ON THE GREAT OAR-FISH. 1 57 



swimming near the surface, a supposition I do not myself feel 

 inclined to subscribe to. 



The following notes were drawn up under considerable dis- 

 advantages, owing to the fish being under exhibition at the time, 

 and that in a very badly-lighted room. I had to write amidst a 

 talkative crowd, while my observations were confined to the one side 

 — naturally the best — exposed to the public. Imperfect as they may 

 be, I lay them before the Institute as a contribution toward our 

 better knowledge — still very imperfect — of this rare genus of fishes. 



It is remarkable that all the New Zealand specimens have been 

 found on the South Island; and like aU the other specimens, 

 European or New Zealand, (except the Nelson Harbour one, which 

 was a male), whose sex has been determined, the present is a female, 

 and it has occurred on our shores at the same period of the year (the 

 Spring and early winter), as they have invariably done. 



In order to facilitate comparison with the observations recorded 

 by Prof. Parker in the Transactions of this Institute for 18S7, I shall 

 arrange my notes under the same heads and in the order adopted by 

 him. 



Size, Proportions and Number of Fin Rays. — It will be seen from 

 the accompanying measurements that the present is the largest 

 specimen of Regalecus yet taken on the coast, its length being 18 feet 

 "10 inches, with its protrusile mouth not extended. It is probable, 

 however, that it does not exceed by much the length attained by 

 Prof. Parker's Otago Harbour specimen when complete. This 

 specimen was broken across, and he conjectures that it was most 

 likely about 1 7 feet in length. Its ribbon-like form is indicated by 

 the proportion of its height to its length, which was -^, the New 

 Brighton specimen was 1 i r , the Moeraki specimen, sent to London, 

 y 1 ^, while the Victorian specimen was still more band-like, its height 

 being only -£$ of its total length. The Otago harbour specimen is 

 given as -j^, but if this were corrected for the length that the fish is 

 conjectured, as stated above, to have reached, the proportion of 

 height to length would closely approximate to that of the Okain's Bay 

 example. In this specimen the neck crest is damaged, and a gap 

 occurs in the dorsal tin, so that it is difficult, with absolute accuracy, 

 to determine the number of fin rays. Taking 14, the number given 

 by Professor Parker in the Otago Harbour specimens, as the probable 

 number here, these were succeeded by 221 rays anterior to the gap, 

 in which 1 7 were made out, — but there may have been one more, — and 

 succeeded by 170 more to the termination of the tail, giving in all 

 422, which comes very close to the number recorded by Lindroth in 

 R. Grillii, and by Professor McCoy in the Victorian specimen, which 

 is 423. 



Tail. — In the present specimen the tail is almost perfect, a mere 

 fraction only being possibly absent. It terminates in a point, and is 

 curved upwards for its terminal few inches. The dorsal fin extended, 

 I am convinced, to, but it did not pass, I am certain, the extreme 

 point. Its fin rays have been broken off for the last few inches, but 

 with a magnifying glass it was possible to detect their broken 

 extremities. There is, therefore, no caudal fin. There is no sign 



