PLATE XCVIII. 
datory of the different transitions of its growth from a diminutive size, 
to the full dimensions of those delineated in our plate. Every one of 
those bear the most striking semblance of the parent fish, and afford 
an incontrovertible evidence that the White-bait is really the fry of the 
common Shad. We shall premise our enquiry by introducing the ob- 
servations of Mr. Pennant concerning it, in the result of which he la- 
bours to prove that the White-bait is not the young Shad, or even a 
fish of the Clupea, but one of the Cyprinus genus, approaching nearest 
to the Bleak, and shall conclude with stating our reasons for dis- 
senting from an opinion so long established and so uniformly adopted 
by later writers. 
I 
“ During the month of July (says Mr. Pennant) there appears in 
the river Thames, near Blackball and Greenwich, innumerable mul- 
titudes of small fish, which are known to the Londoners by the name 
of White Bait. They are esteemed very delicious when fried with 
fine flour, and occasion during the season a vast resort of the lower 
orders of epicures to the taverns contiguous to the places where 
they are taken at.” 
“ There are various conjectures about this species, but all termi- 
nate in a supposition that thev are the fry of some fish, but few 
agree to which kind they owe their origin. Some attribute it to the 
Shad, others to the Sprat, the Smelt, and the Bleak. That they 
neither belong to the Shad, nor the Sprat, is evident from the number 
of branchiostegous rays, which in those are eight, in this only 
three. That they are not the young of Smelts is as clear, because 
they want the pinna adiposa, or rayless fin; and that they are not 
the offspring of the Bleak is extremely probable, since we never 
heard of the White-bait being found in any other river, notwith- 
