40 DR. A. GUNTHER ON THE BRITISH CHARRS. ([Feb. 11, 
should not be wise to provoke just retribution by unfair severity 
towards others. 
1685. WitLoveusy is the first who with the practised eye of an 
ichthyologist examined the Charrs of England and Wales, devoting 
a separate article to their description*. He recognizes their affinity 
to the Salbling (S. salvelinus), and lets the descriptions of the Ger- 
man and British fishes follow one another; but the “‘ Torgoch”’ of 
Wales and the “Red Charre of Winander-mere’’ appear to him to 
be the same species, with which he unites even the “ Reutele”’ or 
Rothel of South Germany—a fish which, however, appears to have 
been known to him rather by name or by recollection than by actual 
examination and by comparison with the British fish. 
At a time when naturalists were only beginning to advance be- 
yond the individual specimen to the conception of classification, and 
to form the ideas of species and genera, it was creditable enough to 
note the British Charrs on the whole as different from the Salbling, 
and, at the same time, to indicate their affinity. 
Willoughby mentions the Gilt Charr beside the Red Charr, also 
from the lakes of Westmoreland, considering it identical with Sal- 
viani’s Carpione from the Lago di Gardat. In the description of 
the latter he says (p.197), “In palato quinque dentium areole,” whilst 
he expressly and correctly mentions that the middle of the palate is 
toothless in the Salbling as well as in the Red Charr. Therefore 
the Gilt Charr, as it is understood by Willoughby, cannot be a true 
Charr without teeth along the middle of the vomer (Salmo, sensu 
stricto) ; but it isa species of Salar or Fario, with five series of teeth 
along the roof of the mouth, viz. two along the maxillaries, two along 
the palatines, and one along the vomer. 
We shall see that Pennant and Yarrell mention the Gilt Charr (of 
which I have not seen an example) as a variety of the common 
Charr; but what Pennant says about its habits and propagation 
tends to show that Willoughby was perfectly right in referring it to 
(or near to) a very different species. 
1738. The confusion commences with ArtEepr and Linnavus, 
who, without knowing the British fish, refer Willoughby’s Red Charre 
to the Salmo alpinus from Lapland. 
1755. FARRINGTON, in a letter printed in the ‘Philosophical Trans- 
actions’ of that year, gives some notes about the general appearance 
and the habits of the Torgoch. He very truly remarks that the fish 
is “slimy, nearly allied to the eel and the tench.” From the speci- 
mens which I have examined I cannot confirm his observation that 
“‘the male is not adorned with the beautiful red hue of the female ;” 
“yet,” he continues, “ he is finely shaded and marbled upon the back 
and sides with black streaks.’ ‘‘ The Turgoch makes its appearance 
at the shores of the Llanberris lakes about the winter solstice; the 
whole number annually taken in the two pools of Llanberris does not 
amount to a hundred dozen.” 
* Will. Hist. Pisc. p. 196. 
+ See Heckel, Reisebericht, p. 98 (Salmo carpio, L.; Fario carpio, Heck.). 
