REPORT OF THE COMMISSIONER OF FISHERIES. 17 1 



of Linnaeus; the second received a new name, Stromateus trlacanthus; 

 the third also has a new name, Bleniiius angulllarls^ and the fourth 

 was considered to be specifically identical with the Oi/j)ri?ius catostomus 

 of Forster. Peck's descriptions were very good — for the time at 

 least — and by them his species can readily be recognized. 



The first is clearly the species later (1839) named Cryptacantliodes 

 macidatus by Storer; Peck's misidentification undoubtedly was very 

 bad, but he manifested a better appreciation of the relationship of the 

 species than did Storer. The Ophidian or Ophidium imberbe of Lin- 

 nanis was primarily based on the common gunnell of Europe, PhoUs 

 giinnelhis." Apt as Pock's description was, however, Storer did not 

 recognize his iish. Dekay later (181:2) equally failed to recognize it, 

 but, concluding that it could not be the Oplddimn imherbe of Lin- 

 naeus, referred it to the genus Fierasfer and calls it ^''Fierasfer 

 horeaUs? " The name was new, and by the interrogation Dekay evi- 

 dently intended to question whether the species belonged to the genus 

 I'iera!<fe)' and not whether it belonged to a species already named Fieras- 

 fer Jforealis. The correct identification of the species was not published 

 till 1863 (Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., p. 332). 



Peck's second species is the one now known as Stromateus triacan- 

 tJnis or FoTonotiis triacwdhus; his third species is Zoai'ces anguiUaris, 

 and his Cyjyrinus catostomiis is Cato&tomus commersonii^ the common 

 sucker of Massachusetts. 



^^' 



In 1816 the United States was visited by a Frenchman who is well 

 entitled to be considered as the first ichthyological artist of his time- 

 so far superior to all others, indeed, that there was no close second.^ 

 I mean, of course, Charles Alexandre Lesueur,'' who was born in 

 Havre on the New Year's day of 1778. He became the companion of 

 Franyois Peron in the notable expedition to southern lands which left 

 Havre in 1800, under the command of Baudin, and was so fruitful of 

 novelties for science. In 1815 he made arrangements with William 

 Maclure by which he was enabled to visit the United States. After 

 a prolonged voyage by way of the West Indies with Maclure, Lesueur 



oThe Ophidion imberbe was long a puzzle to European naturalists and the last authoritative author 

 to adopt the name (A. Gunther) applied it to a nominal species called GymncUs imbcrbis and con- 

 founded under it names belonging not only to Pholis gunneUus, but also others belonging to Fierasfer 

 and the common eel (Anguilla). Thereupon the present writer published an article " On the affini- 

 ties of several doubtful British fishes" (Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1864, p. 199-208), promulgating 

 the views held at present. 



&I am glad to be able to agree for once with William S«-ainson, who was much more trustworthy 

 as an artist and art critic than as an ichthyologist. Swainson (Taxidermy, etc., pp. 214, 24.i) noticed 

 Lesueur as an " inimitable painter, accomplished naturalist, and accurate describer," "the Raffaele of 

 zoological painters," who "left behind him no one, in France, who was qualified to fill his place, or 

 whose delineations foram^oment can be compared with his own." He regretted that " no one volume 

 will hereafter point out the matchless excellence of LeSueur." 



<■ In the first and second volumes of the Journal of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia 

 the name appears as LeSueur, but in the third and forth as Lesueur. 



