Comments on Dr. Peringuey's Note on Whales. 
97 
Jardine, W., F.R.S.E., F.L.S., 4 Cetacea,' 1837, pp. 128, 136. 
Burn Murdoch W. GL, F.R.S.G.S., 'Modern Whaling and Bear- 
Hunting,' 1917, p. 254. 
Lydekker, ' Guide to Whales in the British Museum,' pp. 18, 20. 
Beddard, F. E., M.A., F.B.S., 'Book of Whales,' 1900, pp. 154, 156, 
158. 
Southwell, T., F.Z.S., ' Seals and Whales of the British Seas,' 1881, 
p. 77. 
Andrews, R. C, Assistant Curator of Mammals, American Museum 
of Natural History, "Shore Whaling," 'National Geographic 
Magazine,' vol. xxii, No. 5, May, 1911 (Washington), pp. 427 
and 431. 
Olsen, 0., " The Bryde Whale," ' Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond.,' pt. iv, 
December, 1913, pp. 1073-1090. 
' Report of the Interdepartmental Committee on Research and 
Development in the Falkland Islands, 1 pp. 9, 10, 11, 40, 46, 47, 
55, 73, 74, 75, 81, 90, 95, 101, 102, 117, 118, 133, 134. 
A study of these, along with the information I give, will, I submit, 
demonstrate that Dr. Peringuey is in error about the feeding habits of the 
whales. 
Dr. Peringuey 's conclusion (p. 74), that B. brydei is ichthyophagous, is 
correct, but his premises are wrong. One cannot arrive at a conclusion as 
to whether a whale feeds on the Plankton or fish from the evidence of the 
baleen fringe. For instance, this fringe is at least as coarse, or probably 
coarser in B. musculus than in B. brydei, but there is no evidence that B. 
musculus is ichthyophagous. All observers agree that the food of the 
B. musctdus consists of small crustaceans, therefore Dr. Peringuey's reason- 
ing breaks down in the face of established facts. Olsen states (' Proc. Zool. 
Soc. Lond.,' pt. iv, December, 1913, pp. 1073-1090) that the food of B. 
brydei consists chiefly of fish, but that it occasionally takes crustaceans, with 
which observations I agree. 
Dr. Peringuey's remarks about the asymmetry of skeletons of Cetacea are 
by no means clear to me, but the difference in shape of the sterna of 
B. borealis and B. brydei, as shown by the photographs, is of considerable 
interest. Not, however, from the standpoint of demonstrating the specific 
distinctness of the two mammals, which has already been established, but 
because the sternum of B. borealis, as shown in the photograph, is quite 
different in shape from the sternum of a normal specimen of this whale. 
The abnormal form of the breast- bone in the photograph is remarkable, but 
it is not safe to use this specimen as an example for comparison with the 
sternum from another species of whale. I submit a photograph showing 
normal specimens of the sterna of B. borealis. 
Humpback whales. — I have measured a number of these in South Africa 
9 
