SB 
PROCEEDINGS OF THE BRITISH ASSOCIATION. 
DWGreville thought it might be an object to procure cheap Vanilla in France* 
where they used so much, but he believed in England very little was consumed. 
Mr. Turner, of Manchester, then exhibited several specimens of rare insects 
from the Museum of the Manchester Natural History Society. They were 
described by the Rev. F. W. Hope, as consisting of a species of Lucanus from 
South Africa, another of the genus Cupes , a third a species of Danaus , and a 
fourth a rare insect belonging to a group he had distinguished by the name 
Dicromorina. 
Dr. Parnell read a paper “ On some new and rare species of British fishes.” 
The following is a list of the fishes he exhibited, and the localities from which 
they were obtained :— 
1. Motella cimbria ( Gadas cimbrius , Linn.). Frith of Forth, in June. 
2. Pagellus acarine. Frith of Forth. 
3. Raia chagrined (Rough Flapper). Frith of Forth, in May and June. 
4. Raia intermedia. Frith of Forth, in May. 
5. Trigla lucema. 
6. Monochirus minutus. 
7- Coitus scorpions. Frith of Forth. 
8. Platessa limaudioides. Coasts of Scotland and Devon ; common. 
9. Platessa pala. Frith of Forth, coast of Devon. 
10. Mugil chelo. Frith of Forth, coast of Devonshire, West of Scotland, and 
Berwick. 
11. Trigla gurnardus. From several specimens of this fish that he had seen, 
Dr. Parnell was inclined to refer Trigla Blochii of Yarrell, and Trigla 
cuculus of Jenyns and Bloch, to the young of this species. 
Mr. Jenyns stated that Dr. Parnell had confirmed his statement as far as 
Trigla Blochii was concerned. He thought the mode of distinguishing the 
species of Trigla by the form of the scales of the lateral line very important. 
Some general observations were then made by Messrs. Thompson, Yarrell, 
and Fox, on some of the statements made by Dr. Parnell. 
The next paper was by Mr. J. PXancock, “ On Falco Islandicus of authors,” 
and was illustrated by a specimen and several drawings. The author observed, 
that under the name Falco Islandicus , two distinct species had been included. 
He then pointed out the errors into which zoologists had fallen, from not having 
had sufficient opportunities of examining these birds in their native regions. The 
confusion on this subject appeared to have arisen from the changing nature of the 
plumage of these birds, the young of one species resembling the old of another in 
certain stages of their growth, and thus led naturalists to confound one with the 
other. The author having had opportunities of examining these birds, had come to 
South coast of Devon. 
