258 PROCEEDINGS OF THE ACADEMY OF 



not be denied that Cuvier and Valenciennes were right in utterly denying to 

 Klein the genius of a naturalist. Happy had it been for Icthyology more 

 happy still for Conchology, had he never lived ! 



The name of Klein was revived in 1763 by Gronovius, and by him applied 

 to a restricted group, composed of the twelfth species of Klein, and one which 

 was for the first time made known. He restricted the genus with much pre- 

 cision, but did not include the posterior depression of the dorsal fin among 

 the generic characters, mentioning that peculiarity of his first species as one 

 of the specific distinctions. His second and only other species had an entire 

 dorsal fin, the branchial apertures very ample, the ventral fins two-rayed, 

 teeth equal, acute, remote, biserial at the front of the lower jaw, elsewhere 

 uniserial (" solitarii"), D. 80. A. 60. P. 16. V.2; it was said to inhabit the 

 American sea. This is probably a Brotuloid related to Brotula, and has not 

 been re-discovered. 



As Klein specified no type for his genus Enchelyopus, and as his diagnosis 

 agrees as well with Zoarces as any other type noticed or figured, and, finally, 

 as he did not, more than the other zoologists of his time, regard the first spe- 

 cies enumerated under his genera as types, Gronovius was justified in retain- 

 ing Enchelyopus for the genus in question, since its first species was included 

 by Klein in his own. The name of Klein and Gronovius must therefore, I 

 think, be retained in place of Zoarces. 



Klein's name was afterwards used by Schneider or Bloch and others, for 

 different dismemberments of his genus ; but, as all had been anticipated by 

 Gronovius in its application, it cannot affect the question ; and the objection 

 made by Valenciennes to its employment for the genus called by him, after 

 Cuvier, Zoarces, is therefore illogical. 



Cuvier, in the second edition of his Regne Animal, first established with 

 exactness and characterized by the depression of the dorsal fin, the genus in 

 question, and gave to it in its French form, (Les Zoarces,) the name which it 

 has since, with more or less modification, borue. But, as the genus had al- 

 ready received a name, that of the great naturalist cannot be retained. 



The choice assortment of modifications of the word Zoarces is doubtless due 

 to the detestable plan adopted by Cuvier, in common with the other French 

 zoologists of former years and still continued by a few, of giving only the 

 French form of the name, instead of that belonging to the language of science. 

 Naturalists will be precluded from adopting many genera first indicated by 

 Cuvier on account of the preference thus evinced for giving them in the 

 vernacular, for it is not the business of the savant to translate the popular, 

 or even the pseudo-popular name which the author of any country chooses to 

 employ, into its scientific equivalent. In the present case, however, the true 

 form of the name happens to be the same as the French, as its etymology, 

 (jj*pn;,) indicates, and is preferable to those terminating in -us. 



The genus Enchelyopus, as here adopted, has the same limits as the Cuvier- 

 an Zoarces, but it is probable that two distinct genera are confounded under 

 it, the American species being distinguished from the European by the larger 

 head, much larger mouth, greater extent of the spinous portion of the dorsal 

 fin, and the much larger number of caudal vertebrse. The name Macrozoarces, 

 here used in a subgeneric sense, will doubtless have to be elevated to a gene- 

 ric one, and the American species named M. labrosus. 



Subgenus MACROZOARCES Gill. 



^Enchelyopus anguillaris Gill. 



Synonymy. 



Blennius anguillaris Peck, Memoirs of the American Academy of Arts and 



Sciences, vol. ii, pt. 2, p. 48, fig. 3. 

 Blennius labrosus Mitchell, Transactions of the Literary and Philosophical 

 Society of New York, vol. i. p. 375, pi. 1, fig. 7. 



[Sept. 



