PROCEEDINGS OF THE BRITISH ASSOCIATION. 
95 
migrating. Trout, in company with the young of the Salmon, with the true Parr 
(Salmo salmUlus ) and varieties of the common fresh-water Trout. 
A series of admirably-prepared specimens were laid before the Section, the 
production of Dr. Parnell, in illustration of his and Sir Wm. Jardine’s remarks. 
Mr. Allis then read a paper “ On the toes of the African Ostrich,” for which 
see our present No., p. 68. 
Mr. Trevelyan exhibited a young living specimen of Coluber natrix. of Italian 
writers, which was evidently a different species from C. natrix of Britain; also a 
specimen of Polyodon folium, a fish from North America ; a small collection of 
insects ; and a new species of JJrtica gathered in the island of Elba. 
Dr. Charlton exhibited a specimen of Tetrao Rakkelhan of Temminck, and 
was inclined to consider it nothing more than a hybrid between the female 
Capercailzie and the Black Grous. In favour of this opinion, he stated that the 
female of this bird had not been discovered, and yet every year males were 
transmitted to England. Mr. Tunstall, on the authority of some old Scottish 
gentleman, had stated, that the hybrid bird as well as the Capercailzie was 
formerly met with in Scotland. This Dr. Charlton considered as an argument 
in favour of its being a hybrid, for were it otherwise, it would in all probability, 
being a much smaller bird, have survived the extirpation of the Capercailzie. 
Friday. 
Dr. Handyside, of Edinburgh, read a paper on a species of Sternoptyx. He 
proposed making a new family, Sternoptixinece. The present species he proposed 
to call S. ccelebes. The following diagram will give its position :— 
Osseous Fishes. 
Subdivision, Malacopteryyii Abdominales. 
Family 4.— a. Salmonidce. 
b. Sternoptixinece. 
Genus 2. Sternoptix. 
Species a. S. Hermani. 
(3. S. ccelebes. 
Genus 2. S. Olfersii. 
The paper was accompanied by a dissected specimen and several drawings. 
The author stated that he was indebted to Dr. Bichardson for the arrangement 
in the above analysis. 
Mr. Forbes then read a paper “ On the distribution of the terrestrial 
Pidmonifercz in Europe.” After alluding to the importance of the subject of 
geographical distribution, and its almost entire neglect, he stated, with regard to 
the distribution of the Pulmoniferce , that in Europe they might be divided into 
five groups. The first of these divisions comprehends Scandinavia, Finland, 
