4946 THE ZooLoGist—JUNE, 1876. 
the Whitstable Company, and are emitted as “black spawn,” to 
all appearance vigorous and healthy. It is also a fact that these 
grounds are well supplied with “ cultch,”’—7.e., old oyster-shells, 
which are admitted to be the very best material to invite the attach- 
ment of the young oysters; and whenever the sharp eyes of the 
dredgers discern indications that spat is falling, orders are at once 
given to cease working with the dredge. Yet year after year the 
hopes of oyster-catchers and oyster-eaters are alike disappointed. 
SIBERT SAUNDERS. 
Whitstable, May 2, 1876. 
Starfishes and Oysters. By Enwarp NEWMAN. 
I was rather taken aback the other morning by reading in the 
columns of that excellent periodical, the ‘ Field,’ a very able paper 
from the pen of Mr. Saville-Kent, with the heading “ Starfish and 
Oysters,” and which commences with the following paragraph :— 
“Tf any poor unfortunate representative of animate nature has been 
singled out for especial obloquy and abuse, and of whom it may be said 
‘he has no friends,’ that unhappy creature is the starfish. Far and wide, 
both at sea and on shore, these luckless radiates enjoy the most unenviable 
notoriety. Fishermen, gourmets, and naturalists have alike united to abuse 
them from time immemorial, in association with their accredited oyster- 
eating propensities. Last century, such was the animus in high places 
against the common starfish (Uraster rubens), in virtue of the delinquencies, 
real or imaginary, of that species in this direction, that the High Court of 
Admiralty laid penalties even upon those who did not “tread under their 
feet or throw upon the shore a fish which they call five-fingers, resembling 
a spur-rowel, because that fish gets into the oyster when they gape, and 
sucks them out.’” 
There can be no doubt that the charge in question has been 
repeatedly made and is very generally believed: scarcely any one 
now doubts that these starfishes, or as they are usually called by 
fishermen “ five-fingers,” actually will destroy and devour multi- 
tudes of oysters, thus tending to promote that numerical decrease, 
which, if not patent to all, is at least admitted on all hands to have 
taken place of late years: now the question very naturally arises, 
How far is this charge substantiated? Let us hear Mr. Kent:— 
“ My first score on behalf of these persecuted, if not hitherto absolutely 
friendless, ocean waifs, is embodied in the following :—For upwards of a 
