1883.] PROF. FLOWER ON THE DELPHINID/E. 4/5 



F. Cuvier's ' Histoire Naturelle Jes Cetaces ' (183G), at p. 158, 

 under the naine of D. cejjhulorliijnchas . It does not appear tliat 

 an animal having exactly the coloration ascribed to this individual 

 has been met with again ; and as, allowing for imperfections of the 

 drawings, it agrees very closely in form with D. heavisidii, it may be 

 considered as only a variety (|)erhaps melanism) of that species. 



A full and accurate description of a Dolphin, of vvliich the skin 

 was brought from the Cape of Good Hope by M. Verreaux, is 

 quoted by Fred. Cuvier {pp. cit. p. 161), from a manuscript by 

 M. Quoy, under the name of B. hastatus. Cuvier recognizes its 

 identity with Gray's I), heavisidii, but does not adopt the name, 

 although it clearly has the right of priority as to publication. In the 

 same chapter in which he quotes Gray's 'Spicilegia ' (published eight 

 years before), he says : — " Voici la description mauuscrite que nous 

 trouvons de la main de M. Quoy, et que nous ne sachions pas avoir 

 ete publlee." 



With the same disregard for priority, Rapp ('Die Cetaceen,' p. 37, 

 1837) has the species Delphinus hastatus, Fr, Cuvier, giving 

 D. heavisidii, Gray, and D. caj^ensis, Dussumier, as synonyms. His 

 figure is from a specimen in the Museum of Stuttgart, and is an 

 improvement upon that of Gray, except perhaps as to the form of 

 the head and mouth. The colouring, well shown in the figure of 

 the under surface (plate iii. fig. b), agrees exactly with the descrip- 

 tions of Gray and Quoy. 



A better figure of unquestionably the same animal, from a drawing 

 by Castelnau, has been given by Vau Beneden (Bull, de I'Acad. 

 Roy. de Belgique, 2me ser. t. xxxvi. No. 7, juillet 1873) under the 

 erroneous name of Orca capensis, Gra}^, although its specific identity 

 with Delphinus heavisidii and D. hastatus is admitted. 



In a valuable paper on the " Whales and Dolphins of New Zea- 

 land," published in the Transactions of the New-Zealand Institute 

 for 1872, vol. v. (1873), Dr. Hector describes the external and 

 some of the osteological characters of a Dolphin, apparently one 

 of the commonest in the seas around New Zealand, under the name 

 of Electro clancula, upon the supposition that it was identical with 

 the Lagenorhynchus clanculus (afterwards Electra clancula') of 

 Gray, described from a skull alone. The vagueness of Dr. Gray's 

 description may be a sufticient excuse for this determination ; but it 

 was altogether an erroneous one, as it is evident that the New-Zea- 

 land animal is not an Electra or Lagenorhynchus at all, but belongs 

 to a totally different group of the family. The figure of the under 

 surface of the skull (Trans. N.-Z. Inst. vol. ix. pi. xi.) shows the 

 separated and diverging pterygoid bones, and all the characters of 

 the present section. Unfortunately the numbers of the vertebrae are 

 not given. 



In size the animal differs little from C heavisidii, fifty-one inches 

 being given as its length. Hutton (Trans. N.-Z. Inst. ix. p. 350) 

 gives four to five feet. The slight sketch of the external form 

 given by Hector (which Hutton characterizes as "not good") shows 

 considerable similarity to the previous figures of Z>. heavisidii, but 



