310 REPORT OF COMMISSIONER OF FISH AND FISHERIES. [22] 
14. HISTIOPHORUS PULCHELLUS, Cuvier & Valenciennes. 
Histiophorus pulchellus, Cuv. & Vau. Hist. Nat. Poiss. viii, 1831, p. 305, pl. 
ccxxx.—GUNTHER, op. cit. p.514.—LUTKEN, ll. ¢. . 
Cuvier and Valenciennes described under this name a specimen 4 
inches Jong taken in the Eastern Atlantic, north of the Cape of Good 
Hope, probably somewhere on the west coast of Africa, by M. Raynaud. 
There were said to have been a great many more of the same size in the 
region of the Atlantic where it was taken. ; 
Liitken regards it as the young of Histiophorus gladius. He usesit to 
complete the series of development between the small specimens de- 
seribed by Giinther and the adult forms. 
15, HISTIOPHORUS GRACILIROSTRIS, Cuv. & Val. 
Histiophorus gracilirostris, Cuv. & VAL. 1. c. p. 308 (description of a snout from 
Seychelles).—LUTKEN, ll. ¢. 
Cuvier and Valenciennes had in their possession, and deseribed, a beak 
of a Spear-fish, the breadth of which was contained 25 to 26 times in its 
length, and the sides of which were more rounded than in the other 
specimens accessible to them. This wasfrom Seychelles. Liitken is in- 
clined to admit this provisionally as a distinct species. Giinther, on 
he other hand, ignores H. gracilirostris, but regards H. ancipitirostris as 
a possibly existing form. 
16. HISTIOPHORUS ANCIPITIROSTRIS, Cuv. & Val. 
Histiophorus ancipitirostris, CUv. & VAL. op. cit. p. 309.—GUNTHER, op. cit. p. 
512, note. 
A. snout (locality unknown), having a flattened surface, its width con- 
tained 19 or 20 times in its length. Probably a species of Tetrapturus. 
17. MAKAIRA NIGRICANS, Lacép. 
Makaira nigricans, LACEPEDE, Hist. Nat. Poiss. ‘‘iv, pp. 688, 689, pl. xiii, fig. 
3”.—Cuv. & VAL. Hist. Nat. Poiss. viii, p. 287. 
Xiphias makaira, SHaw, Zool. iv, Fish. p. 104, 
Machera velifera, CUvirR, Nouv. Ann. Mus. Hist. Nat. 1832, p. 43, pl. 3.— 
LUTKEN, ll. ¢. 
Xiphias vilifer, GUNTHER, op. cit. p. 512. 
This species is undoubtedly mythical. Liitken and others have 
pointed out the error of arranging it, as Gtinther has done with Xiphias. 
He suggests that in the specimens deseribed by Lacépéde the ventral 
rays were hidden in the ventral furrow, and unperceived. In this case, 
he remarks, it would be identical with Histiophorus gracilirostris ; but, 
at all events, whether it has ventral fins or not, its right place is with 
the subfamily Histiophorine. 
The specimen described by Lacépéde was never seen by him. It was 
driven ashore near Rochelle, and his sole acquaintance with it was 
from a drawing and description given him by M. Traversay, sous-préfet of 
