366 



CLASSIFICATIOX OF FISHES.- 



With these two genera^ we follow Cuvier in placing an- 

 other, which he has named Lebia (L.elipsoides,fig.gS.), 

 which differs " ' " " - — . . - . - 



in nothing from Poecil'm but in having 



the teeth (o) serrated — a very questionable ground 

 for generic difference when unsupported by any other 

 character, SVe esteem ourselves fortunate in being able 

 to present our readers with con*ect figures of these rare 

 and interesting fishes, all represented of their natural 

 size, from the masterly delineations of Le Sueur. 



(297-) Hitherto, however, notwithstanding the ana- 

 logy of these viviparous genera (and more especially of 

 Anahleps^ to the cartilaginous order, we have men- 

 tioned no fish which ei'ternally possessed any resem- 

 blance to the latter, or gave us any idea that the 

 Cobitid(F really exhibited any such modification of 

 form as a fiat head, large pectorals, and a transverse 

 mouth, placed beneath a projecting snout, — characters, 

 in fact, which every one knows are prevalent through 

 all the cartilaginous types, and, therefore, peculiarly cha- 

 racteristic of them. There are, however, among the 

 Indian di-awings published hy Hardwick and Gray, 

 the figures of two species of their genus Balitora, 

 which completely realises these particulars. No de- 

 scriptions to these plates having yet been published, and 

 not being aware that this genus has ever been defined 

 by Mr. Gray, we can only be guided by the figures ; but 

 these leave us in little doubt as to the natural station of 

 these singular fishes among the malacopterygious fami- 

 lies. A glance at the figures here given of Balitora Bricei 



