388 Mr. F. Day on the Bib and Poor- God. 



M'Intosh, as I not only gave them as separate and distinct 

 species but also figured them as such. I fail to see how Dr. 

 Mcintosh explains his assertion tliat " a large series from the 

 Yarious parts of the British seas leaves little doubt of the 

 identity of the two forms " (Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist. 1886, 

 xvii. p. 443). 



" Moreover, in his recent paper Mr. Day correctly points 

 out that these two fins have a more evident interval (in the 

 poor-cod) than in the bib" (p. 348). This would seem as if 

 I had omitted such in ray work, whereas it is distinctly shown 

 on comparing the figures on plates Ixxx. and Ixxxi. As to 

 the lateral line in my figure of the poor-cod not being suffi- 

 ciently curved, I may say I merely followed what existed in 

 the specimen. 



" Mr. Day does not mention the cutaneous bleb so charac- 

 teristic of both species " (p. 349). If ray work is referred to 

 (vol. i. p. 287) it will be seen that under the head of names I 

 observe '^ Mens or blinds in Cornwall ; these last naraes are 

 doubtless due to a sort of loose bag capable of inflation 

 existing in front of the eye and formed by an outer layer 

 passing from the cheeks over the eye, and a second layer 

 over the eyeball, thus forming a sac-like cavity well desig- 

 nated by the local words bleb or Main, terras for a bubble in 

 the water or a blister." 



" The number of rays in the first dorsal is stated to be the 

 same in both, viz. 12." This is another misstatement, for 

 in the synopsis of species pertaining to the genus Gadus 

 (vol. i. p. 275) I give the first dorsal at 12 in the G. luscus 

 and from 12 to 15 in the G. minutus j those numbers are also 

 repeated when describing the species in detail at pages 287 

 and 289. That Professor M'Intosh has found this fin in the 

 bib with from 12 to 14 spines in 1888 does not affect the 

 accuracy of my statement in March 1882 that I had found 

 12, for no one else has, until now, recorded more. The num- 

 ber of fin-rays in the Gadida3, as in the Pleuronectidas, is 

 subject to very great variation. 



Professor M'Intosh also observes : " In regard to the charac- 

 ters derived from the gill-rakers, as indicated by Mr. Day in 

 his recent paper in this journal ... it is fully as important 

 as any mentioned in the ' British Fishes.' " Admitting this 

 to be so, as I only obtained specimens on which to make these 

 investigations in February 1888, I could not have recorded 

 the results in 1882. So far as I know, this fact had not 

 been previously observed; and Professor M'Intosh might have 

 investigated it himself in the large series of specimens he 

 referred to in 1886, and prior to so authoritatively asserting 



