PROCEEDINGS OF UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. 365 NOTi:«9i 0>f TBIE FSSiMJS^ OF BEAUFORT IIARBOE:, NOKTIt C'AKOLBIVA. iSy DA\flI> S. JOKDAN Kud CI1AKI.ES 12. GILEEIIT. In tlie Proceedings of the Pliiladelpliia Academy of Natural Sciences for 1877, P13. 203-218, is a paiJer entitled "Notes on tlie IsTatural History of Fort Macon, K. C, and Vicinity (No. 3)," by Dr. H. C. Yarrow, whick treats of tbe species of fishes obtained by Drs. Cones and Yarrow in Beaufort Harbor and neigbboriug waters during the peiiod of tlieir residence at Fort Macon. During the past summer (1878), the ^Miters, accompanied by Prof. A. ^Y. Brayton and a partj' of students from Butler University, spent three weeks in the month of August at Beaufort, the chief business of the party being the collection of fishes. AVe obtained, in all, about seventy-five species, many of which are not included in Dr. Yarrow's list. For the x)uri)ose of making as complete a showing of the Ichthyology of the North Carolina coast as possible, we here include not only the species which we have ourselves. observed, but also those taken by Drs. Coues and Yarrow. Brief notes on the local habits or distribu-tion of each species are given, as well as occasional critical remarks on the nomenclature. The sequence and nomenclature are essentially as in Professor Gill's Catalogue of the Fishes of the East Coast of North America, 1873. The vernacular uauif s here given are onlv tliose used by the Beaufort fishermen. Family LOPHIID^. Genus LOPHIUS Linn. 1. Lophius piscatorius L. — AU-mouth. {Lophius cmericaniis Gill, 1. c.) Not seen alive; two sets of jaw-bones picked up on the beach below Cape Lookout. Said to be occasionally taken by the fishermen. Until some evidence other than the difference of habitat is offered to show that the American "Angler," Lophius amcricanus DeKay, is distinct from the European Lophius piscatorius L., it seems to us that the burden of proof is on the side of the doubtful species. It seems better to consider the two forms on opposite sides of the xVtlantic as identical until proved to be distinct, rather than distinct until proved to be identical. In the case of this and numerous other northern fishes of mde range. Dr. Gill (1. c), on the contrary, has "preferred to retain the names given to the American forms as distinct species, although he is inclined to belie\'e that they will eventually be foimd to be co-specific with other forms."
BioStor
