DR. J. MURIE ON THE ORGANIZATION OF THE CAAING WHALE. 291 



(G. macrorhynclius\ the G. indicus, the G. sieholdii, and G. chinensis, some confusion 

 evidently reigns. Dr. Gray says Mr. Blyth's species ((?. indicus) is "perhaps a 

 Neomeris." But his own trenchant definition of the latter genus, viz. " dorsal fin 

 none," does not harmonize with Blyth's recorded dorsal fin 2-| feet in length. I have 

 alluded frequently to the anatomy of Dr. Williams's Lewchew specimen, which agrees 

 with the British G. meJas ; yet it is as likely as not to be the G. indicus, Blyth. 



As far as I can draw a conclusion from what has to me been satisfactorily demon- 

 strated by others concerning Globicej)s, there is but one (or two'?) well-determined 

 species inhabiting the basin of the Atlantic'. This is manifestly a migratory animal. 



That in the Pacific and Indian Oceans the species are more numerous is possible ; 

 but how much separation or identity of specimens from different localities are entitled 

 to weight requires more research and comparison than the subject has hitherto received. 



As far as outward figure and colour are concerned, there appears considerable unifor- 

 mity ; but paucity of trustworthy observation may have something to do with this, if 

 Couch's^ assertion is well founded. 



The precise position of the Cetacean dorsal fin would seem to be no sure specific 

 test ; for between foetus and mother there is no unanimity : in other words, its position 

 depends ^«n' ^«5SM on the age of the animal. 



Whilst the entire pectoral limb of the M^hale is reduced to act in a watery mobile 

 element, it acquires unusual power of a semirotatory kind. Professor Huxley^ remarked 

 of the Porpoise, " it is not, however, by any motion of those fins that locomotion is 

 effected, this being almost exclusively produced by the sculling action of the tail." 

 True! still it seems to me that every movement must to some extent be influenced by 

 these appendages. In nautical parlance, crank vessels require floats or outward balances. 

 Now this is precisely the office of the semirigid extremity. It rotates, moreover, on its 

 own axis, through the well-nigh ball-and-socket joint and fore-and-aft levers. 



Has subservience to function, preservation of type, selective power, or hereditary 

 transmission had the most enduring influence in the transference of such a complex 

 fleshy arrangement of the naso-facial muscles ? Huddled up beneath a mass of blubber, 



' This opinion may seem very offhand as weighed against such authorities as Gray, Gervais, and van Beneden ; 

 but the wide geographical range of O. melas makes one hesitate to accept distinction unless well founded. I 

 regret the cessation of the text of the ' Oste'ographie des Cetaces,' which, in spite of p!s. 51 & 52, leaves a 

 loophole of uncertainty. Burmeister's Globiocephalus grayi (Anales, as cited, p. 367, pi. 21), as far as I can 

 judge from a study of his test and plates, seems specifically identified more by abnormality in dentition than by 

 strikingly trenchant cranial distinctions; and that, as I have intimated above, is a point of weakness in 

 diagnosis. Regarding Malm's Ohhiocephalus propinquus (Svenska Kongl. Akad. 1871) I have not had an 

 opportunity of mastering his differentiations. If, however, O. melas, as proved, ranges from the Polar seas to 

 the Mediterranean, and possibly south of that, is it not probable the Gottenburg specimen may eventually turn 

 out to be a variety of the common species ? The skeletal changes from youth to age have yet to be worked 

 out in Ghhiceps before species can be soundly established. 



' Com. Fauna, p. 10, quoted by Gray. ' Hunterian Lectures, 1856. 



VOL. viii. — PART IV. February, 1873. 2 t 



