296 



SCIENCE. 



[Vol. XIX. No. 486 



lished in the Boston Journal of Natural History, Vol. II., 

 pp. 289-558, where it diifers very little from the separate. 

 This report well represents the best American work done in 

 ichthyology up to 1840. 



4. In 1841 he published a short "Supplement to the Ich- 

 thyological Report," in the Boston Journal of Natural 

 History, Vol. III., and in 1844, in the fourth volume of the 

 same journal, his " Additional Descriptions of, and Observa- 

 tions on, the Fishes of Massachusetts." 



5. The year 1846 saw the appearance of " A Synopsis of 

 the Fishes of North America," an extensive work, mainly 

 compilation, published in the Memoirs of the American 

 Academy of Arts and Sciences, and reprinted separately, 

 with different title-page, paging-, and index, making a quarto 

 volume of about 300 pages. In this work there are evidences 

 that compiling was not so much to the author's liking as 

 original work, in which he certainly attained a greater de- 

 gree of success. 



6. The "Catalogue of the Fishes of South Carolina" in 

 Tuomey's Eeport on the Geology of South Carolina, of 1848, 

 is a list of nominal species occupying several pages, for 

 which dependence was placed on literature rather than on 

 specimens. 



7. In the fifth volume of the Memoirs of the American 

 Academy ot Arts and Sciences, 1853-55, Dr. Storer put forth 

 the first, second, and third instalments of " A History of the 

 Fishes of Massachusetts." The fourth part appeared in Vol. 

 VI., 1858, the fifth in Vol. VIII., 1863, and the last in Vol. 

 IX., 1867. The whole was published separately as a hand- 

 some quarto of 287 pages and 39 plates. This work contains 

 descriptions and drawings taken from specimens of more than 

 130 species, together with a great mass of detail concerning 

 habits, capture, economic value, and the like. 



To show how the author regarded his own work we may 

 quote the following, the opening paragraphs of the History : 



" As one of the Commissioners on the Zoology of Massa- 

 chusetts, in the year 1889, 1 prepared a Eeport on the Ichthy- 

 ology of the State. From the brief time occupied in its 

 preparation, it was necessarily imperfect, and, not being 

 accompanied by figures, was comparatively useless, except 

 to scientific men. Since the appearance of that communi- 

 cation, much information has been obtained respecting 

 several of the most common and valuable fishes, and quite a 

 number of new species have been ascertained to exist in our 

 •waters. 



" Having carefully re-described all the species, I trust the 

 following paper will present an accurate history of the fishes 

 of our State. Considering this as the completion of my 

 former report, I have kept in view the primary object of the 

 commission, — to ascertain the value of our fauna in an 

 economical point of view, rather than to prepare labored 

 scientific descriptions." 



The estimate placed by the author on his work in the re- 

 port of 1839 may leave an imperfect idea of its real value. 

 As he was engaged in revising and enlarging it, it was but 

 natural for him to consider it not what it should be; yet for 

 many years it was the standard work on our fishes, and 

 was only supplanted in New England esteem by the revised, 

 extended, and fully illustrated work completed in 1867. 



It is through this last our author should be judged, all of 

 the others being preparatory. Comparing the records in- 

 cluded in its pages with the other records of the period, we 

 shall have to rank it with the best. At the present, details 

 are valued more highly, but to a considerable extent the de- 

 tails are supplied in the excellent drawings from nature, by 



the pencil of the artist, Sonrel, so long and so happily em 

 ployed by Professor Agassiz. If we place this work on our 

 own fishes by the side of those devoted to the fishes of other 

 States; Mitchell's NewYork. 1818; Raflnesque's Ohio, 1819-20; 

 Dekay's New York, 1842; Thompson's Vermont, 1842; Kirt- 

 land's Ohio, 1839-44; Baird 'sNew Jersey, 1855; Holbrook's 

 South Carolina, 1860; or Holmes's Maine, 1862, we find but 

 one or two that approach it and none that surpass. The 

 excellence of the descriptions and illustrations is generally 

 admitted. Taking up economic considerations, the work is 

 readily seen to be in advance of any of the others. Being 

 a forerunner of the fishery commissions, of either the general 

 government or of the different States, Dr. Storer had to 

 gather his statistical or other information directly from the 

 markets or from the fishermen. One who has not engaged 

 in similar work can hardly realize the magnitude of such an 

 undertaking. In the evidence that accumulates there is apt 

 to be so much that is more positive than accurate that at 

 times it seems an almost hopeless endeavor to discover the 

 trutli. The Doctor, however, has acquitted himself admira- 

 bly. He seems to have been especially fortunate in selecting 

 the men on whom he depended most for assistance. Such 

 names as those of Captain N. E. Atwood of Provincetown 

 or Captain Nathaniel Blanchard of Lynn are often cited as 

 authorities for statements of fact, and I have never yet been 

 able to learn of a single instance in which their testimony 

 has proved other than absolutely trustworthy. 



The " History of the Fishes of Massachusetts " is a Classic in , 

 North American ichthyology that must serve as the basis for 

 the future histories of New England's fishes. In the quarter 

 of a century that has passed since its publication we have 

 changed our ideals of names; and discoveries of new genera 

 or species, or in the anatomy, have compelled changes in the 

 arrangement. The nomenclature of the book has become 

 somewhat antiquated, and the systematic arrangement is not 

 entirely suited to the present time, yet we must say the same 

 of all the contemporaneous ichthyological literature, and it 

 will not be long before a similar characterization will be 

 equally applicable to the works of to day. But it matters 

 comparatively little to this book how much the names are 

 changed, how radically the classification is modified, the 

 things are described here, the illustrations are here, the facts 

 are here, and these give the work a permanent value. It 

 would be diiBcult to point out a work of greater accuracy in 

 detail, or one that left less doubt in regard to the identity of 

 the different forms to which attention is directed. 



Dr. Storer was not led astray by desire for novelty; he 

 used little of his energy in searching for generalizations; he 

 appears rather to have given himself up to the careful prepa- 

 ration of a good record of what he could gather during years 

 of collection and study. Most will admit that in this his 

 judgment was good. For, though it sometimes happens that 

 science is benefitted and fame is brought to an author by a 

 revolutionary change in classification, or through a brilliant 

 generalization or theory, the result most often is only an 

 evanescent notoriety that soon dies away. It is through the 

 patient elaboration of facts and success in recording them 

 that one is most certain of contributing to the advancement 

 of science. In this way Dr. Storer has made a contribution 

 to ichthyology of lasting importance. In the amount of in- 

 formation given, its accuracy, and style of presentation, he 

 has established his claim to present and future gratitude and 

 has proved his right to rank amongst the foremost of Ameri- 

 can ichthyologists. S. Garman. 



Mus. Comp. Zool., Cambridge, Mass. 



