THE BLACK BASSES. 55 
This volume is, however, not easily accessible, and the important 
differences are therefore repeated in this place. In the Large-mouth the 
upper jaw extends far behind the eye; in the other to a point below it. 
The Large-mouth has from sixty-five to seventy rows between the gill- 
opening and the base of the tail, instead of seventy-two or more, while on 
the cheek there are about ten oblique rows instead of seventeen, also seven- 
and-a-half to eight instead of eleven rows between the lateral line and 
the dorsal. There are other distinctions, such as the absence, in the Large- 
mouth, of scales on the bases of the dorsal and anal fins, the smaller num- 
ber of rays in the pectoral fins (there being thirteen or fourteen instead of 
sixteen or seventeen), and the lesser height of the spinous dorsal. (In the 
Large-mouth the first dorsal spine is one-half; in the Small-mouth, one- 
third of the height of the third dorsal spine.) 
THE SMALL-MOUTH BASS. 
Numerous as have been the zodlogical names, they are outnumbered by 
the popular names still in use in different localities. Charlevoix, a Jesuit 
missionary whoexplored Canada in 1721, mentionsa fish called ‘‘Achigan,’’ 
which is thought to have been the Large-mouth. An earlier allusion to 
this species, which in the Southern States is still called ‘‘ Trout,’’ occurs 
in the writings of Réné de Laudonniére, who described the incidents of 
the first Huguenot expedition to Florida in 1652, under the command of 
Jean Ribault. The Large-mouth is known in the Great Lake Region, 
especially in Northern New York, as the ‘‘ Oswego Bass.’’ This name 
should not be confounded with ‘‘ Otsego Bass,’’’a local name for the com- 
mon whitefish. In Kentucky, and possibly in Florida, it is called 
‘¢ Jumper ;’’ in Indiana, ‘‘ Moss Bass ;’’ in the Southern States generally, 
‘* Trout,’’ though on the Tar River of North Carolina, it is called « Chub,”’ 
and on the Neuse, ‘‘ Welshman.”’ 
