Zoological Society. 501 
F.L.S., giving an account of a double variety of the Field Scabious, 
Scabiosa arvensis, L. (Knautia arvensis, Coult.), a specimen of which 
he presented to the Society. The specimen was gathered in a 
stubble-field at Norton in the county of Durham on the 29th of 
September, and was the only one seen with a double flower, all the 
other plants in the field presenting the ordinary flower of the species. 
The doubling consists in the enlargement of the inner florets to the 
same size as the outer ones in the ordinary flowers ; but the anthers 
and stamina of the former do not appear to have become abortive as 
in the outer enlarged florets, and as might have been expected from 
the similar change in the corolla. In Hooker's ' British Flora,' the 
species is characterized by the corolla of its outer florets having 
unequal and of its inner florets equal segments : in this double 
variety the segments of the inner florets are unequal like those of 
the outer. 
Mr. Westwood, F.L.S., exhibited a small branch of a Nelis d'hiver 
pear grown against a wall in the garden of Mr. Wilmot, Isleworth, 
covered with a great number of large, solid, woody, gall-like protu- 
berances caused by the punctures of a species of Aphis closely allied 
to the American blight, the twigs in this branch having been com- 
pletely stunted in their growth, and not exceeding an inch in length, 
the energy of the tree having been concentrated in the growth of the 
protuberances. Mr. Westwood pointed out the difl'erence between the 
real galls (sometimes quite hard and woody in their texture) caused 
by the punctures of insects and the deposition of eggs, and these 
pseudo-galls which did not enclose eggs, but were the result of 
the punctures of the proboscis of insects for obtaining an immediate 
supply of food. The latter are of great rarity, and Mr. Westwood 
had never seen any which could be compared in extent to the speci- 
men exhibited, which was moreover covered with a whitish powder 
discharged from the bodies of the Aphides, and with a great number 
of the skins shed by them during their transformations. 
Read a further continuation of Mr. Huxley's Memoir " On the 
Anatomy of the Diphj/dce," &c. 
ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY. 
May 22, 1849.— Harpur Gamble, Esq., M.D., in the Chair. 
On the British specimens of Regalecus. By J. E. Gray, 
Esq., F.R.S. &c. 
The occurrence of a specimen of Regalecus on the coast of North- 
umberland, which is now being exhibited in Regent-street, has in- 
duced me to communicate the following remarks which I have col- 
lected connected with the history of its former occurrence in this 
country, some of which appear to have escaped the researches of our 
British naturalists. 
Though the materials here referred to are mentioned by M. Valen- 
ciennes in the tenth volume of the * Histoire des Poissons,' the refer- 
502 
Zoological Society. 
ence is so indistinct and indefinite that it has not enabled British 
naturahsts to discover where they were to be seen. 
On a very accurate drawing of a fish of this genus, bound up with 
other notes on British fishes, at the end of a 4 to copy of Pennant's 
British Zoology of 1776, which is contained in the library of the late 
Sir Joseph Banks, now forming part of the library of the British 
Museum, is the following, the head of which is reduced two-thirds m 
the following figure : — 
"On Saturday the 23rd day of February, 1788, was caught near 
Newlyn Quay, on the sand at ebb-tide, a fish which measured in 
length 8 feet 4 inches, breadth 10 inches, and thickness 2 J inches ; 
weight 40 lbs/* 
The drawing is inscribed, by another hand, '^ Regalecus Glesne, 
Ascan. Icon. t. 1 1 ; Miiller, Z. D. n. 355. R. remipes, Nov. Act. 
Hafn. n. 414 ; " and on the margin there is added in another hand 
the following note : — 
**N.B. A gentleman who saw this fish informed Capt. Chemmhig 
(Chelnwyn ?) that the tail was not perfect, and supposed it was ori- 
ginally longer than is represented." 
The body of the fish is silvered, with obscure indications of darker 
cross-bands, and the fins are all salmon-coloured ; the first ray of the 
dorsal over the eyes is elongated and bent down over the front of the 
head, and each of the two ventral fins ends in an ovate radiated appen- 
dage. 
This figure, representing the first British example on record, is 
certainly the best and most trustworthy representation of the fish that 
I have seen. A reduced copy of this drawing is here given. 
Valenciennes, to whom a copy of this figure has been sent by 
Mrs. Lee, mentions it in the History of Fish, vol. x. p. 365, but has 
translated Newlyn Quay into " Necolyn Quay.'* 
Dr. Russell (Fishes of Coromandel, i. 29) observes: "In 1796 a 
fish of this genus was cast on shore in Cornwall, a drawing and de- 
scription of which were sent to Sir Joseph Banks. It has two ventral 
cirri, and in the crest of the head resembled the present subject more 
than anv of the others : the tail had been broken off." 
N Zoological Society, 503^ 
Shaw (Zool. iv. 1 98) observes : " It appears from a print published 
in the year 1798, that a specimen of this fish {Gymnetrus Hawkenii) 
was thrown on the coast of Cornwall in the month of February in the 
same year. Its length was 8 feet 6 inches, its breadth in the widest 
part 10^ inches, and its thickness 2 J inches. The tail in this speci- 
men was wanting ; the colour the same as in the specimen (of Gymne- 
trus Hawkenii) figured by Dr. Bloch." 
I have no doubt, as Valenciennes suspected (see Hist. Poiss. x. 
3/5), from comparing these accounts with the drawing in the edition 
of Pennant above quoted, and with Russell's and Shaw's notices, that 
they are from that authority, and that the two dates in the notes, and 
the length mentioned by Dr. Shaw, are mistakes of the copyist. I have 
not been able to find the engraving mentioned by Shaw, which was 
doubtless made from this drawing, though there is a slight variation 
in each of the items of the measurements given by the latter author. 
Could he have considered this drawing as a published print ? The 
writing is so beautifully executed that he might be deceived unless 
he examined it very carefully. 
Mr. Couch, in his paper on Cornish fishes, Linn. Trans, xiv. "Jl^ 
informs us, under 
" Ceil Conin. — This fish was drawn on shore in a net at Newlin 
(Newlyn) in this country in February 1791. The extremity of the 
tail was wanting ; the length of what remained was 8y feet, the depth 
10^ inches, thickness 2f inches, weight 40 lbs. A coloured drawing 
of this fish is in the possession of W. Rashleigh, Esq., F.L.S., of 
Menabilly." 
Mr. Couch has seen this drawing. A copy reduced to one-fourth 
its size is given by Mr. Yarrell in his excellent work on British Fishes, 
vol. ii. p. 221. 
I have great doubt if the fish mentioned by Mr. Couch is not also 
the same specimen as the one described as caught on 2^rd of February 
1788, as it is found in the same place, is the same size and weight, 
&c., and that the date is a mistake. The addition of the two ventral 
fins was probably a fancy of the artist, like the addition of the tail, 
the drawing of the fish sent to Sir Joseph Banks being without these 
fanciful embellishments. 
It has been supposed, because the copy of the drawing given by 
Mr. Yarrell is very like the figure of Gymnetrus Hawkenii in Bloch' s 
Hist. Ich. xii. t. 433, that the drawing of the Cornish fish was the 
orighi of Bloch' s figure ; but it is to be observed that Mr. Hawk en 
sent a specimen as well as a drawing of the fish he received from Goa ; 
that his specimen was only 2^ feet long, and the Cornish specimen 
S\ feet. See Cuvier, Hist. Poissons, x. 374. 
Dr. Shaw (Zool. iv. 197) informs us that the drawing of Gymnetrus 
Hawkenii was communicated by " J. Hawkins, Esq. ;" and he added, 
" I am assured by Mr. Hawkins that this is really the case (the tail 
being added by the draughtsman), the specimen from which the 
drawing was taken having been defective in that part." 
From this examination I conclude that these accounts are all from 
the specimen and figure in Pennant. 
504 
Zoological Society. 
In the same copy of Pennant's ' British Zoology ' occurs the follow- 
ing note and figure, which is here copied two-thirds the size : — ' 
" * York, March 29, *96. — On Friday last a curious and uncommon 
fish came on shore at Filey Bay, and was taken by four women ; they 
sold it to a man who brought it to this city ; it was 13| feet in length, 
rather more than one foot in depth, and not more than 3 inches in 
thickness. Its skin was smooth and of a silver hue : had no tail, and 
its fins were the colour of those of the roach or perch. It may be 
considered as a nondescript, neither Linnaeus, Pennant, or any other 
writers on Ichthyology having given any description of it.' 
" This paragraph is cut from the York Chronicle of last Thursday, 
and the enclosed I traced from a drawing by Dr. Burgh, who penned 
the paragraph and made the following notes on his drawing." — J. F. 
"13 feet long, 1 deep, 3 inches thick ; head 7 inches long ; eye 1| 
diam. ; no scales, but very small protuberances, silvered over like the 
swim of a herring ; these run the whole length in stripes, alternate 
with others which are bare, and of a light colour. 
" The dorsal fin runs the whole way from the head to the other 
end, at which there is no tail. The dorsal fin is red, like that of a 
roach or perch; 6 bronchial rays; dorsal fin 290 and 13 rays; the 
pectoral 12 ; ventral 1 ; no anal. No teeth ; a soft tongue. The face 
and inside of the mouth black. Anus 4 feet 9 inches from the head. 
Iris a silver-white. He ran on shore at Filey Bay, March 18, 1796 ; 
was seen by four women, who took him and sold him to a man who 
brought him to York, where on March 2 1 I saw him. Though there was 
then no caudal fin, it is not clear that he never had one, for there was 
an appearance of mutilation in its place. The two sides were precisely 
alike. The eye in the drawing is placed a little too low." — W.B. 
This description is mentioned by M. Valenciennes in his ' Histoire 
des Poissons,' x. 365, under the name of Gymnetrus Banksii ; nothing 
is said of the figures which accompanied the letter. I can see nothing 
Zoological Society. 505 
in the account or figures to induce me to believe that it is different 
from the Regalecus Glesne, or the specimen from Cornwall. 
Mr. Yarrell, in his letter to Mr. Whitehead, printed in Dr. Jacobs' s 
account of the Northumberland specimen, p. 10, gives the description 
of a specimen which was caught in March 1844, at Crovie, near Mac- 
duff, in Scotland, sent by Mr. John Marten of Elgin to Dr. George 
Johnston and Mr. Yarrell. 
It would therefore appear that the specimen from the coast of 
Northumberland is at least the fourth time that a fish of this genus 
has been recorded as found on the coast of Britain. 
From the comparison of the various descriptions and figures given 
by the English observers, and those given by Ascanius, Brunnich and 
Lindroth, I believe there is only a single species yet found in the 
North Sea, and it appears that that species occasionally comes as far 
south as the coast of Cornwall. 
The great distinction between Regalecus Glesne and R. Grillii is 
the number of the rays in the dorsal fin ; but as Valenciennes justly 
observes, that Ascanius' s figure represents more rays than he de- 
scribes the specimen to have had, and in this respect it agrees with 
the description of jK. Grillii and with the specimens which have since 
occurred, I think it probable that the number in the text is a mis- 
print. 
Ascanius represents the five longitudinal streaks mentioned in the 
description of the Filey specimen. 
Mr. Whitehead's specimen agrees with the one from Filey, in 
having the five convex longitudinal lines. These lines are shown in 
the painting made from the fish when more fresh, but they are not 
so distinct in the specimen in the fluid ; yet they have been rendered 
more visible than when I first saw it by some glass which had been 
put on the specimen to sink it in the fluid. 
The black bands so well marked in the painting of this fish were 
also observed in the specimen cast ashore at Crovie, near Macduff, in 
March 1 844, described by Mr. Marten, and in Gymnetrus Grillii of 
Lindroth; and they are indistinctly represented in the drawing of 
the Cornish specimen. 
The ventral fins in Mr. Marten's specimen "consisted of two fila- 
ments 3 feet in length ; they were fringed with a thin membrane on 
two sides, and had evidently been broken." 
This shows the affinity of the black-striped fish with the Glesne of 
Ascanius and the S. Grillii of Lindroth, and I have no doubt that 
the slight dilatation at the end of the ventral fins in his figure is a 
mere enlargement of the membranous fringes above described. 
The following appear to be the synonyma of this species : — 
Regalecus Glesne. 
1. Ophidium Glesne, Ascanius, Mem. Soc. Copenh. iii. 419. 
Regalecus Glesne, Ascanius, Icon. ii. t. 11. cop. E. M. t. 358 ; 
J. J. (J. Jacob), An account of the rare fish, &c. 8vo, 1849, 
figures Illustrated London News, June 2, 1849, p. 384 fig. 
Regalecus remipes, Brunnich in Nya Saml. iii. 414. t. 13. f. 4, 5 ; 
copied by Walbaum, t. 3. f. 4. 
506 Zoological Society. 
Gymneti'us remipes, Schneider, Syst. Ichth. 482. t. 88, altered 
from Ascanius; copied by Yarrell, Brit. Fish. 
Uegalec Glesne, Lacep. ii. 214, 215. 
Gymnetrus Jscanii, Shaw, Zool. iv. ii. 1. 1. cop. from Ascanius. 
Le Gymnetre Glesne, Valenciennes, Hist. Poissons, x. 365 & 366. 
From the figure of the Newlyn specimen. 
2. Gymnetrus Grillii, Lindroth, Kongl. Vetensk. Acad. Nva Handl. 
1798, 288. t. 8 (from a dry fish) ; Schneider, Syst. Icith. 482 ; 
Valenciennes, Hist. Poissons, x. 370. 
3. Le Gy^nnetrus Banksii, Valenciennes, Hist. Poissons, x. 365. 
From the letter respecting the Filey specimen. 
4. Ceil Conin = Gymnetrus Hawkenii, Couch, Trans. Linn. Soc. xiv. 
77. part.; Yarrell, Brit. Fish. 221. part. From the Newlyn 
specimen (not Bloch, Ich. xii. t. 423?). 
5. Gymnetrus Northumbricus (Hancock's MSS. ?), 1849. 
Gymnetrus ? Marten in Jacobs' s Account of Rare Fish, 1849, 
p. 10. 
6. Sea Serpent y Ladies' Newspaper, 12th May, 1849. 
M. Valencienes, by mistake, thinks that Ascanius described this 
fish first as Regalecus, and then as an Ophidium, but 1 766 comes 
before 1772. The specific name of Glesne is derived from the name 
of the place on which the fish was found, near Bergen in Norway. 
The generic name of Regalecus, characterized in 1772, has the un- 
doubted priority over Gymnetrus of Schneider, and therefore ought 
to be used ; neither are quite unexceptionable, the one being a mix- 
ture of Greek and Latin, and the latter as conveying a false cha- 
racter, for the fish has ventral fins ; but I think it is not desirable to 
change names which have once been used for such reasons, though 
it is well to avoid giving names having the first objection, and the 
second should always be avoided. 
The Banksian copy of Pennant is very valuable to the British zoo- 
logist, and contains, besides the figures and letters here referred to, 
some shorter notes, the titles of which I here give, as they may be 
of use to persons residing at a distance from the library. 
Vol. I. Aylmer Bourke Lambert, letter on the Irish Wolf Dog. 
P. 224. Note on Grouse. 
P. 346. Mr. Pearson of Newport Street, account of keeping Swal- 
lows through the winter. 
Letter from James Hervey of Manchester, on the arrival of 
Swallows. 
P. 352 List of indigenous Mammalia and Birds that are wanting 
to the British Museum, by W. E. Leach, M.D. 
The price of Heronshaws in 1556. / 
A Penman's List of the Fowls found in the East Fen. 
Vol. IL p. 357. Letter from T. J. Woodward of Walcot, respecting 
the Heron with the crest. 
Vol. III. p. 109. — 1. A figure of a short Sun-fish, inscribed " Por- 
trait of a Sun-fish for Sir Joseph Banks, Bart., from his obliged and 
humble serv* Richard Brocklesby." 
Zoological Society. 507 
P. 137.— 2. A beautiful drawing of a Launce, by " W. W. Ellis, 
ad viv. delin. et pinxt. 1779." 
P. 138. — 3. A letter from L. Morris, accompanied by a pen 
sketch of the 'Morris' Leptocephalus, copied from a blank page in 
Lewis Morris's Ray Synopsis, by Mr. Lloyd, at Aberystwith, 1786. 
This note is copied into the edition of ' Pennant's Zoology' for 1812, 
p. 215, where the editor observes : **The above memorandum is pre- 
served in the copy of the British Zoology in the valuable library of 
the President of the Royal Society in Soho Square." The editor 
does not notice any of the other papers in the Banksian copy of 
Pennant. 
P. 178. — 4. A note about the name of the Torse. 
P. 187. — 5. Sir William Musgrave's note accompanying a Spotted 
Goby and a young Angel Fish. 
P. 213. — C. Hugh Davies' reply to Donovan respecting the tri- 
furcated Hake, from the North Wales Gazette, March 1810. 
P. 213. — 7. Moses Griffith in reply to Donovan, from the Cam- 
brian, Dec. 30, 1809. 
P. 372. — 8. The description of three fish, accompanied by very 
good figures in India ink, probably by Colonel Montague (? ?). 
Viz. 1. Leptocephalus Morrissii. — I may observe, that on the con- 
tinent they apply this name to a species which is much longer and 
more slender than the one figured by Pennant and Yarrell, and Costa 
has given the name of L. candidissimus to the shorter British spe- 
cies ; we have both species from Costa in the British Museum. 
2. Ccepola rubescens. 
3. The Variegated Sole, Solea lingula. In the MSS. it is stated, 
"This fish is sometimes taken in Torbay in the trawling-nets. It 
differs at first sight from the common sole in the edges of the scales 
being strongly ciliated, and in wanting the numerous small beards 
that hang from the lower side of the head of the common sort." 
This appears to be the Red-back described from E. Hanmer's MSS. in 
the 1812 edition of Pennant, but there is no reference to this figure. 
9. The letter from J. F. respecting the fish from Filey Bay, 
R. Banksii of Valenciennes. 
10. The drawing oi Regalecus Glesne from Newlyn Quay. 
I may also mention, that in this copy of Pennant the plate 93, 
called Ophidium imberbe, Brit. Zool. App. iii., is marked in pencil, 
apparently by Dr. Solander, as being *' Murcena Anguilla." This 
probably explains why the figure is replaced in the edition of 1812 
by Montague's figure from the Wernerian Transactions, as mentioned 
by Yarrell, Brit. Fishes, 412 & 414, where these two figures are 
copied. 
Since this paper was read, there has appeared in the ' Annals of 
Natural History ' a full description of Mr. Whitehead's specimen, and 
an account of some other specimens found on other parts of the En- 
glish coast.