48 Fish Cultural Association. 
formerly similar that, “in the former case it is probable that 
traditionary and imperfect information formed the basis of 
error, while in the latter instance it is most probably founded 
on misinformation dictated by séctional interests.” Mr. Whit- 
cher’s own paper upon migration is the only one of Ameri- 
can origin in which I have seen scientific method sacrificed 
to partisan spirit. 
Having read Mr. Whitcher’s introduction, one might readily 
predict what sort of an argument he will wrench out of the 
statements of “such disinterested authorities as may be readily 
quoted.” First he gives extracts from Mitchell and the Edin- 
burgh Encyclopedia regarding the habits of the herring, 
Granting all that is claimed about the herring, without refer- 
ence to the reliability of these authorities, what do we find ? 
Merely a begging of the question! The habits of the herring 
and mackerel are not known to be the same. In many par- 
ticulars they are diametrically different, for the former loves 
cold water, the latter warm water. 
Various provincial writers are now quoted: Mr. Perley, 
who says that “naturalists now tell us,” and “it is now con- 
sidered settled,” that the mackerel is not migratory, but draws 
off into deep water at the approach of winter; and Mr. 
Knight and Mr. Fortin—though the reason for these quota- 
tions is not apparent, since no reference to the winter habits 
of the fish can be found these: He does not. refertonrthe 
writings of Mr. Ambrose and Johnston, Canadian writers, who 
advocate the migration theory. Yarrell and Couch.are next 
quoted, though neither of them ventures to give a decided opin- 
ion. Finally, we have a paragraph compiled from five French 
Encyclopedias, good and bad, no means being afforded of 
distinguishing the opinions of Cuvier from those of Chenu’s 
literary staff. Mr. Whitcher’s conclusion is this, “that it is 
