18/6.] DR. J. VON HAAST ON A NEW ZIPHIOID WHALE. 7 



genus Dichobune are also considered by Gervais to be more properly 

 Xiphodons ; so it is perfectly clear that a more careful comparison 

 than has yet been made will be necessary to determine the claims of 

 either to generic distinction. 



Being always strongly opposed to the multiplication of generic 

 designations without very adequate grounds, I shall be content in the 

 present instance, to retain the Cuvierian name Xiphodon*, and, in the 

 absence of any certain evidence that it belongs to any of the pre- 

 viously described species, to distinguish it as X. platyceps. 



It may be added that all the species with which it is most nearly 

 related, found both in England and France, belong to the Upper 

 Eocene epoch, or " proVcene " of Gervais. 



The principal dimensions of the cranium are as follows : — 



inches. centim. 



Length, in its mutilated state 8 - 2 20*8 



(About 9 inches if perfect.) 

 From anterior margin of orbit to occipital 



crest , 5'3 135 



From anterior margin of orbit to infraorbital 



foramen 1*5 3'8 



Breadth of upper surface of skull between 



orbits 2*8 7"2 



Greatest parietal breadth 2*4 (H 



Breadth at anterior part of temporal fossa . 1*8 4.6 

 Height of skull (between frontal region and 



hinder part of palate) 2 - 6 6*6 



Height of orbit 1-3 3'3 



Length of molar and premolar series .... 3' 7 9*5 



Breadth of palate between posterior molars 9 2*3 



,, „ between middlepremolars 1*1 2*8 



2. On a New Ziphioid Whale. By Julius von Haast, Ph.D., 

 F.R.S., Director of the Canterbury Museum, Christ- 

 church, New Zealand. Communicated by Prof. W. H. 

 Flower, F.R.S. 



[Received November 16, 1875.] 



In the month of May of this year the Canterbury Museum re- 

 ceived from W. Hood, Esq., of the Chatham Islands, three skulls of 

 Ziphioid Whales taken from specimens stranded with about 25 others 

 during the summer of last year on the Waitangi beach of the main 

 island of that group. 



They were described as "blackfish," all belonging to the same 

 school, by my informant, who moreover believes that the whole series 

 belonged to the same species. 



* Not, however, as a subgenus of Anoplotherium, from which it is perfectly 

 distinct. 



