282 Notice of the Report on the Fishes of New York. 
twenty five inches in length, and weighing between three and 
four pounds. That small specimen was of an uniform dark slate 
color; but on the next page, I say “in a specimen weighing 
twenty pounds,” (or in other words, in the more mature fish,) 
“the color is brown upon the back, with yellowish sides and. 
white abdomen.” This, the adult fish, you perceive is not of 
an uniform dark slate.” pees . 
- Lumpus anglorum, (p. 305.)—In my account of the lump 
fish in my report, when speaking of the ridge in front of the dor- 
sal fin, I remarked, “this ridge is formed of distinct rays; which 
are very visible in the dried specimen.” Dr. Dekay, who must 
hhave had my report before him when he described that species, 
because he quotes me as having seen “one which weighed sev- 
enteen pounds,” observes “the dorsal lump without any vestige 
of rays; at least, I found none in two which I examined.” A 
dried specimen belonging to the cabinet of this Society lies before 
you, in which the rays are perfectly obvious. 1f Dr. Dekay had 
dissected a specimen, he would never have made such an error; 
eight rays are distinctly seen upon removing the flesh. he 
Anguilla tenuirostris, (p. 310.)—The description of this spe 
cies is one of the most accurate in the volume before us; and had 
it borne its true specific name, it should have been left untouched. 
This species is Lesueur’s “ Mureena Bostoniensis,” and I cannot 
see an effort made to erase it, without protesting against such a 
step. Dr. Dekay says “it may possibly be the Bostoniensis of Le- 
sueur, as given in his brief sketch of the Murenidz of the United 
States; but the description is too incomplete to enable me to de- 
termine it with certainty.” How does it differ from the Bostoni- 
ensis?' Lesueur’s species is “above of a dark olivaceous brown, 
throat and abdomen grayish, region of the anus yellow ochre, 
towards the tail reddish.” Dekay’s species is “grayish olive 
above, yellowish beneath.” Lesueur’s, “jaws acute and short.” 
‘Dekay’s, ‘‘ head small, tapering to the jaws.” Lesueur’s, “ length 
about twenty four inches.” Dekay’s, “length one to two feet.” 
The differences I cannot perceive; they cannot be pointed out. 
Dr. Dekay says, ‘(I think it probable, but am not so certain, that 
the common eel of Massachusetts, noticed by Dr. Storer, may 
‘also be referred to this species.” I would only remark, I never 
“saw but one species of eel in the Boston market; that eel, Le 
Sueur saw in the same market, and called it Bostoniensis ; that 
© 
