ADVJCRTISEMIiNr. 
obtained their currency. There are two or three ambi- 
guous tishes described by that author, but of which at 
this remote period Ave can procure no very correct infor- 
mation. We can neither comprehend the Cook cornu- 
biensmm (or Labrus Coquus) of that writer, nor the 
Black iisJC of his friend Mr. Jago, the minister of 
Loo.— Perhaps the observations of future naturalists on 
the Cornish coasts may confirm the accuracy of those 
WTiters; we only mean to infer, that they are either ob- 
scurely described, or fishes unknown to us.— The “ Lon^ 
Fisla/ig Frog^’ of Mount’s Bay, an account of which is 
given by Dr. Borlase in the Natural History of Cornwall, 
•we are not at present acquainted with ; but arc inclined 
to think the description might be taken from a dried 
example of the common Angler, which would assume 
the linear appearance he describes;— and the Zaieni Sole 
ot Borlase is also another fish we have never seen. 
I he author of the British Zoology introduces all the 
species abovementioned on the authority of Ray and Bor- 
lase, and it is not without regret we may add, has included 
others on less authentic obsci vation, The Trifurcated 
Hake ol this writer, communicated, as his Avork informs 
us, by the Rev. Mr. Hugh Davies, of Beaumaris, we 
have been enabled to testify, on the most indubitable 
authorit^^, is not in being;— the description Avas taken 
from a damaged skin of the forked Hake, which latter 
is also described by the same author, avIio thus con- 
stitutes two species of the same fish * The Beaumaris 
* Vide Donov.Tour of South Wales and Moninoulhshire ; wherem 
file circuinstiinces attending the origin of this error is detailed at Icneth 
cn the authority of the Ktv. .Mr, Hugh Davies. 
