1878.] MR. F. DAY ON FEAR AND ANGER IN FISHES. 221 



short, invariably seize their prey with their mouths, and that without 

 calling the caudal fin into play. In fact, a stroke with the tail appears 

 sometimes to denote contempt in fishes ; it is not rare that anglers 

 find fishes sometimes swim up to their bait, which they not only 

 refuse, but, giving it a lash with their tail, decline to rise any 

 more. This may, however, be a symptom of curiosity, which is 

 largely developed in the finny tribe. 



"I might multiply instances from many authors, but consider those 

 adverted to are sufficient to show that various ichthyologists have 

 remarked upon the emotions of anger and terror in fishes being 

 shown by the erection of their dermal appendages and gill-covers, 

 as well as by changes of colour, whilst terror induces some species 

 to emit sounds that are not commonly perceived ; that fishes some- 

 times show affection for their partners in captivity, mourniug their 

 removal ; that they may be tamed sufficiently to come to a recognized 

 sound, even to individual names that have been bestowed upon them ; 

 and that some species have an instinctive affection for their eggs and 

 young, which they guard against intruders with the greatest deter- 

 mination. 



"At the present time, in the Royal Westminster Aquarium, is a 

 live example of the Electric Eel (Gymnotus electricus) which has 

 in its electric organs the means of showing when it is affected bv 

 anger or terror. Some consider this curious property is for protec- 

 tion against Alligators ; it is certainly used against fishes for the 

 purpose of obtaining food ; but when we remember how, when the 

 Indians drive in horses and mules to the waters infested by the Eels, 

 they immediately attack them, we must admit that such cannot be 

 for the purpose of preying upon them, but is due to anger or terror 

 at being disturbed." 



Mr. Whitmee being unable to attend, the Secretary read the 

 subjoined reply to Mr. Day's remarks. 



" By the courtesy of the Secretary I have seen Mr. Day's comments 

 on my paper. As I cannot attend the meeting to-morrow evening, 

 I crave the liberty of presenting two or three written observations. 



"1. My paper was written in Samoa in 1875 ; and my position 

 there, of course, prevented me from having access to the whole 

 literature of this subject. I was aware of the conduct of the Stickle- 

 back in guarding its nest, and also of similar conduct in some other 

 fishes. But my object was to show, in opposition to a view quoted, 

 that fishes, as a class, manifest as much feeling as most other 

 animals. In stating that I had not met with observations showing 

 this, I did so as an excuse for presenting a paper which I feared 

 possessed little intrinsic value. I am glad the paper has led Mr. 

 Day to bring forward so much evidence in confirmation of the view 

 I advocated. 



"2. Mr. Day gives a more general application than I intended to 

 my observations about the mode of fighting with the tail. I stated 

 an observed fact, viz. that certain fishes in my aquarium, when 

 fighting, lashed at each other with their tails. From this I inferred 



