6 PROCEEDINGS OF UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. 



I shall soou i^ublish a full discussion of this subject. At present, my 

 conclusions may be stated as follows : — 



(1) The figure, while undeniably bad, resembles the menhaden very 

 closely, while it cannot be intended to represent any allied species. 

 The contour, were the missing dorsal fin supplied, is similar to that of 

 the menhaden. The black spot upon the scapular region is constant in 

 the menhaden only, though a similar one is occasionally seen upon the 

 shad and alewife. 



(2) The name "bay alewife" is the same now given to the menhaden 

 in the Chesapeake and its tributaries. This is a strong argument : for 

 although seventy-five years have passed since Latrobe wrote, the per- 

 sistence of popular names is very remarkable, as I have elsewhere 

 pointed out.* Moreover, Latrobe was also acquainted with a "her- 

 ring" and a "shad". These being eliminated, there is no other fish 

 than the menhaden to which the description in question can refer. 



(3) The habits of the alewife, as described by Latrobe, are essentially 

 the same as those of the menhaden at the present day. The alleged 

 river-ascending habits of the " bay alewife" were thought to throw its 

 identity with the menhaden out of the question. This is no longer an 

 obstacle. 



(4) The presence of the crustacean parasite is the strongest argu- 

 ment of all. While this is found in the mouths of a large percentage 

 of the southern menhaden, suggesting the local name of " bug fish", it 

 has never once been found attached to any other species, although 

 careful search has been made by several persons. The northern men- 

 haden is free from this parasite. This is still another reason for the 

 failure to identify on the part of northern writers. 



Latrobe's name has the priority over Mitchill's by thirteen years. It 

 is to be regretted that it is necessary to replace by another a name so, 

 appropriate and of such long standing. 



January 1, 1878, 



tbe; oc€IJICre:n€e: of beIiOive i^ATairiAivus iiv buzzard'.^ bait, 



MASSACHUSETTS. 



By O. BRO^VN GOODE. 



A peculiar species of Belone was obtained at Wood's Holl, in 1875, 

 by Professor Baird. It was caught in the weir on Great Neck, owned 

 by the Wood's Holl Weir Company. On study, it proved to be the form 

 described by Professor Poey under the name Belone latimanus, and 

 hitherto known only from Cuba. A good water-color sketch (Cat. No. 

 795) was made by Mr. Kichard, a photograph (Cat. No. 218) taken, and 

 the specimen and a finely colored cast (Cat. No. 16121) are preserved in 

 the National Museum. 



* Catalogue of tbe Fishes of the Bermudas, 1876, p. 15. 



