186 XOTE. 



of the Salmonidse, and more especially from the mysterious fish 

 called the parr. Following the great law of Nature the unity of 

 the organization the young of all the Salmonidse I have examined 

 resemble each other in many particulars. They have all red spots 

 and dark spots, and pan* bars or markings, and their dentition is 

 nearly the ^ same in all. But as each species progresses it lays 

 aside certain of these characters, retaining those which, by their 

 permanence, mark the species. The salmon loses the parr mark- 

 ings and red spots, and most of the dark ones, nearly all, in fact, 

 below the lateral line ; the salmon trout loses its red spots and 

 parr markings, but retains numerous dark spots above and below 

 the lateral line ; one kind of river trout retains the red spots only ; 

 another the red spots and parr markings ; the lake trout retains 

 only the darker spots. Lastly, the dentition changes ; from being 

 alike in all, it becomes specifically distinct. The trout, with certain 

 exceptions, retains only the mesial vomerine teeth in a double row ; 

 the sea trout loses most of these teeth, retaining, however, a single 

 row of mesial teeth and the transverse, or those on the chevron ; 

 lastly, the true salmon loses all, or nearly alL the mesial vomerine 

 teeth, retaining only those of the chevron. It was known nearly a 

 hundred vears ago. that if you scrape the scales from off the sides- 

 of a smolt you will find the parr markings below of course you 

 will : von will find the colouring of the fry, from which it has but 

 just changed. Does tins partial persistence of the appearances, 

 dependent on the universal law of unity of the organization, prove 

 the smolt to be a parr ? _With men ignorant of the basis of all 

 zoology, anatomy, or physiology it does, but scientific men merely 

 lau^h at this. 



Convinced that no true legislation can take place in respect of 

 the salmon until the parr question be decided, I have continued my 

 observations up to the moment I now write this. Parr and smelts 

 are now before me from the Annan and from the Shin. Anatomical 

 inquiries t do not bear out the idea that they are identical. How 

 does their natural history agree? I have opened, in April and 

 May, hundreds and hundreds of smolts, and without an exception 

 found the milt and roe at their minimum, with every appearance of 

 their never having altered from their ascent through the gravel. 

 Now, if these smolts of April and May (say 1853), were merely the 

 winter parr of the year 1851 or of 1852, what has become of the 

 numerous male parr which during the autumn and winter have the 

 milt fully developed ? How inexplicable must it ever remain ac- 

 cording to the present views, that the male of the parr, a young, a 

 very young fish a fish which, according to their views actually lias 

 not yet acquired the specific forms and robe of the salmon, retain- 

 ing still its embryonic colouring and forms and habits, should, at all 

 seasons of the year, remark, enter into a condition, as to the milt, 

 which the full-grown smolt never shares, and which is only found 

 in the male adult salmon late in autumn, and at a season which 

 never changes. I have found in the rivers abundance of male parr 



