37 
time: ‘‘I can show you an acre of these trout, hundreds 
of which will weigh from three to eight pounds each. I 
could never have believed such a sight possible in New 
Hampshire. The new fish differs from the brook trout in 
many ways. The females have a brownish back and 
lemon-colored sides; the males, a bluish black back and 
golden-orange sides. The fins are much larger than in the 
brook trout, and there is an entire absence of the mottling 
characteristic of the latter fish.’’ 
Thus Col. Hodge recognized in this graceful, high-col- 
ored charr a new variety, and he lost no time in inviting 
the attention of scientists to the New Hampshire beauty. 
Specimens were forwarded to the Museum of Comparative 
Zoology at Cambridge, Mass., and to Dr. Tarleton H. 
Bean, Curator of the Department of Fishes, National 
Museum, only to be pronounced at both centres varieties 
of brook trout. Col. Hodge resented this classification, 
and sent Dr. Bean other large specimens of the new fish, 
together with several Sunapee brook trout, urging a more 
minute examination. Dr. Bean compared the two forms 
with special care, changed his opinion, frankly admitted 
that Col. Hodge was right, and pronounced the Sunapee 
trout ‘‘a Sulvelinus of the oguassa type, but of so enor- 
mous a size that at first he did not suspect its relation to 
that species.’? The late Prof. Baird inclined to the opin- 
ion that it might be a representative of a highly variable 
Arctic charr found in the Dominion of Canada and Green- 
land, viz.: the Salvelinus arcturus. (Victoria Lake and 
Floeberg Beach in extreme northern part of Arctic Amer- 
ica—allied to stagnalis.) 
A controversy at once arose regarding the origin of this 
unique trout. Whatever its species, it was a newcomer in 
the opinion of some; in that of others, a native—the old- 
est of our charrs, representing the ancestral type, and now 
almost extinct. Those who took the first view were chiefly 
