fication is an unfinished pencil sketch by Parkinson, pre- 

 served in the Banksian Library. This exhibits only fifteen 

 dorsal spines, and does not agree, in that respect, with any 

 specimen we have seen. Another species, procured in 

 Dusky Bay, was named by J. R. Forster Sciana lineata, 

 and his description of it published in Schneider's Bloch, 

 under the appellation of Cichla litieata, and also in the 

 edition of his notes, brought out by Lichtenstein (p. 134). 

 George Forster's sketch of the fish, No. 204, in the Bank- 

 sian Library, differs so much in outline from Latris he- 

 cateia, that I have not thought it expedient to refer both 

 to the same species, though no decided character is no- 

 ticed in the description by which they can be distinguished. 

 A comparison of Dusky Bay and Van Diemen's Land spe- 

 cimens is required to decide the point. 



There are two other figures by George Forster, which 

 have a closer bearing on the subject of this article than the 

 preceding ones. One numbered 205* in the Banksian 

 collection, is a coloured drawing of a fish taken in Dusky 

 Bay, and named by the natives Moghee. This presents 

 very nearly the outline of Latris hecateia, but wants the 

 lateral stripes of that species, and also the yellow tail of 

 Latris lineuta. It is entitled Latris ciliaris. The other, 

 also inscribed Latris ciliaris, is a pencil sketch of a fish, 

 obtained in Queen Charlotte's Sound on the 25th of Octo- 

 ber, 1774. A description of Latris ciliaris is contained 

 in Lichtenstein's edition of J. R. Forster's notesf (p. 137), 

 and reference is made to a figure by George Forster, but it 

 is not said which of the two is meant, and the exact locality 

 is not noted in this work as it is generally on the drawing, 

 so that we receive no assistance from that consideration, + 

 but we may suppose that figure (No. 205) is the one in- 

 tended, since its dimensions (nine inches in total length), 

 correspond with those given in the text. The rays of the 

 dorsal and anal fins are stated in one paragraph to be, 

 D. 16|43; A. 2,36; and in another to be, D. 16|38; 

 A. 2|32. Such a difference in numbers rarely occurs in 

 the same species, and I think it probable that the descrip- 

 tion was made at different dates, and of two distinct spe- 

 cies. It is with the sketch 209, and the rays enumerated 

 in the last paragraph, as well as in the size, which is stated 

 to be thirty inches, that Sir James Ross's specimen, figured 

 in Plate 26, so nearly corresponds, that 1 have considered 

 them to belong to one species, to which I have applied 

 Forster's name of ciliaris, being unwilling to add to the 

 number of specific names, where it can be avoided. If 

 Forster be supposed to have overlooked the first short and 

 incumbent spine of the dorsal and anal spines, there is no 

 material discrepancy between the rays of our specimen 

 and those enumerated in his concluding paragraph. As 

 to George Forster's figures, no great endeavour at accuracy 

 of numbers has been made, if we may judge by com- 

 paring them with his father's descriptions," but they render 



* In the comments I made on this figure in the ' Zooh)};ical Tran- 

 sactions,' iii. p. 115, the number of it is erroneously printed 204 instead 

 of 205. 



t Anthias ciliaris, Schn. Bl p. 



X In Lichtenstein's work, the pages containing Scicma ciliaris and 

 hneata are headed Nova Hollandia, though in the text the species are 

 said to inhabit the sea of Nova Zeelandia. 



the generic aspect of the fish, for the most part, very 

 happily. 



One sentence in J. R. Forster's notes occasioned me 

 some difficulty, " Tubercula bina supra oculos, ciliaria," 

 but I now think that this merely refers to the convexity 

 of the anterior frontal producing an obtuse superciliary 

 ridge. The figiu-es show no other protuberance, although 

 fi-om the conical supra-orbitar projections of the frontal 

 bone, observed in some Cheilodactyli, we might be led to 

 look for something similar in the allied group of Latris. 



Sir James Ross's specimen, measuring thirty inches in 

 length, was procured at Sidney, and being put into brine, 

 which spoiled during the voyage, reached this country in 

 very bad condition. On this account our figure cannot 

 pretend to perfect accuracy of outline or markings, but in 

 other respects it may be relied upon. 



The head forms a fifth of the whole length to the tip of 

 the lower lobe of the caudal-fin, and its height at the nape 

 is one-sixth less than its length. The ej'e is high up, and 

 midway between the tip of the snout and apex of the gill- 

 flap. The convex space between the two eyes is less than 

 two diameters of the orbit. The anterior frontal is convex 

 and bulging. The maxillaries are moderately pi-otractile, 

 their pedicels exceeding their dental limbs in length. The 

 limbs of the lower jaw are unusuallj- broad and short, the 

 jaw being articulated oppo.site to the fore edge of the rec- 

 tangular preorbitar. The under lip folds broadly back 

 laterally. The teeth, small, short, and slenderly subidate, 

 are loosely set on both jaws, to the depth of five or six 

 at the symphysis, diminishing to a single one at the corners 

 of the mouth. Their tips are black in the specimen. There 

 are none on the roof of the mouth. 



The preoperculum has a wide smooth disk, and its outer 

 edge is curved parabolically. The upper limb, which is 

 slightly concave, is finely serrated, the teeth becoming 

 obsolete on the rounded corner. The operculum is large, 

 and permits only a narrow subopercidum to appear beneath 

 it. The disk of the interoperculum is comparatively broad. 

 All these bones have entire edges. An occipital crest runs 

 back on the nape, rendering it acute. The distance from 

 its ridge to the ujjper edge of the gill-cover, exceeds a 

 third of the height of the head. The belly is said to be 

 keeled in Forster's notes. We cannot make out its true 

 form from the specimen, but in Latris lineata the sides 

 are compressed, and the belly acute behind the ventrals, 

 yet there is a flattish under surface before these fins, and 

 it is probable that ciliaris resembles it in these respects. 



The scales are arranged much as in the Scicciiidee. 

 Those which compose the lateral line are traversed by a 

 simple slender tube, and are notched at the tip. They 

 are smaller than the others, and being overlapped by the 

 adjoining scales both above and below, very little of their 

 disk is seen. They amount to about eighty-four in num- 

 ber, and diminish considerably in size towards the base of 

 the caudal fin. There are twenty-four or twenty-five scales 

 in a vertical row over the ventrals. The scaly fillets along 

 the bases of the dorsal and anal fins exist, as is usual in 

 the genus. The first dorsal .spine is incumbent on the 

 lower half of the second one, and when invested with soft 

 integument, they would naturally be reckoned only as a 

 single spine, as Forster seems to have done. The two 



