some doubtful British Fishes. 43 



3. Murcena^ Anguilla, L. (or allied sp.). 

 "Beardless Ophidium" Pennant, Brit. Zool. iii. 398; App. tab. 33. 



2. " Trichiurus lepturus.'^ 



The question which we shall next consider relates to the 

 specimens identified by Mr. James Hoyf with the Trichiurus 

 lepturus of Linnaeus. 



In the * Transactions of the Linnsean Society/ Mr. Hoy has 

 published an account of two fishes stranded, at considerable in- 

 tervals of time, " upon the shore of the Moray Frith, near the 

 fishing village of Port Gordon.^' The first specimen was found 

 "on the 2nd of November, 1810, after a high wind from the 

 north '/' " its head was much broken ;" " the extremity of the 

 upper jaw, or upper part of the mouth, was entire ; upon either 

 side of which was an operculum •/' " the body, from the gills to 

 the point of the tail, was 3 feet 2 inches long; its greatest 

 breadth 6^ inches, and its greatest thickness only an inch;" 

 " both sides of the fish were wholly white, without a spot upon 

 them;" *^the dorsal fin was the only part of a difi^erent colour, 

 being a blackish green ; this ran all the way back from the gills 

 to the tail;" "the tail ended in a point, consisting of three or 

 four soft spines or bristles of different lengths, not exceeding 

 2 inches. The' body was nearly of the same breadth for one 

 half of its length, and then its breadth diminished gradually till 

 within 3 inches of the tail, when the diminution became more 

 quick. The lateral line was straight, and strongly marked along 

 the middle of the two sides." 



The second specimen was obtained on the 12th of November 

 1812; "its head had been broken off, and was quite gone; a 

 small bit of the gills only remained, about the upper part of the 

 throat, from whence to the extremity of the tail its length was 

 12 feet 9 inches; its breadth, 11^ inches, was nearly equal for 

 the first six feet in length from the gills, diminishing gradually 



* Bleeker is doubtless correct in retaining the name Murcena for the 

 M. Anguilla. The name was restricted by Bloch, who first subdivided the 

 genus, to the type represented by that species; and the M. Anguilla was 

 evidently the one on which Artedi and Linnaeus based their diagnoses. 

 Repugnant as must be such perversions of names, consideration for the 

 uniformity of nomenclature, which may best be attained by strict adherence 

 to the laws, seems to require assent to them. The genus Anguilla is ge- 

 nerally attributed to Thunberg ; but a search instituted among his various 

 memoirs has failed to reveal any mention of it, and it is to be remarked 

 that no naturalist has referred to any precise work. Professor Agassiz, 

 indeed, refers to "Anguilla, Thunb., Nuov. Mem. Stockh. 179—," but no 

 such generic name is to be found in the series referred to under that title. 



t Trans. Linn. Soc. xi. p. 210. 



