SCIENTIFIC HISTORY OF THE I'.LACK BASS. 47 



If (4) the name salmoides, left hopelessly uncertain by its author, 

 should have been definitely used for some species to which it might 

 not improbably have referred befure the use of the name pallldm lor 

 the same species, it should be retained, dating its acceptance from 

 its second use, and the name paUidus should be considered as a 

 synonym of salmoides. 



If (5) the name salmoides should have been adopted by the second 

 author supposed in (4) for some species not a Micropteriis, or for 

 some species which could not reasonably be identical with the 

 original salmoides, the identification should be taken as an erroneous 

 one, and should not be considered in our nomenclature. 



The actual state of the name salmoides is that supposed under (3) 

 above. I do not consider the name salmoides as rightfully entitled to 

 l^riority over either pallidus or dolomiei as the specific name of a 

 species of Black Bass. If it must be used, however, I think it wisest 

 to retain it, with Professor Gill, for the small-mouthed species. For 

 this purpose, we must consider the salmoides of Lactp^de as complex, 

 including both species. The case would then be that supposed by 

 (1) above. We miist hold further that Cuvier and Valenciennes 

 restricted the name to the small-mouthed form. No possible settle- 

 ment of the case can be free from question or objection. I propose 

 to adopt the following view of the case, proposed by Dr. (Jill (in 

 lit.), to whom I have submitted the evidence above given. 



Dr. Gill remarks : 



" I think we can retain our old names (i. e., MicropAerus salmoides 

 and Microptenis pallidus) on the following grounds: 



"(1) Let us admit that Labriis salmoides Lac. may be the small- 

 mouthed. 



"(2) The name salmoides, it may be considered, was re-established 

 by Cuvier and Valenciennes for the largest specimen (the small- 

 mouthed, according to your observations). The description was 

 evidently based on that, as appears from the number of scales, the 

 absence of any on the preopercular limb (' le limbe de son preoper- 

 cule [etc.] en manquent'), and the form of the dorsal. Even if it 

 is certain that the figure was taken from a large-mouthed specimen, 

 this would not aflfect the question, inasmuch as we must accept the 

 description when that is definitive, and such is the case here. 



" (3) It may be held that the name is further specialized by Cuvier 



