The Migration of Fishes. + 
probable that the schools which appear in such abundance 
round the more temperate European coasts in reality reside 
during the winter at no very great distance, immersing them- 
selves in the soft bottom, and remaining .in a state of tor- 
pidity from which they are awakened by the warmth of the 
returning spring and gradually recover their former activity.” 
Even if Shaw could fairly be quoted as a supporter of this 
theory, his opinion is of little value. He was not a natural- 
ist, but a book-maker, and his compilations are acknowl- 
edged to be inaccurate.* 
The opinions of Dr. Bernard Gilpin and the late Rev. 
John Ambrose, two excellent Nova Scotian observers, are 
quoted,+ though with no apparent reason, for the latter re- 
marks only that “it is the opinion of some” that the third 
run of mackerel, which come to St. Margaret’s Bay about 
the first of August, are not returning from the Gulf of 
St. Lawrence, but from the sea, and “it may be that a 
portion of the immense school, passing eastwardly in the 
spring, strikes off to some favorite bank outside to deposit 
the spawn. Cr there may be a sort that never go as far 
east or west as the others, but winter along our shores,” 
etc., etc, while Dr. Gilpin expressly remarks that though 
the asserted torpidity and blindness favor the idea of hyberna- 
tion, he does not think that we have yet sufficient proof 
to assert them as facts. 
The authorities brought forward in support of the hyberna- 
tion theory do not, in fact, support it, and the testimony 
cited by Prof. Hind is merely tradition and popular opin- 
ion, some obtained directly, the remainder at second-hand. 
* See a criticism on Shaw’s General Zoology in Gills Arrangement of the Families of Fishes 
etc., 1872, pp. 40 and 41. 
TPart- 1. p: 79: 
