SEA-TROUT. 57 



support the theory that the sea-trout is only an anad- 

 romous brook-trout. . . . Indeed the difference in 

 color between the brook-trout and sea-trout ranges 

 within a far narrower scale than that between parr, 

 grilse, and salmon." The reader who has not read the 

 paper would doubtless thank me for quoting it entire. 

 As will have been seen, the conscientious and lamented 

 Thad. Norris, when he wrote as above quoted, thought 

 that the Canadian sea- trout were not the English Salmo 

 Triitta, nor the Salmo Fontinalis, and as proof gave 

 this table showing the number of rays in the fins of the 

 following fish : 



Sea-trout (S. Trutta) 12 13 9 10 19 



Canadian Trout (S. Canadensis) 10 13 8 9 19 



Brook or River Trout [S. Fontinalis) 10 12 8 9 19 



c. 



He adds, speaking of the last two fish—" there be- 

 ing only a difference of one ray in the pectorals, wdiich 

 may be accidental." I am credibly informed that some 

 years after his book was written, and after a more 

 familiar acquaintance with the S. Canadensis, his views 

 underwent an entire change, and that he wrote "the 

 S. Canadensis is the S. Fontinalis gone to sea." 



The space allowed me for this paper will not admit 

 of my quoting further from the writings of those above 

 mentioned or of others upon this subject. 



I will now state, as briefly as I can, my own views re- 



