[The 13th. | THE VARIOUS EXPLANATIONS, 439 
inclose a tracing of the figures in it, which are accompanied by 
the following statement in the Graphic: — 
The statement of the Kiuwshiu Maru is further copied, accompanied by 
the two figures (see n°. 151, figg. 48 and 49), and he continues saying : 
“As I have not been able to find any description of the skeleton 
of the Zeug/odon, 1 venture to draw attention to the subject through 
your columns, in the hope that among your many readers in Amer- 
ica this letter may attract the notice of some one who will tell 
us whether what is known of the osseous structure of Zeuglodon 
cetoides is or is not consistent with the representation in the Graphic. 
The remains of the cetacean, supposed to be extinct, indicate, ac- 
cording to Sir Charles Lyell, that it was at least seventy feet in 
length, (He observes in the third edition of his “Manuel of Ele- 
mentary Geology’, 1851, p. 208, that he visited the spot where 
a vertebral column of this length belonging to Zeuglodon had been 
dug up.) while its great double-fanced but knife-edged molars show 
that it was carnivorous; and as we are not so far removed from 
the period of the Alabama Tertiaries as to render it improbable 
that members of what must once have been a great Order of car- 
nivorous cetacea, totally distinct from the orders of cetacea hitherto 
known as living, may still survive, I have braved the ridicule at- 
taching to this subject so far as to mvite attention to it.” 
“The second of the two figures in the Graphic shows the long 
necked animal to possess the cetacean tail, and its head there seems 
to have been turned from the observer, so that the underside of 
it only is presented. The first figure shows that the whale had 
been seized on its flank by the powerful bite of its agressor, and 
that to escape from this it had thrown itself out of the water. 
Having succeeded in this object the second figure shows the agres- 
sor rearing its head and neck out of the water to discover the 
direction which its prey had taken, in order that it might follow 
it up; and so far from the charge of curious drawing made by 
the editor of the Graphic being justified, the representation of the 
whale can be at once recognized as fairly correct; while that of 
the tail of the unknown animal (which probably prompted this 
charge), so far from being curious, forms an important piece of 
evidence as showing the animal in question to be catacean.”’ 
This paper had already been sent to the Editors of ature, when 
Mr. Szarztes V. Woop, Jun., observed that he was mistaken as to the 
report, and as soon as possible he sent a Postscript to the Editors , 
which appeared appended to his paper. The postscript runs as follows: 
