PLATE XXXVII. 
the scales upon the fins. Bloch has given an incomplete representa- 
tion of it also, his specimen not having the two canine teeth in the 
inferior jaw ; a circumstance which this author does not pass over m 
silence. He animadverts upon Pennant, for having represented two 
such teeth, observing that they were not found either in his own 
fish, in the figure of Ray, nor in that given by Duhamel ; and hence 
infers that Pennant is in an error. This remark of Bloch is 
equally vague, and contradictory, for Duhamel shews them very 
distinctly as well as Pennant ; and it is only evident that they were 
accidentally wanting in the specimen in Bloch’s collection, for in that 
which we possess they are perfectly distinct. 
I 
Neither Linnsus, nor Gmelin after him, speak of this species! 
perhaps they were unable to asccrtala its characters from Ray, an^ 
having never seen the fish, did not think proper to hazard any 
opinion concerning it. Bloch, who mentions this, assigns to it the 
specific name of Rail, in memory of Mr. Ray, who first introduced 
the species to our observation; a name, we feel it highly proper to 
retain : the character which Bloch has oflFered for its specific dis- 
tinction, with some addition, we have adopted likewise ; we agree 
with him that the imbricated scales on the fins, are a striking cha- 
racter of the species, at the same time that the canine teeth which 
were not visible in his specimen, are in our mind of too much con- 
sequence to remain unobserved.— dentex, Sparus Cpnodffn, 
&c. are furnished with canine teeth, but in those species they are 
situated in both jaws, and in other respects they are quite different 
from the toothed Gilt-head. Duhamel calls our fish La Castagnole, 
a title, it will be proper to apprise the reader, under which three 
distinct fishes are known in France ; the Castagnole of the Genoese 
and Sardinians, is another fish likewise. 
