5. Regalecus banksii, Illustrated London News, June 2, 1849, p. 384. 6.* The so-called Regalecus jacksonensis of Ramsay (Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., vol. v., p. 631, pl. xx.) is certainly wrongly named; it is either a large Trachypterus or belongs to a new genus. " " Gray, loc. cit.: copies of two original drawings in Sir J. Banks's copy of Pennant's Zoology. 7.* The so-called Regalecus jacksonensis of Ramsay (Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., vol. v., p. 631, pl. xx.) is certainly wrongly named; it is either a large Trachypterus or belongs to a new genus. " 8. " " (?) (Gymnetrus hawkinsii), Bloch, “Naturgeschichte der auslœndischen Fische,” xii., pl. 425 (copied by Yarrell, op. cit., p. 302). 9. " " Lütken, “Videnskabelige Meddelelser fra den naturhistoriske Forening” for 1881, p. 190. 10. " glesne, Ascanius, “Icones Rerum Naturalium,” pl. 11. 11. * The so-called Regalecus jacksonensis of Ramsay (Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., vol. v., p. 631, pl. xx.) is certainly wrongly named; it is either a large Trachypterus or belongs to a new genus. " " Schneider, “M. E. Blochii Systema Ichthyologiæ,” pl. 88 (copied by Yarrell, op. cit., p. 301). 12. " " “Encyclopédie Méthodique,” fig. 358. 13. " grillii, Lindroth, Vet. Akad. handl., pl. 8. 14. " russellii, Shaw, “General Zoology,” iv., pl. 28. 15.* The so-called Regalecus jacksonensis of Ramsay (Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., vol. v., p. 631, pl. xx.) is certainly wrongly named; it is either a large Trachypterus or belongs to a new genus. " pacificus, Haast, loc. cit., pl. 7. The specimen from which the following description is taken was cast ashore at Moeraki, about 40 miles north of Dunedin, on the 14th of June. It was purchased by a fisherman, who, previously to bringing it to Dunedin for exhibition, cut it into four pieces for convenience of transit! After it had been exhibited for two or three days I was able to secure it for the Museum. As the specimen was thus wantonly injured, and was moreover by no means fresh when it came into my possession, it was useless to attempt to stuff it, and I decided instead to have the skeleton prepared: of this I hope, as very little seems to be known of it, to publish a detailed description. In the present communication I propose to give a general description of the fish with especial reference to one or two points left more or less uncertain by other observers. All the species of Regalecus are distinguished by their great length in proportion to their height and thickness, most of them being from 8 to 18 feet long, 6–15 inches high, and not more than 2 or 3 inches thick. In the species recorded up to the present time the proportion between height and length varies from 1: 24 (R. telum) to 1: 11 (R. pacificus): in the Moeraki specimen this proportion is as 1: 10, the total length being 12½ feet, and the greatest height 15.25 inches, so that the fish is higher in proportion to its length than any former specimen. The length of the head varies from 1/19th of the total length (R. gladius and pacificus) to 1/16th (R. banksii); in my specimen the head is 1/17th the length of the whole body, being 9 inches long with the jaws retracted. In correspondence with the great length of the fish, the number of rays in the continuous dorsal fin is very considerable: it varies from 134 (8/126) in R. glesne to 406 in R. grillii. In the present specimen the number is