32 THE VICTORIAN NATURALIST. 



attention of Mr. Kershaw to the fish, and he was of the same 

 opinion as I was, that the fish was the common Tupong, though, 

 of course, one cannot be absolutely certain of a fish without de- 

 tailed examination. Still we had a good view of it as it rested 

 on the bottom or swam lazily along close to the glass wall of the 

 tank, elevating and depressing its two dorsal fins. In colour it 

 was somewhat lighter than the variety which we know from our 

 rivers, though mottled or marbled in much the same way. I saw 

 a specimen in the saltwater tanks at the same place a couple of 

 years ago that I believe was also the Tupong, though I could not 

 examine it very closely, since it declined to move, and conse- 

 quently I waited for some more evidence. Mr, Kershaw has 

 kindly looked up the question at the National Museum, and finds 

 that they have four specimens, received at different times within 

 the last few years, and labelled " Western Port." Presumably 

 these specimens were caught in the sea, as they came through the 

 fishermen. The first specimen I saw at the Aquarium came from 

 the same place, so they do not seem to be very uncommon there. 

 Western Port, it may be mentioned, receives the drainage of no 

 large streams, and, as it is fully open to the sea, is peopled by a 

 truly marine fauna. It is not an estuary, any more than Port 

 Phillip is. The question is rather an interesting one, as Mr J. 

 Douglas Ogilby has suggested (Proc. Linn. Soc, N.S.W., 1897, p. 

 560) that perhaps our species \s identical with F. burshius, C. 

 and v., which, like Castlenau's specimen, was also originally 

 described from saltwater (Port Jackson), and has never since been 

 recognized. If, as Mr. Ogilby points out, the identity of F. 

 urvillei with F. bursinus is settled, then the latter name will take 

 precedence. Both generically and specifically, as will be seen on 

 reference to Mr. Ogilby's paper, the synonymy of this fish has 

 been somewhat of a puzzle to unravel, and I would ask any of our 

 angling members to carefully preserve any sea-caught fish which 

 they believe to be the Tupong, as possibly some slight variations, 

 sufficient to finally settle its name, may be found. — T. S. Hall. 

 loth April, 1899. P.S. — Mr. Kershaw has told me that the 

 Museum has also a specimen caught at Port Melbourne in 1883. 

 This, however, is just off the Yarra mouth and might not mean 

 much. Another specimen, however, was obtained from Mordi- 

 alloc about two years ago, and as it was netted off shore it supplies 

 positive evidence of the occurence of the Tupong in salt water. — 

 T. S. Hall. 13th April, 1899. 



Foreign Birds in London. — At the Crystal Palace Bird Show, 

 held in February last, about 400 foreign birds, the majority of 

 which were parrots and parrakeets, were exhibited. Amongst 

 them was a specimen of the rare Princess of Wales Parrakeet, 

 from Central Australia, which was exhibited by Mr. Fulljames, an 

 enthusiastic exhibitor of some seventy birds. 



