Cutler divides this group into two small tribes : ], those whose head bears the ordinary proportion to the body ; and 2, those which have the head disproportionately great.
1st Tribe.
Genera:—]. Delphinia, Linn., with the subgenera Delphinia, Cuv.; Phocitria, Cuv.; Ddphinapterus, Lacep.; and II yperoodon, Lacdp.
2. Monodon, Linn.
2nd Tribe.
These Cetaceans have the bead so large, that it is either a third or ono-half of the length of the body ; but neither the cranium nor the brain participates in this disproportion, which is entirely due to esti enormous development of the bones of the face.
Genera :—I. Physeter, Linn. (the true Cachalots) ; with the sills genus Phyneter, Lactp. (Cachalots with a dorsal fin).
2. Bahena, Linn. (Whalebone Vaal(*) ; with the sub-genera eon tamping the Balanopterm of Lnc6peclo: nnmely, the Balmnoptertz with a smooth belly • and the Balirnopterte with a plaited belly, common]) termed Itorquals. (' Ilegne Animal?) The following synopsis of the families of Celacea in taken from the 'Catalogue of the British Museum,' by Dr. J. E. Gray.
Sub-Order CETI:.
Skin smooth, bald. Teats 2, ingninal. Limb* dewlaps. Fore limbo fin-shaped; hinder united, funning a forked horizontal tail No/Arils enlarged into blowers. Carnivorous.
Family 2. Balanithe.
No teeth ; their place supplied by the plates of baleen, or whalebone, attached to the upper jaw. Blow-holes distinct. A mecum.
Genera: Balcenoptera; Bakena.. (`Histoire Naturelle dee Cdtads, &c.) On the arrangement and remarks of the two Cuviers, Dr. J. E. Gray makes the following criticism. .After referring 'to Lae:6pede's classi fication, he says :— " Cuvier, dissatisfied with this state of things, in his Ossemeus Fossiles' examined the various documents and consulted the authorities which had been used by Lacdp6de ; but he appears to have undertaken the work with a predisposition to reduce the number of species which his predecessor. had described to the smallest number. Thus, he concludes that there are only eleven species of Dolphins, one Narwhal, one Hyperoodon, one Cachalot or Sperm-Whale ; and he appears to think there are only two Whalebone Whales—the Right Whale and the Firmer. To make this reduction : First, he believes that the Hump-Backed Whale of Dudley is only a whale that has lost its fin not recognising that the Cape Rorqual, which he afterwards described from the fine skeleton now shown in the inner court of the Paris Museum is one of this kind. Secondly, that the Black Fish and the Sperm-Whole are the same species, an error which must have arisen from his not having observed that Sibbald bad figured the former, for he accuses Sibbald of twice describing the Sperm-Whale; and when he came to Schreiber'a copy of Sibbald'a figure, he thinks the figure repreaenta a dolphin which had lost its upper teeth, over looking the peculiar form and posterior position of the dorsal fin, and the shape of the bead, which is unlike that of any known dolphin. This mistake is important, as it vitiates the greater part of Cuvier'a criticism on the writings of Sibbald, Artedi, and others, on these animals. Unfortunately these views have been very generally adopted without re-examination. But in making these remarks, it is not with the least dcaire to underrate the great obligation we owe to Cuvicr for the papers above referred to ; for it is to him that we are indebted for having placed the examination of the whales on its right footing, and for directing our inquiries into the only safe course on these animals which only fall in our way at distant periods, and generally under very disadvantageous circumstances for accurate examination and study. "M. F. Cuvier'a Cetacea' (Paris, 1836) is little more than an expansion of his brother's essays, with a compiled account of the species ; but he has consulted with greater attention the works of Sibbald and Dudley; has some doubts about the finned Cachalots being the same as the Sperm-Whale (p. 475), but at length gives up the subject. He has found that the Hump-Backed Whale is evidently a Rorqual (p. 305), but does not record it as a species, nor recognise it as the Cape Rorqual, nor as Dr. Johnston's Whale.: the latter he incorrectly considers the same as B. Physalus. He combines together as one species Quoy'a Short-Finned Rorqual of the Falkland Islands, with Lalande's Long-Finned Whale of the Cape (p. 352). He is in great doubt about the hump of the Cachalots (p. 279) : his remarks on that subject, and on the Cachalots of Sibbald, show how dangerous it is for a naturalist to speculate beyond the facts before him." Before giving any account of the natural history of the species of , Whales, we shall make some remarks on their general structure and or ganisation. First we shall speak of the structure of the skeleton in the Phytophngous Cetaceans—of which the Lamantin, or Manatee, is an example. The nasal bones in the skull of the Manatee are very small, almond-shaped, separated from each other, and let in on each aide in a notch of the frontal bone. The result of this conformation is a very largo aperture of the bony nostrils. The rest of the bones
of the nose are nevertheless replaced by cartilages, so that in the living animal the opening of the nostrils is, as ordinarily, at the end of the muzzle. The intermaxilhuy bones carry no teeth in the adult, nor at any period of life, except during the first days of embryonic existence ; they are notwithstanding very much extended longitudi nally, and they re-ascend along the edge of the nostrils to above the region of the eye. The orbits are very much advanced and very pro jecting. The suborbital lick is pierced in the re-entering angle formed by the projecting frame of the orbit with the anterior part of the maxillary bone, so that it is not perceptible when the cranium is seen in profile. This projection of the orbit causes the distance between the lower external border of the zygomatic portion of the intermaxil lary bone and the teeth to be greater than the width of the palate. The frontal bones, whose anterior branches are much separated, in order that they may embrace the aperture of the nostrils and form the walls of the orbits, give off each an obtuse postorbital apophysis. The cheek-bone extends throughout the lower half of the orbit on the orbital apophysis of the maxillary bone, and thus borders the whole of the orbit anteriorly; it gives off a postorbital inferior apo phyeis. A very small lachrymal bone is let in at.tbo anterior angle between the frontal, the jugal, and the maxillary, which intervenes at this point between the lachrymal and the jugal bones. A little lower down, in a is pierced the largo suborbital hole, which Is thus carried farther backward than the edge of the orbit, and cannot give place to any canal. The dental part of the maxillary is more ;award than the orbit, so that the interior part of the wall of this cavity is formed by a flat advancement of that bone. The zygo matio apophysis of the temporal bone is thicker than in any other animal, but the rest of the bone is moderate; it contributes to form the sides of the occipital crest, and leaves above, between it and the superior and lateral occipitals, a space which permits the petrous hone to be seen. Tho two create which limit the temporal fosse above run in a nearly parallel direction, and do not unite in a single line, as in the greater part of the Curnivorn. In the adult there is only a single unequal parietal bone, which enters largely into the temple; but in the fetus there are two, completely separated by a double inter. parietal ; these four hones however speedily unite, not only with each other, but, what is singular, with the upper occipital, even before the other parts of the occipital are united. The plane of the occipital is inclined from before backwards, and from above downwards, and the occipital crest makes an obtuse angle; there is no vestige of a mastoid apophysis. Below, the intermaxillaries form the point of the muzzle, occupying nearly the fourth of the palate, and surrounding a large incisive hole, which is single, because they have no internal apophysis. Very young Manatees have a small tooth in each of their intermaxil laries, thus completing, Cuvier observes, their analogy with the Dugongs. He observed this in the foetus, hut he remarks that the tooth disappears at a very early period. The jaws commence a little behind the sub orbital hole, which, from the disposition of the orbits, is found nearly at their level. The palatine bones advance in a narrow and obtuse point, occupying nearly a fourth of the palate, and contribute to the formation of two large pterygoid wings, whose body is in other respects almost entirely sphenoidal, and does not separate itself from the body of the posterior sphenoid even in the fcetua. The temporal are of the sphenoid remain distinct much longer. The palatine bone shows itself in the temple by a narrow tongue-shaped process, between the maxillary on one side and the anterior sphenoid and the frontal on the other ; but its continuity is partially hidden by the dental portion of the maxillary bone, which is continued backwards to the wing of the sphenoid, which it touches without articulation. The anterior sphenoid also only shows itself in the temple by a narrow tongue-shaped process, but much shorter than that of the palatine. It does not reach the parietal bone, and the orbital wing of the sphenoid touches the frontal The body of he basilary bone and that of the two sphenoida are conjoined with each other and with the cribriform plate of the ethmoidal bone, considerably before the basilary unites with nearly flat sufacos, as in all the Ilerbirora. The ascending rnmus is very wide, and its posterior angle rounded. The caronoid apophysis is directed forwards, and truncated nearly into a hatchet-shape. The region of the symphysis is thick and elongated anteriorly. Tho whole portion that supporta the gum is perforated with small holes. Tho holes for the exit of the lower maxillary are very large. The lateral and dental portions of the lower jaw are very largo and rounded.