262 Mr. G. A. Boulenger on the 
which otherwise would appear to have a great affinity to 
them.”” He then divides the family into four groups, as 
follows :— 
Eyes on the upper surface of the head; lateral 
line contintOusy erent er ene eee a. Uranoscopina. 
Eyes more or less lateral; lateral line continuous ; 
no larger tooth on the posterior portion of the 
intermaxallaicys Sex. Quarry ee eee tae b. Trachinina. 
Hyes lateral ; a larger tooth on the posterior por- 
tionvofsthenmitermasxallll ain serene eee c. Pinguipedina. 
Lateral line interrupted or not continued to the 
Gamolall mins Ome CORA. oscacacccaeccoooeds d. Pseudochromides. 
Lateral line interrupted * ; two dorsal fins...... e. Notothenina. 
This arrangement, slightly modified from that proposed in 
the ‘ Catalogue of Fishes,’ was still maintained in the ‘ Study 
of Fishes’ in 1880, and has been followed, with greater or 
less modifications, bearing chiefly on the hierarchical import- 
ance of the divisions, by most subsequent writers. 
It will strike one, however, that hardly any account has 
been taken of osteological characters or of the position of the 
ventral fins, to which, as arule, very great importance is 
attached. And any one at all familiar with fishes will soon 
discover that the Trachinide are made up of a very incon- 
gruous assemblage of genera, connected together merely by 
trivial characters of the most superficial nature, such as the 
position of the eyes, the extent of the dorsal and anal fins, &c. 
Although I am, I believe, the first to repudiate this asso- 
ciation altogether on osteological grounds, and to apply the 
results of a study of its components to a radical reconstruction 
of the taxonomic system, I am not by any means the first to 
perceive its defects. Dr, Gill f and Bleeker { especially have 
expressed dissent, although, in my opinion, the changes they 
have proposed are far froin having all been improvements. 
Dr. Gill, in 1861§, after excluding the Uranoscopina, 
Penguipedina, and Pseudochromides, proposed to split up 
* Should read “ lateral lines two.” 
+ “Synopsis of the Sillaginoids,” Proc. Ac. Philad. 1861, p. 501; 
“ Synopsis of the Cheenichthyoids,” ¢. ¢. p. 507 ; “Synopsis of the Harpa- 
giferoids,” ¢. c. p. 510; “Synopsis of the Notothenioids,” ¢. ¢ p. 512; 
* On the Limits and Affinity of the Family of Leptoscopoids,” op. cit. 
1862, p. 501; “Arrangement of the Families of Fishes,” Smithson. Miscell. 
Coll. xi. no, 247 (1872); “ Families aud Subfamilies of Fishes,’ Mem. 
Ac. Se. Washingt. vi. 1893, p. 127. 
t ‘Mémoire sur les Sciénoides et les Sillaginoides,” Verh. Akad 
Amsterd. xiv. no. 4 (1874); “Sur la Famille des Pseudochromidoides, 
op. cit, xv. no, 5 (1875). 
§ Proc. Acad. Philad. 1861, p, 614. 
