200 NEW SOUTH WALES 
JAPAN. 
1. Fauna Japonica. Poissons; par H. Schlegel. (Ludg. Bat., 
1850, fol.) 
‘East Inpies: TROPICAL PARTS OF THE INDIAN AND Pactric OcEANS. 
1. E. Ruppell Neue Wirbelthiere. Fische. (Frankf., 1837, fol.) 
“These two works form the standard works for the student of the 
Fishes of the Red Sea, and are distinguished by a rare conscientiousness 
and faithfulness of the description and figures ; so that there is no other 
part of the tropical seas with the fish of which we are so intimately 
acquainted as with those of the Red Sea. But these works have a still 
wider range of usefulness, inasmuch as only a small proportion of the 
fishes is limited to that area, the majority being distributed over the 
Indian Ocean into Polynesia: Ruppell’s works were supplemented by 
the first two of the following works :— 
3. B. L. Playfair and A. Giinther: The Fishes of Zanzibar. 
(London, 1866, 4to.); and 
4, C. B, Klunzinger: Synopsis der Fische des Rothen Meers. 
(Wien, 1870-1, 8vo.) 
5. T. Cantor: Catalogue of Malayan Fishes. (Calcutta, 1850, 8vo.) 
6. F. Day: The Fishes of India (London, 1875, 4to., in progress) ; 
contains an account of the fresh-water and marine species, and 
is not yet complete. 
7. A. Giinther: Die Fische der Sudsee. (Hamburg, 4to., from 1873, 
in progress. ) 
“ Unsurpassed in activity, as regards the exploration of the fish fauna 
of the East Indian Archipelago, is P. Blecker, a surgeon in the service 
of the Dutch East Indian Government (born 1819, died 1878), who 
from the year 1840, for nearly thirty years, amassed immense collections 
of the fishes of the various islands, and described them in extremely 
numerous papers, published chiefly in the Journals of the Batavian 
Society. When his descriptions and the arrangement of his materials 
evoked some criticism, it must be remembered that at the time when he 
commenced his labours, and for many years afterwards, he stood aloney. 
without the aid of a previously named collection on which to base his 
first researches, and without other works but that of a Cuvier and 
Valenciennes. He had to create for himself a method of distinguishing 
species and describing them, and afterwards it would be difficult for 
him to abandon his original method and the principles by which he had 
been guided for so many years. His desire of giving a new name to 
every individual, to every small assemblage of species, wherever prac- 
ticable, or of changing an old name, detracts not a little from the 
satisfaction with which his works would be used otherwise. 
“Tt is also surprising that a man with his anatomical knowledge and 
unusual facilities should have been satisfied with the merely external 
examination of the specimens; but none of his numerous articles 
contain anything relating to the anatomy, physiology, or habits of the 
fishes which came under his notice; hence his attempts at systematic 
arrangement are very far from indicating an advance in Ichthyology. 
“Soon after his return to Europe (1860), Blecker commenced to collect 
the final results of his labours in a grand work, illustrated by coloured 
