THE SEA-LEOPARD. 27 
(ee ed obtained it in the Antarctic pack-ice to the north of Ross Sea, as also 
e ‘Southern Cross’ and the ‘Belgica’ later on. More recently it has been 
Teported by the Scottish Expedition from the South Orkneys, and by the Swedish 
Expedition from South Georgia, and from 65° 19'S. lat. in 56° 48’ W. long. 
In the ‘ Discovery, during our passage through the pack to the north of Ross Sea 
in January, we saw one example only, which we procured (fig. 22, p. 28). It was an 
adult female, and in full milk, but we saw no sign of a young one. On our homeward 
voyage We again saw two examples in loose and disintegrating pack-ice, on March 1st, 
quite close to the Balleny Islands. 
The ‘ Morning’ procured three examples also in the Ross Sea pack, about 68° and 
69° S. lat. in 173° and 178° E. long. 
The identity of this seal has, I think, on many occasions been mistaken. Mr. 
Borchgrevink seems to have confused the two so-called Leopard Seals, and quite 
habitually speaks of the Sea Leopard (Stenorhinchus leptonya:) when giving an excellent 
description of Leptonychotes weddelli. Mr. Bruce also appears to have made the same 
mistake in Graham’s Land. Stenorhinchus is a solitary animal,* and the seals which he 
saw in “a great host, moaning loudly,” must surely have been Weddell’s Seals. I can 
also understand Dr. Donald’s note that “the females of the larger species were larger 
than the males” only by believing that the animals he speaks of were Weddell’s Seals. 
It is with all due deference that I urge such criticisms, but it is well to correct, 
if possible, misapprehensions which have arisen from these accounts, for Stenorhinchus, 
above all things, is in the Antarctic ice a widely scattered species, not found in large 
herds, and not “one of the two best-represented seals in the pack-ice near Victoria 
Land,” as Mr. Borchgrevink has stated; nor can it be said to breed in Robertson Bay, 
except possibly on very rare occasions. Leptonychotes, on the other hand, does all 
these things, and it is of Leptonychotes that they should rightly have been recorded. 
Mr. Moseley’s note of a herd of 400 of these animals at Kerguelen Island is 
perhaps less open to doubt. It is more probable, however, that this was a collection 
of Stenorhinchus than of Leptonychotes. It is just possible that it was neither, although 
both are known to have occurred there. 
But it may here be pointed out that we know practically nothing of the breeding 
habits of Stenorhinchus, and that it may collect for the purpose of breeding in the out- 
lying islands of such places as Kerguelen. It seems occasionally to produce its young 
in the Antarctic pack ice, or in the neighbourhood of Antarctic lands, but no account has 
ever yet been given of anything approaching an undoubted ‘rookery’ in the Antarctic. 
The ‘ Southern Cross’ Expedition claimed to have found it breeding in Robertson Bay, 
but the animal instanced seems really to have been Leptenychotes, which bred freely there. 
The contour of Stenorhinchus, as may be judged from various photographs that 
* Compare also Dr. Andersson’s account of this animal in South Georgia: ‘‘ Es kam vor, das wir dort bis 
zu 10 Stiick auf demselben Strande nicht weit von einander sahen, aber sie schienen in keiner Weise sich um 
einander zu kiimmern, so dass er keinesfalls als ein geselliges Tier zu bezeichnen ist.” Op. cit., p. 11. 
