2U. CHKYSOPHRYS, 491 



C. Western specimen with 13 dorsal spines. 

 Tc. Adult: stuffed. 



D. Eastern specimens with 11 dorsal spines: Chr. longispinis, 

 Schleg., Richards., Chr. xantho_poda, Richards., Chr. schlegelii, Bleek. 

 I. Half-grown. China. 



m. Half-grown. China. Presented by J. R. Reeves, Esq. 



n, 0. Adult : stuffed. China. Presented by J. R. Reeves, Esq. — 



Types of Chr. xanthopoda and Chr. auripes, Richardson. 

 p, q. Adult and half-grown : skins. China. Purchased of Mr. 



War\vick. 

 /•. Adult: stuffed. Japan. 

 s. Adult. From the Haslar Collection ? 

 t. Adult: stuffed. (Named Chr. maryinata?) 

 u. ? Adult: bad state. N.W. Australia. Presented by Sir J. 



Richardson. 



The fine series of specimens in the Collection of the British Museum 

 has enabled me not only to rectify- the synonjiny, but to form also 

 a judgment on the differences obseiTed in fishes from different 

 localities. Above all, there £lre three fishes described by older 

 authors : Spams berda by Forskal, from the Red Sea, Sp. hasta by 

 Schneider, from the coast of Coromandel, and Coius datnia by 

 Buchanan Hamilton, from the Bay of Bengal. The description of 

 the fii'st would appear too insufficient to admit of a decision but for 

 the figure given by Riippell, which undoubtedly represents the same 

 fish. We shall afterwards see that it is highly probable that the Red 

 Sea fish must be separated from those of the East Indies, and that 

 Valenciennes is wrong in applying the name of Sp. berda to the latter. 

 Not having had specimens from the Red Sea, or the figure pubhshed 

 by Riippell, Valenciennes was imable to compare both species. Thus 

 the second name, Sp. hasta, given by Schneider, has the right of 

 priority. Schneider had a specimen wdth eleven dorsal spines, and 

 he gives a good diagnosis, by which the fish may be easily recog- 

 nized ; and his specimen coming fi-om the coast of Coromandel, cannot 

 be identified wdth Forskal's fish. With regard to Coius datnia, Buch. 

 Ham., I have shown above (p. 283) that Cuvier was entirely wi'ong 

 when he confounded it with Datnia argentea (Therapon argenteus, m.) ; 

 the description given by Buchanan Hamilton is quite correct, and 

 there cannot be the least doubt, from the dentition stated, that this 

 ichthyologist described a Sparoid fish. The figure is excellent, and 

 agrees with the specimen {g.) of the British Museum Collection as if 

 it were di-awn from it. 



In the sixth volume of the * Histoire Naturelle des JPoissons,' 

 Valenciennes confounds, iinder the name of Chr. berda, Bengal spe- 

 cimens oiSparus hasta with eleven dorsal spines, and Sp. berda, Forsk. 

 Under the name of Chr. longispinis, he unites specimens from Japan 

 and those from Bengal wdth twelve dorsal spines. 



Schlegel and Riippell have not compared their specimens with ex- 

 amples from other localities : the former applies Valenciennes's name 



