The Zoologist— June, 1869. 1725 



occasion it had thrown oflF its tail, and that a (to me) very remarkable process was 

 goin;,' on in the repairing of the injury: about an inch of the skin appeared to have 

 lost its vitality, but still adhered to the body, forming a case of the natural size of 

 the reptile: on looking into it the end, or tail, appeared to be perfectly sound, but 

 whether it wmild have grown to its former length is more than I can assert. A news- 

 paper paragraph staled that two full-grown adders had been killed near Fowey, about 

 nine miles from this place, a week before I fell in with the one I killed. — Stephen 

 Clogg ; East Looe, March 2, 1 869. 



Scyllarus arclus in Berry. — By the kindness of Humphry Davy, Esq., of this 

 place, I have obtained Scyllarus arctus alive and in berry: it was taken in a crab-pot 

 at Long Rock, near this place, and its capture establishes beyond all doubt that this 

 Mediterranean crustacean breeds in Mount's Bay. It is the second specimen taken in 

 the Bay alive to my knowledge, but the first I ever saw living. It was taken off the 

 same rocks on which Dr. Borlase {vide his 'Natural History of Cornwall,' p. 274) 

 found that fine shrimp " Squilla lata Rondeletii." It is impossible now to ascertain 

 whether Dr. Borlase was quite correct in the name of bis specimen, but looking at the 

 fact that we have taken Scyllarus arctus in the same locality as his " shrimp," and to 

 the fact that Pennant (vol. iv., p. 17, lobster 23) identifies " Sq. lata Rondel." with his 

 " Homarus arctus," and describes the latter as " Size of the spring lobster," it is pro- 

 bable that the doctor was mistaken and that his specimen was S. arctus also. — Thomas 

 Cornish; Penzance, April 2^, 1869. 



Note on the Phosphorescence of the Lobster after Death.— 1 have just been reading 

 Phipson on Phosphorescence, a work which is I believe held to be an authority on the 

 subject. In Part 3 he treats of emission of light by dead animal matter; but he does 

 not allude to the common lolisler as an instance of this. On April the 24th I pur- 

 ciiased at Norwood a lobster, which had been boiled on the previous afternoon, and 

 which was therefore perlecily fresh. On April the 25th, in the afiernoon, the said 

 lobster was cut up and put in the dish in the usual manner fur the table ; it was then 

 stowed away in the larder, which is a cool airy place, where the thermometer at the 

 time stood at about 56" Fahr. : in the evening, the cook having gone out, the table- 

 servant went to the larder in the dark to bring it to table ; she was startled by what 

 she thought to be the pair of eyes of a cat which had stolen into the larder; on look- 

 ing more attentively she saw that it was the lobster shining in the dish. She brought 

 it to table and left it, whilst she announced supper : meanwhile a member of the family 

 going into the dark room saw the lobster shining in the dish, and called us all in. The 

 dry shell of the crustacean did not .shine at all, but all the moist interior, as also the 

 juice in the dish. This latter was so luminous that a drop taken on the finger shone, 

 as also when let fall on the table-cloth. Every moist part of the creature appeared to 

 be luminous, and the luminous portion presented an oily feeling. I do not attribute 

 much importance to this last fact, as this juice always, more or less, presents a similar 

 appearance. Of course, on a light being brought in, the phosphorescence could not 

 be observed ; but in the dark it was very brilliant, and I have thought it worthy of a 

 note. — C. Home; Upper Norwood, April 26, 1869. 



P.S. — All appearance of phosphorescence had vanished next morning, as I tested 

 by placing the remains in a dark cellar. I believe that a free current of air greatly 



