

 " Bahia Finner," was a Megaptera, but afterwards concluded that though a Megaptera 

 unquestionably occurred in the vicinity of Bahia, it was " quite doubtful " whether 

 the same was Gray's B. brasiliensis after all. We may properly consider that 

 Cope's remark that " it should be called Megaptera brasiliensis' 1 '' means merely that 

 when he first wrote, in 1867, he thought Gray's Balcenoptera brasiliensis shoxild be 

 transferred to the genus Megaptera. The Megaptera brasiliensis is not, therefore, 

 to be considered as one of Cope's new species, and the skeleton which he presented 

 to the Philadelphia Academy is not a type. Disposed of in this way, as I believe 

 it should be, there is still a matter of interest in determining what the skeleton was 

 which Cope presented to the Academy. 



So little is left of the specimen and it is so young, that it is hardly worth con- 

 sideration. The skull is very immature and lacks the right maxilla. The spines 

 and processes of the vertebrae are all separate, showing immaturity. I have found 

 37 vertebrae in all, apparently without the atlas and axis, and numerous caudals are 

 doubtless lacking. 



The skull, so far as can be judged, does not differ notably from that of M. 

 bellicosa. The breadth across the squamosals (greatest) is 38 in. ; the orbit, point 

 to point, 6 in. What Cope means by saying that the " orbital processes of the 

 frontal are narrowed externally," is not evident. The orbits are very large rela- 

 tively, as is to be expected in so immature an individual. Length of mandible, 

 straight, 5 ft. 1 in. ; curved, 5 ft. 5 in. 



There are 14 pairs of ribs, all very fragile. The first is broad distally, as in 

 M. bellicosa. Measurements of the limbs are as follows : 



Scapula: Breadth, i ft. 10 in. 

 Height, i " 3 i " 



Humerus: Length, o " 9^- " without epiphyses (straight). 

 Radius: Length, i " 8J " 

 Ulna: Length, i " 5 J " " 



The total length of the skull (as well as can be made out) is 5 ft. 2 in. 

 Length of rostrum, 3 ft. 2^ in. Breadth of rostrum at middle, estimated, 14 in. 

 Depth of mandible at middle, 6-^- in. Nasals are lacking. 



Note on AGAPHELUS GIBBOSUS (Erxleben) Cope. 



The first mention of this whale by Cope is in the Proceedings of the Academy 

 of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, 1867, p. 147, where he says in a foot-note : 



