FISHES OF MASSACHUSETTS. 3 



of" Holmes' Hole, I am most deeply indebted; to \he former, for his 

 constant and unwearied efforts to serve me amid the fatigues of his 

 arduous profession, during the entire period I have been engaged in 

 this survey, and for many judicious remarks and valuable details 

 imparted to me ; — and to the latter, for his invaluable aid — for which 

 I am not only obliged for specimens of nearly one fifth of all the spe- 

 cies I have described, and which, but for him, J could not have pro- 

 cured, but also for many specimens of more common species, and 

 much valuable information respecting them. 



My friend Jeffries Wyman, M. D. has kindly enriched my pages 

 with very accurate plates of the Aspidophor aides monopterigius , Sygna- 

 tJius PecJdi, Platessa ferruginea, Orthagoriscus mala, and Lamna 

 punctata. 



Inasmuch as unavoidable errors, of greater or less importance, may 

 be detected by the scientific critic in this report, you will excuse me, 

 when I add, that in its preparation I have been entirely unaided. Not 

 knowing a single ichthyologist in New England to whom, in cases 

 of doubt, 1 could refer for advice and instruction, I have been com- 

 pelled to rely wholly upon myself. 



The small number of new species here presented may surprise you. 

 Disgusted with the mania so common among naturalists to form spe- 

 cies out of mere varieties, thus casting confusion upon their favorite 

 pursuits, and bringing odium upon themselves, I have endeavored to 

 avoid this error — and may have carried the feeling so far, that some of 

 the species, catalogued here as having been previously known, may, at 

 a future period, be considered new. If, in this respect, I have erred, 

 my descriptions will in themselves correct me. 



Throughout the whole of this report 1 have avoided all reference to 

 a " Natural History of the Fishes of 3Iassachusetts," published in 

 Boston, in 1833 — and also, to the " Catalogue of the Marine and Fresh 

 water Fishes of llassachusetts," prepared by the same author, and 

 contained in Professor Hitchcock'' s Report, published in IS3-5. Were 

 I to pass these by in perfect silence, I might be accused of neglecting 

 the labors of my predecessor. To prevent such an imputation, I am 

 reluctantly compelled to explain. Besides, in the Catalogue above 

 referred to, 108 species are registered — while your Commissioner has 

 been able to distinguish with accuracy, but 107 species. Rev. Leonard 

 Jenyns, in his " Report on the recent progress and present state of 

 Zoology," contained in the " Fourth Report of the British Associa- 

 tion for the advancement of Science,'^ makes the following observation, 



