on (P. Z. S. 18G3, p. 197, and 18G4, p. 241) he creates for it a 
new genus, wliicli lie names Lagenocetus. Dr. Gray evidently liad 
never examined an individual of Ms new genus in tlie flesh j and the 
only instance which he gives in support of his assertion that “males 
and females have been seen and preserved of both species,” will not 
hear investigation. There are doubtless, as he says, both males and 
females of H. rostratus known ; hut the males have all been 
immature ; and the adult female, which he states to have been 
killed in the Firth of Forth in 1839 (and which he does not say 
that he examined himself), does not appear to answer to his type 
of Lagenocetus latifrons. The particulars of the occurrence of the 
female referred to by Dr. Gray Avill bo found in the ‘ Ann. and 
Mag. Flat. Hist.’ vol. xvii. (184G) p. 153 : it is there said that 
preparations had been made of the soft parts by Mr. John Goodsir, 
“ for the University Fluseum [of Edinburgh], where the skeleton 
itself will eventually bo placed.” There is no actual record of this 
skeleton, but Professor Turner tells me that in the Anatomical 
Museum at Edinburgh there is the skeleton of a Ilnperuodon, 
Avhich has been there many years : unfortunately it is not labelled, 
but ho has always been under the impression that it was acquired 
by the late Professor Goodsir, and may be of the date of 1839, and 
if so, it is probably the one referred to by Dr. Gray. This skull. 
Professor Turner says, is of the same form as that of the young 
males; showing that the cranial characters of the adult females con- 
form to those of the young male, Avhich is AAdiat Ave might expect ; 
but it disposes of the only instance adduced by Dr. Gray in favour 
of his neAV genus, in Avdiich the sex Avas said to have been noted in 
the flesh. All his other examples appear to have been skulls only, 
Avhich of course Avould be useless in support of his conclusions, 
unless their former proprietors had been ascertained Avhilst in 
the flesh to have been females, Avhich does not appear to haA'C 
been done. Amongst continental Naturalists, both Professor 
Eschricht and M. Gervais Avere of opinion that the type of 
Gray’s Hyperoodon (Lagenocetus) latlrostris Avas a fully adult 
male of the common species //. rostratus. Criticising the opinion 
of the latter. Dr. Gray remarks, that M. Gervaise only gives (Zool. 
et Paleont. Fran^. t. 38 f. 6) a reduced copy of his figure from the 
Zool. ‘Erebus and Terror,’ “instead of figuring a skull in the inter- 
mediate state of crest, Avhich Avnuld have proved that .such a 
