xxvi Mr. Jonathan Couch's 



species for comparison : to the latter, as well as to Mr. James Hardy, I am likewise 

 indebted for extracts from works not generally accessible to the provincial entomo- 

 logist, 



T.J. Bold. 

 42, Bigg Market, Newcastle-on-Tyne, 

 October 25, 1848. 



Art. III. — Description of Brama pinna-squamata, a supposed unrecognized British Fish. 

 By Jonathan Couch, F.L.S., &c* 



In a paper on the fishes of Cornwall which I communicated to the Linnean Society 

 in the year 1822 (vol. xiv.), there is the description of a species which I then referred 

 to the genus Chaetodon of Linneus, — a class of fishes that included an immense mul- 

 titude of species which obtained their generic denomination from the structure and 

 arrangement of their teeth, resembling rows of slender bristles ; but a much more 

 conspicuous character of the class is, that their fins are more or less encrusted with a 

 continuation of the scales which are firmly spread over the body. The arrangement 

 which Baron Cuvier has made, by elevating the Linnean Chaetodons into a family, 

 and denominating them — from this remarkable character of the fins — Squamipennes 

 or scale-finned, must be admitted to be a great improvement ; as he is thus enabled 

 to distribute them into several subordinate genera, in which the genus Brama stands 

 conspicuous, by having the whole of the dorsal and anal fins thus guarded, as well as 

 the mystache ; and, also, by the distinction of an elevated profile and remarkably 

 short snout, the angle of the mouth descending much below the ordinary level. 



In this genus Cuvier has followed Bloch in placing Ray's bream (Brama Raii), so 

 named from the illustrious British naturalist who first made it known, — and indeed 

 the genus itself was especially constituted for the reception of this fish ; for it is the 

 opinion of Cuvier and Valenciennes, in which they are followed by Mr. Yarrell, that 

 the genus, in fact, consists of no more than this one species, and that the Chaetodon 

 above referred to does not differ from the last-named fish. 



The difficulty of forming a correct opinion on this subject arises in part from the 

 great rarity of specimens, but more particularly from the fact that when my paper on 

 the Cornish fishes was published, as I could not persuade myself that the species 

 there described could be unknown to naturalists of more extended observation, and, 

 consequently, I was not without the hope that at some future time I might be able to 

 identify it by the aid of the sketch which I had taken of it, I retained it for my own 

 use. When afterwards my friend Mr. Yarrell was engaged in publishing his ' His- 

 tory of British Fishes,' this figure was not in my possession ; and the authority of 

 Cuvier was sufficient to confirm the belief, that whatever differences might appear in 

 the descriptions of the two fishes should be best explained by supposing some inaccu- 



Read before the Natural-History Society of Penzance. 



