Chapt. XXVL Fad S is Prolific as English S 38] 



parallel I How do you know that the [ndian seas are as prolific ol 

 Bab as the English ! Eave you herring, pilchard, or sardine, 

 mackerel, and cod fisheries as in England? We have not the 

 fisheries to any extent, but we have the fish ; and I take it upon me 

 to assert that, as Ear as our knowledge goes, there is every reason to 

 believe that the [ndian Beas are as prolific as the British The 

 presumption is rather that they are more so. As regards fresh- 

 waters I think there is no doubt that the balance is heavily in 

 favour of India. 



30. To enter into much detail would be wearisome. It will 

 probably sutliee to say that while the Carp runs in England with 

 difficulty over 20 lhs.. it is to he found of 200 lbs. weight in India 

 [Barbus tor). The Sardine or Pilchard is on our Indian coasts in 

 plenty (Clupea Neohowi). Herrings too we have, the one that 



ads our rivers {Clwpea Uisha) is incomparably a finer fish than 

 the Yarmouth celebrity. In Mackerel, Scomber kanagurta, and 

 Bome thirty Carangides or horse-mackerel are more or less relatives 

 and represent quantity if not quality. Against the Cod we may 

 fairly pit the Seir (Cybium lineolatum, and C. Commersonii) and 

 several others, as well as the excellent salting fish Polynemus 

 teiradactylus and Polynemus Indians and others; but I surely 

 Deed not go further into some hundreds of varieties of Indian fish, 

 They are sufficiently set forth in the works of Dr. Day, and I do 

 not think it cm Beriously be doubted for a minute that our Indian 

 seas are quite as productive of fish as the seas of colder climes. 



31. I had written thus far when a friend objected with 

 pertinence that the natural enemies of the fish here, as compared 

 with those in England, should he taken into account. I must 

 admit it. Setting aside porpoises, dog-fish, and other sorts common 

 to both, we have in India large predatory animals which they have 

 not, in the form of sharks and crocodiles. But 1 do not think this 

 is an argument that our fisheries compare badly with English 

 fisheries, but rather the reverse. I think the presence of the e 

 monsters indicates that their functions are necessary to the main- 

 tenance of the balance of nature, or, in other words, that the Indian 

 seas and rivers are more prolific than the English, and that when 

 man enters on the field more fully and diminishes these, his 

 competitors in the work of slaughter, the yield of other fish will be 

 still more favourable. 



