188 



may have facilitated or induced the extension of the shoals in 

 such unusual quanties from Japan to our coasts. Duperrey (or 

 Lesson and Grarnot) found it in New Zealand, and Cuvier and 

 Valenciennes referred their specimen to the genus Alausa. I 

 find, however, that the authors of the "Histoire des Poissons" 

 were in error, and Temmiuk in the right, — the former assigning 

 five, and the latter seven gill-rays ; and it has also a row of teeth 

 on the tongue, as was correctly stated by Terninink, and errone- 

 ously denied by Cuvier and Valenciennes. The fish is therefore 

 a Meletta, and not an Alatcsa, and should be referred to as the 

 Meletta Melanosticta (Tern.)" 



All that the Professor says about the extraordinary occurrence 

 of the shoals of the fish is perfectly correct, and they have since 

 that time made their appearance every year ; but in 1871 a few 

 only began to be seen on the 16th of November, and they became 

 more abundant in December and January following, but at 

 all times in much less numbers than those of other years, but 

 I cannot agree with Professor M'Coy about the name of this 

 fish, and it is impossible for me to see any teeth on its tongue ; 

 I therefore think that its genus was well named by Cuvier and 

 Valenciennes. That it is not the Melanosticta of Schleg. is still 

 more evident, as that sort has sixteen or seventeen rays to its 

 anal, while the Australian fish has eighteen, and this is one of 

 the characters of Sagax, which has also the round black spots on 

 the sides. Dr. Grunther has well described and distinguished 

 these two sorts, and if Professor M'Coy has not been mistaken 

 in regard to the existence of lingual teeth, it would .show that the 

 two sorts appear in the waters of the southern parts of Australia. 



According to Dr. Grunther, Cliupea Sagax inhabits the western 

 coast of America, from California to Chili, Japan, and New 

 Zealand. 



MELETTA. 



This genus of Cuvier and Valenciennes, formed on sorts who have 

 only teeth on the tongue, and none on the jaws, is not admitted by 

 Dr. Grunther, who considers the dentition in this group of fishes as 

 too rudimental to be taken as a generic character ; but at the 

 same time he takes it as his principal character of the division of 

 the genus. If it is constant enough to furnish a safe guide for 



