ue : if
i

fs)
brs

i

oat

Ks
he’
¢

re

SCIENCE, SKETCHES

a 1 Y

“SCIENCE SKETCHES

BY

DAVID STARR JORDAN

MAY 07 1987
LIBRARIES

CHICAGO
A. C. MCCLURG AND COMPANY
1888

COPYRIGHT
By. A. C: McCrurG AND Co.
A.D. 1887.

Lo ey .
STEJNEGER 7

COLLECTION

PRE A CE,

«tao volume is made up of a number
of unconnected sketches and addresses,
coming more or less distinctly under the
eas) OF Popular Scrence.” Three ot them
—the paper on “ The Dispersion of Fresh-
Water Fishes,’ the address on “ Darwin,”
and the paper on “The Evolution of the
College Curriculum” — are here published
for the first time. The others have appeared
in various periodicals. All the articles have
been freely retouched, and some of them en-
tirely rewritten. The author wishes to express
his obligations to Messrs. D. Appleton & Co.,
foo. ©. Cassino & Co., and to) the Century
Company for permission to reprint articles
which have appeared in the “ Popular Science
Monthly,” in the “Standard Natural History,”
and in “St. Nicholas.”
raya
UNIVERSITY OF INDIANA,

BLOOMINGTON, August, 1887.

CO) ENTS.

CHAPTER PAGE
VE otORY OF A SALMON ie Gk es 9

Eo hOMMNy PVA TERS) yok (ac tte ae 6 ea 20
Bie Gap SAE MON FAMILY (30 6 20S at 2!) Bg

IV. THE DISPERSION OF FRESH-WATER FISHES 83

V. THE NOMENCLATURE OF AMERICAN BIRDS 133

Ves eiNer CCENTRIC NATURALIST... (0 2.) 6", 143
Vit We emEAN PISHPRMAN 46) /. oo eo S47 A AGO
“LN RES ESS S18 OCT OSE gies GP ee CMR Ga Ot
LX.) he Otem Ores. STONE). te) 3S 2e 4) FOO
xX. AN ASCENT OF THE MATTERHORN Le a a eS

XI. THE EVOLUTION OF THE COLLEGE CUR-

RCD eae ee Whew s oy eS belts Sop cae, sd eee

WP PEN DIX.

Mist OF SEIENTINIC- PAPERS J 6... fe % se ew 263

SCIENCE SKETCHES.

HE STORY): OF A SALMON.

N the realm of the Northwest Wind, on the
boundary-line between the dark fir-forests and
the sunny plains, there stands a mountain,—a
great white cone two miles and a half in perpen-
dicular height. On its lower mile the dense fir-
woods cover it with never-changing green; on its
next half-mile a lighter green of grass and bushes
gives place in winter to white; and on its upper-
most mile the snows of the great ice age still
linger in unspotted purity. The people of Wash-
ington Territory say that their mountain is the
great “ King-pin of the Universe,” which shows
that even in its own country Mount Tacoma is
not without honor.

Flowing down from the southwest slope of
Mount Tacoma is a cold, clear river, fed by the
melting snows of the mountain. Madly it hastens
down over white cascades and beds of shining
sands, through birch-woods and belts of dark firs,
to mingle its waters at last with those of the great
Columbia. This river is the Cowlitz; and on its
bottom, not many years ago, there lay half buried

IO SCIENCE SKETCHES,

in the sand a number of little orange-colored
globules, each about as large as a pea. These
were not much in themselves, but great in their
possibilities. In the waters above them little
suckers and chubs and prickly sculpins strained
their mouths to draw these globules from the
sand, and vicious-looking crawfishes picked them
up with their blundering hands and examined
them with their telescopic eyes. But one, at
least, of the globules escaped their curiosity, else
this story would not be worth telling. The sun
shone down on it through the clear water, and the
ripples of the Cowlitz said over it their incanta-
tions, and in it at last awoke a living being. It
was a fish, —a curious little fellow, not half an inch
long, with great, staring eyes, which made almost
half his length, and with a body so transparent
that he could not cast a shadow. He was a little
salmon, a very little salmon; but the water was
good, and there were flies and worms and little
living creatures in abundance for him to eat, and
he soon became a larger salmon. Then there were
many more little salmon with him, some larger
and some smaller, and they all had a merry time.
Those who had been born soonest and had grown
largest used to chase the others around and bite
off their tails, or, still better, take them by the
heads and swallow them whole; for, said they,
“even young salmon are good eating.” ‘ Heads
I win, tails you lose,’ was their motto. Thus,
what was once two small salmon became united
into a single larger one, and the process of ‘ad-
dition, division, and silence”’ still went on.

THE STORY OF A SALMON. II

By-and-by, when all the salmon were too large
to be swallowed, they began to grow restless.
They saw that the water rushing by seemed to
be in a great hurry to get somewhere, and it was
somehow suggested that its hurry was caused by
something good-to eat at the other end of its
course. Then they all started down the stream,
salmon-fashion, — which fashion is to get into the
current, head up-stream, and thus to drift backward
as the river sweeps along.

Down the Cowlitz River the salmon went for a
day and a night, finding much to interest them
which we need not know. At last they began to
grow hungry; and coming near the shore, they saw
an angle-worm of rare size and beauty floating in
an eddy of the stream. Quick as thought one of
them opened his mouth, which was well filled with
teeth of different sizes, and put it around the angle-
worm. Quicker still he felt a sharp pain in his.
gills, followed by a smothering sensation, and in
an instant his comrades saw him rise straight into
the air. This was nothing new to them; for they
often leaped out of the water in their games of
hide-and-seek, but only to come down again with
a loud splash not far from where they went out.
But this one never came back, and the others went
on their course wondering.

At last they came to where the Cowlitz and the
Columbia join, and they were almost lost for a
time; for they could find no shores, and the bottom
and the top of the water were so far apart. Here
they saw other and far larger salmon in the deepest
part of the current, turning neither to the right nor

iz SCIENCE SKETCHES.

to the left, but swimming right on up-stream just
as rapidly as they could. And these great salmon
would not stop for them, and would not lie and float
with the current. They had no time to talk, even
in the simple sign-language by which fishes express
their ideas, and no time to eat. They had im-
portant work before them, and the time was short.
So they went on up the river, keeping their great
purposes to themselves; and our little salmon and
his friends from the Cowlitz drifted down the
stream.

By-and-by the water began to change. It grew
denser, and no longer flowed rapidly along; and
twice a day it used to turn about and flow the other
way. Then the shores disappeared, and the water
began to have ‘a different and peculiar flavor,—a
flavor which seemed to the salmon much richer and
more inspiring than the glacier-water of their native
Cowlitz. There were many curious things to see,
—crabs with hard shells and savage faces, but so
sood when crushed and swallowed! Then there
were luscious squid swimming about; and, to a
salmon, squid are like ripe peaches and cream.
There were great companies of delicate sardines
and herring, green and silvery, and it was such
fun to chase and capture them! ‘Those who eat
sardines packed in oil by greasy fingers, and
herrings dried in the smoke, can have little idea
how satisfying it is to have a meal of them, plump
and sleek and silvery, fresh from the sea.

Thus the salmon chased the herrings about, and
had a merry time. Then they were chased about
in turn by great sea-lions, —— swimming monsters

THE STORY OF A SALMON. 13

with huge half-human faces, long thin whiskers, and
blundering ways. The sea-lions liked to bite out
the throat of a salmon, with its precious stomach
full of luscious sardines, and then to leave the rest
of the fish to shift for itself. And the seals and
the herrings scattered the salmon about, till at last
the hero of our story found himself quite alone,
with none of his own kind near him. But that
did not trouble him much, and he went on his
own way, getting his dinner when he was hungry,
which was all the time, and then eating a little
between meals for his stomach’s sake.

So it went on for three long years; and at the
end of this time our little fish had grown to be a
great, fine salmon of twenty-two pounds’ weight,
shining like a new tin pan, and with rows of the
loveliest round black spots on his head and back
and tail. One day, as he was swimming about, idly
chasing a big sculpin with a head so thorny that he
never was swallowed by anybody, all of a sudden
the salmon noticed a change in the water around
him. |

Spring had come again, and the south-lying
snow-drifts on the Cascade Mountains once more
felt that the “ earth was wheeling sunwards.” The
cold snow waters ran down from the mountains and
into the Columbia River, and made a freshet on the
river. The high water went far out into the sea,
and out in the sea our salmon felt it on his gills.
He remembered how the cold water used to feel
in the Cowlitz when he was a little fish. In a
blundering, fishy fashion he thought about it; he
wondered whether the little eddy looked as it used

14 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

to look, and whether caddis-worms and young
mosquitoes were really as sweet and tender as he
used to think they were. Then he thought some
other things; but as the salmon’s mind is located
in the optic lobes of his brain, and ours is in a dif-
ferent place, we cannot be quite certain what his
thoughts really were.

What our salmon did, we know. He did what
every grown salmon in the ocean does when he
feels the glacier-water once more upon his gills.
He became a changed being. He spurned the
blandishment of soft-shelled crabs. The pleasures
of the table and of the chase, heretofore his only
delights, lost their charms for him. He turned
his course straight toward the direction whence
the cold water came, and for the rest of his life
never tasted a mouthful of food. He moved on
toward the river-mouth, at first playfully, as though
he were not really certain whether he meant any-
thing after all. Afterward, when he struck the full
current of the Columbia, he plunged straightfor-
ward with an unflinching determination that had
in it something of the heroic. When he had passed
the rough water at the bar, he was not alone. His
old neighbors of the Cowlitz, and many more from
the Clackamas and the Spokan and Des Chites
and Kootanie,—a great army of salmon, — were
with him. In front were thousands pressing on,
and behind them were thousands more, all moved
by a common impulse which urged them up the
Columbia.

They were all swimming bravely along where the
current was deepest, when suddenly the foremost

THE STORY OF A SALMON. 15

felt something tickling like a cobweb about their
noses and under their chins. They changed their
course a little to brush it off, and it touched
their fins as well. Then they tried to slip down
with the current, and thus leave it behind. But,
no! the thing, whatever it was, although its touch
was soft, refused to let go, and held them like a
fetter. The more they struggled, the tighter be-
came its grasp, and the whole foremost rank of the
salmon felt it together; for it was a great gill-net,
a quarter of a mile long, stretched squarely across
the mouth of the river.

By-and-by men came in boats, and hauled up the
gill-net and the helpless salmon that had become
entangled in it. They threw the fishes into a pile
in the bottom of the boat, and the others saw them
no more. We that live outside the water know
better what befalls them, and we can tell the story
which the salmon could not.

All along the banks of the Columbia River, from
its mouth to nearly thirty miles away, there is a
succession of large buildings, looking like great
barns or warehouses, built on piles in the river,
high enough to be out of the reach of floods.
There are thirty of these buildings, and they are
called canneries. Each cannery has about forty
boats, and with each boat are two men and a long
gill-net. These nets fill the whole river as with
a nest of cobwebs from April to July, and to
each cannery nearly a thousand great salmon are
brought every day. These salmon are thrown in a
pile on the floor; and Wing Hop, the big Chinaman,
takes them one after another on the table, and with

16 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

a great knife dexterously cuts off the head, the tail,
and the fins; then with a sudden thrust he removes
the intestines and the eggs. The body goes into a
tank of water; and the head is dropped into a box
on a flat-boat, and goes down the river to be
made into salmon oil. Next, the body is brought
to another table; and Quong Sang, with a machine
like a feed-cutter, cuts it into pieces each just as
long as a one-pound can. Then Ah Sam, with a
butcher-knife, cuts these pieces into strips just as
wide as the can. Next Wan Lee, the ‘‘China boy,”
brings down a hundred cans from the loft where the
tinners are making them, and into each can puts a
spoonful of salt. It takes just six salmon to fill a
hundred cans. Then twenty Chinamen put the
pieces of meat into the cans, fitting in little strips
to make them exactly full. Ten more solder up
the cans, and ten more put the cans into boiling
water till the meat is thoroughly cooked, and five
more punch a little hole in the head of each can to
let out the air. Then they solder them up again,
and little girls paste on them bright-colored labels
showing merry little cupids riding the happy salmon
up to the cannery door, with Mount Tacoma and
Cape Disappointment in the background; and a
legend underneath says that this is ‘“ Booth’s,” or
‘“ Badollet’s Best,’ or “Hume's,” or “ Clark's,” or
“Kinney’s Superfine Salt Water Salmon.” Then
the cans are placed in cases, forty-eight in a case,
and five hundred thousand cases are put up every
year. Great ships come to Astoria, and are loaded
_with them; and they carry them away to London
and San Francisco and Liverpool and New York

THE STORY OF A SALMON. IF

and Sidney and Valparaiso; and the man at the
corner grocery sells them at twenty cents a can.
All this time our salmon is going up the river,
eluding one net as by a miracle, and soon having
need of more miracles to escape the rest; passing
by Astoria on a fortunate day, — which was Sunday,
the day on which no man may fish if he expects to
sell what he catches, —till finally he came to where
nets were few, and, at last, to where they ceased al-
together. But there he found that scarcely any of
his many companions were with him; for the nets
cease when there are no more salmon to be caught
in them. So he went on, day and night, where the
water was deepest, stopping not to feed or loiter on
the way, till at last he came to a wild gorge, where
the great river became an angry torrent, rushing
wildly over a huge staircase of rocks. But our
hero did not falter; and summoning all his forces,
he plunged into the Cascades. The current caught
him and dashed him against the rocks. A whole
row of silvery scales came off and glistened in the
water like sparks of fire, and a place on his side
became black-and-red, which, for a salmon, is the
same as being black-and-blue for other people.
His comrades tried to go up with him; and one
lost his eye, one his tail, and one had his lower
jaw pushed back into his head like the joint of a
telescope. Again he tried to surmount the Cas-
cades; and at last he succeeded, and an Indian on
the rocks above was waiting to receive him. But
the Indian with his spear was less skilful than he
was wont to be, and our hero escaped, losing only

a part of one of his fins; and with him came one
2

18 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

other, and henceforth these two pursued their
journey together.

Now a gradual change took place in the looks
of our salmon. In the sea he was plump and
round and silvery, with delicate teeth in a sym-
metrical mouth. Now his silvery color disap-
peared, his skin grew slimy, and the scales sank
into it; his back grew black, and his sides turned
red, — not a healthy red, but a sort of hectic flush.
He grew poor; and his back, formerly as straight
as need be, now developed an unpleasant hump at
the shoulders. His eyes — like those of all enthu-
siasts who forsake eating and sleeping for some
loftier aim — became dark and sunken. His sym-
metrical jaws grew longer and longer, and meeting
each other, as the nose of an old man meets his
chin, each had to turn aside to let the other pass.
His beautiful teeth grew longer and longer, and
projected from his mouth, giving him a savage
and wolfish appearance, quite at variance with his
real disposition. For all the desires and ambitions
of his nature had become centred into one. We
may not know what this one was, but we know that
it was a strong one; for it had led him on and on,
—past the nets and horrors of Astoria; past the
dangerous Cascades; past the spears of Indians;
through the terrible flume of the Dalles, where
the mighty river is compressed between huge
rocks into a channel narrower than a village
street; on past the meadows of Umatilla and
the wheat-fields of Walla Walla; on to where the
great Snake River and the Columbia join; on up
the Snake River and its eastern branch, till at last

THE. STORY OF A SALMON. ie)

he reached the foot of the Bitter Root Mountains
in the Territory of Idaho, nearly a thousand miles
from the ocean which he had left in April. With
him still was the other salmon which had come
with him through the Cascades, handsomer and
smaller than he, and, like him, growing poor and
ragged and tired.

At last, one October afternoon, our finny travel-
lers came together to a little clear brook, with a
bottom of fine gravel, over which the water was
but a few inches deep. Our fish painfully worked
his way to it; for his tail was all frayed out, his
muscles were sore, and his skin covered with un-
sightly blotches. But his sunken eyes saw a ripple
in the stream, and under it a bed of little pebbles
and sand. So there in the sand he scooped out
with his tail a smooth round place, and his com-
panion came and filled it with orange-colored eggs.
Then our salmon came back again; and softly cov-
ering the eggs, the work of their lives was done,
and, in the old salmon fashion, they drifted tail
foremost down the stream.

Next morning, a settler in the Bitter Root re-
gion, passing by the brook near his house, noticed
that a “ dog-salmon”’ had run in there, and seemed
“mighty nigh tuckered out.” So he took a hoe,
and wading into the brook rapped the fish on the
head with it, and carrying it ashore threw it to the
hogs. But the hogs had a surfeit of salmon-meat;
so they ate only the soft parts, leaving the head
untouched. And a wandering naturalist found it
there, and sent it to the United States Fish Com-
mission to be identified. Thus it came to me.

20 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

JOHNNY DARTERS!

NY one who has ever been a boy and can
remember back to the days of tag-alders,
yellow cowslips, and an angle-worm on a pin-hook,
will recall an experience like this: You tried some
time to put your finger on a little fish that was
lying, apparently asleep, on the bottom of the
stream, half hidden under a stone or a leaf, his
tail bent around the stone as if for support against
the force of the current. You will remember that
when your finger came near the spot where he was
lying, the bent tail was straightened, and you saw
the fish again resting, head up-stream, a few feet
away, leaving you puzzled to know whether you
had seen the movement or not. You were trying
to catch a Johnny Darter. Nothing seems easier,
but you did not do it.

Having by well-understood stratagem succeeded
where you failed, allow us to give you that ac-
quaintance which he so deftly declined.

In all clear streams from Maine to Mexico the
Johnny Darters are found; and the boy who does
not know them has missed one of the real pleas-
ures of a boy’s life. All of them are very little
fishes, — some not more than two inches long, and

1 The original version of this paper was the joint work of the
late Professor Herbert Edson Copeland and the writer. — D. 5S. J.

JOHNNY DARTERS. 2I

the very largest but six or eight. But small though
they are, they are the most interesting in habits,
the most graceful in form, and many of them the
most brilliant in color of all fresh-water fishes.
The books call them “ Darters; ” for one of the first
species known was named Boleosoma, and that in
Greek means “ dart-body,” —a name most appro-
priate to them all. The realistic dwellers in the
Ohio Valley call some of them “ Hog-fish,” and
the boys call them “Johnnies.” Certainly the
boys ought to know, — and Johnnies they are, and
Darters they are; so Johnny Darters they shall
be. Their first introduction to science was in 1819,
when Rafinesque gave to them their scientific
name of Etheostoma. This name seems to mean
“strainer-mouth;” but the “eccentric naturalist,”
whose peculiar use of the Greek language was not
the least of his eccentricities, says that it means
‘various-mouth,” because no two of those he
knew! have the mouth alike. But whatever it
may mean, L¢hkeostoma is their name, and Rafi-
nesque their godfather; and we may call them
Johnnies for short.

Rafinesque said of the Johnnies that he knew
“they are good to eat fried.” I suppose that
he had tried them; but we have not. We should
as soon think of filling our pan with wood-warblers
as to make a meal of them. The good man goes
a-fishing not for “ pot-luck,” but to let escape “the
Indian within him.”

The Johnny Darter deserves our especial atten-

1 These were Etheostoma flabellare, Percina caprodes, and Diple-
sion blennioides.

22 SCIENCE SKATCHES.

tion in this Centennial year, for he is altogether an
American product. He has all that ardent desire
for perfect freedom that is supposed to be native
to this continent. Unless all appearance of cap-
tivity be concealed in a well-kept aquarium, he
will quickly lie on the bottom, dead. Here, at
the beginning (for much as we may regret the
fact, the death of some individual must precede
our acquaintance with the group, and even to some
extent with the individual himself), we observe
two noteworthy facts: the fish in dying does not
turn over,and does not rise to the surface. On
dissection, we find that the air-bladder is only
rudimentary, being structurally, but not function-
ally, present,—a distinction not without meaning
in these days of evolutionary hypotheses. If our
tank be so arranged that the conditions are nearly
natural, there being an abundance of stones and
weeds on the bottom, our Johnnies will cheerfully
live with us, and we shall be ready to study their
individual peculiarities, or, as Boyesen’s “ Scientific
Vagabond ” would have said, their ‘‘ psychology.”

For it must be known that while all fish are fish,
they are so only as all men are men. The chil-
dren of one family are not more unlike one another
than the fishes of one brood might be if the sickly
ones and the lazy ones were as carefully guarded
as are ours. As it is, they have their individuality.
One is constantly darting over and among the

stones, never resting, moving his head from side
to side when his body is for a moment still. An-
other will lie for hours motionless under a stone,
moving only for a few inches when pushed out

SOHNNY DARTERS. 23

with a stick. These peculiarities of temperament
are important factors in the problem of life; and
from such differences under varying conditions,
may have resulted forms which we now designate
as different species.

But we must leave these general questions for
- the present, and tell the story of the Johnny Dart-
ers that live in our aquarium.!

First of these in size and therefore in dignity
comes the Log Perch or Hog-fish (Percina ca-
prodes Rafinesque). This is the giant of the
family,—the most of a fish, and therefore the
least of a darter. It may be readily known by its
zebra-like colors. Its hue is pale olive, — silvery
below, darker above. On this ground-color are
about fifteen black vertical bars or incomplete
rings, alternating with as many shorter bars which
reach only half-way down the side. The hind-
most bar forms a mere spot on the base of the
tail, and there are many dots and speckles on the
fins. The body is long and slender, spindle-shaped,
and firm and wiry to the touch. The head is flat
on top, and tapers into a flat-pointed snout which is
squared off at the end like the snout of a pig; and
this resemblance is heightened by the form of the
small mouth underneath it. From this pig-like
snout has come the scientific name caprodes.
This is a translation of the older name of ‘ hog-
fish,” which Rafinesque heard applied to it in his
time, and which is still used in the same regions.

Percina reaches a length of six or eight inches,

1 At Indianapolis, Indiana. All the species here mentioned, and
some others, are found in the White River, near Indianapolis.

24 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

and it may readily be caught on a small hook
baited with a worm. We often meet an urchin
with two or three of them strung through the gills
on a forked stick, along with “ red-eyes,” ‘ stone-
toters,” ‘‘horny-heads,” and other “ boys’ fish.”
At such times we generally buy the hog-fish for a
cent, cut it open to look at the air-bladder, which
the books say it does not have, and then lay it
away with the rest of our treasures in the bottle
of alcohol. We find Perczva usually in rapid and
rather deep water,—as deep as we can wade in
when seining in hip-boots. We rarely find them
small enough for ordinary aquarium purposes; and
the living specimen before us, though wonderfully
quick and graceful in its movements, has shown
little that is noteworthy, save his courage, his fond-
ness for angle-worms, and a possible disposition to
bury himself in the sand. There is something in
the expression of his face, as he rests on his “ hands
and feet” on a stone, that is remarkably lizard-
like, suggesting the Blue-tailed Skink (LAusmeces
fasciatus).

We next come to the fine gentleman of the
family, the Black-sided Darter (//adropterus aspro
Cope and Jordan). This one we may know by its
colors. The ground hue is asalmon yellow; the
back is regularly and beautifully marbled with black
in a peculiar and handsome pattern. On the sides,
from the head to the tail, runs a jet-black band,
which is widened at intervals into rounded spots
which contrast sharply with the silvery color of the
belly; or we may say that on each side is a chain
of confluent round black blotches. Sometimes

FOHNNY DARTERS. 25

the fishes seem to fade out; these blotches grow
pale, and no longer meet; but in an instant they
may regain their original form and shade. This
latter change can be induced by the offer of food,
and it is of course due to muscular action on the
scales which cover the darker pigment. A male
in our aquarium underwent almost instantly an en-
tire change of coloration upon the introduction of a
female fish of the same species recognized by him
as his affinity. Although the two have been to-
gether for some weeks, the novelty has not yet
worn off; and although his colors vary much from
one hour to another, he has never yet quite re-
verted to his original hues. The form of the black-
sided darter is more graceful than that of any
other, and his movements have little of that angu-
lar jerkiness which characterizes his relatives.

The fins of Hadrcpterus, like those of Perczna,
are long and large, the number of dorsal spines
being about fourteen. A notable peculiarity in
both species is the presence of a row of shields, or
enlarged scales, along the middle line of the abdo-
men. These may help to protect that part from
the friction of the stony bottom. They seem to
be shed sometimes; but when or why this happens
we do not know. AHadropterus delights in clear
running water, and may be found in most streams
south and west of New York. It is especially de-
sirable for aquaria, being hardier than any other
fish as pretty, and prettier than any other fish as
hardy, and withal with “a way of his own,” as an
Irish laborer, Barney Mullins, once said to us of
Thoreau.

26 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

One of the most simply beautiful of all fishes is
the Green-sided Darter (Dzplesion blennioides Rafi-
nesque). He is not, like the Peczlichthys, an ani-
mated rainbow; but he has the beauty of green
grass, wild violets, and mossy logs. As we watch
him in the water, with his bright blended colors
and gentle ways, once more, with Old Izaak, “we
sit on cowslip banks, hear the birds sing, and pos-
sess ourselves in as much quietness as the silent
silver streams which we see glide so quietly by us.”
During the ordinary business of the year Dzple-
sion, like most sensible fishes and men, dresses
plainly. It is not easy to get time for contempla-
tion when the streams are low and food is scarce.
Besides, a plain coat may ward off danger as well
as facilitate attack. At all times, however, he may
be known by these marks: the fins are all large;
the back is covered with zigzag markings, while
on the lower part of the sides are eight or nine
qw-shaped olive spots. These are more or less con-
nected above, and sometimes form a wavy line.
The eyes are prominent; the snout is very short
and rounded; while the little inferior mouth is
puckered up as if for saying ‘ prunes and prisms,
prunes and prisms.” But when the first bluebirds
give warning by their shivering and bodiless notes
that spring is coming, then Dzpleszon puts on his
wedding-clothes, and becomes in fact the green-
sided darter. The dorsal fins become of a bright
erass-green, with a scarlet band at the base of each ;
the broad anal has a tinge of the deepest emerald;
while every spot and line upon the side has turned
from an undefined olive to a deep rich green, such

JOHNNY DARTERS. 27

as is scarcely found elsewhere in the animal world
excepting on the heads of frogs. The same tint
shines out on the branching rays of the caudal fin,
and may be seen struggling through the white of
the belly. The blotches nearest the middle of the
back become black, and thickly sprinkled every-
where are little shiny specks of a clear bronze-
orange. In the aquarium Dzflesion is shy and
retiring, — too much of a fine lady to scramble for
angle-worms or to snap at the “ bass-feed.” She
is usually hidden among the plants, or curled up
under an arch of stones or in a geode.

We never tired of watching the little Johnny, or
Tessellated Darter (Loleosoma nigrum Rafinesque).
Although our earliest aquarium friend, — and the
very first specimen showed us by a rapid ascent
of the river-weed how “a Johnny could climb
trees,’ — he has still many resources which we
have never learned. Whenever we try to catch
him with the hand, we begin with all the uncer-
tainty that characterized our first attempts, even
if we have him in a two-quart pail. We may know
him by his short fins, his first dorsal having but
nine spines, and by the absence of all color save a
soft yellowish brown, which is freckled with darker
markings. The dark brown on the sides is ar-
ranged in seven or eight w-shaped marks, below
which are a few flecks of the same color. Cover-
ing the sides of the back are the wavy markings
and dark specks which have given the name of the
“ Tessellated Darter; ” but Aoleosoma is a braver
name, and we even prefer ‘“ Boly” for short. In
the spring the males have the head jet-black; and

28 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

this dark color often extends on the back part of
the body, so that the fish looks as if he had been
taken by the tail and dipped into a bottle of ink.
But with the end of the nuptial season, this color
disappears, and the fish regains his normal strawy
hue.

The head in Boleosoma resembles that of Dzple-
ston ; but the habit of leaning forward over a stone,
resting on the front fins, gives a physiognomy even
more frog-like. His actions are, however, rather
bird-like; for he will strike attitudes like a tufted
titmouse, and he flies rather than swims through
the water. He will, with much perseverance, push
his body between a plant and the side of the aqua-
rium, and balance himself on the slender stem.
Crouching cat-like before a snail-shell, he will snap
off the horns which the unlucky owner pushes tim-
idly out. But he is often less dainty, and seizing
the animal by the head, he dashes the shell against
the glass or a stone until he pulls the body out or
breaks the shell. Boly, alas! is the “ Quaker of
our aquarium ” only in appearance.

Gayest of all the darters, and indeed the gaudiest
of all fresh-water fishes, is the Rainbow Darter
(Pecilichthys ceruleus Storer). This is a little fish,
never more than three inches long, and usually
about two. Everywhere, throughout the northern
parts of the Mississippi Valley, it makes its home
in the ripples and shallows of the rivers and in the
shady retreats of all the little brooks. The male
fish is greenish above, with darker blotches, and
its sides are variegated with oblique bands alter-
nately of indigo-blue and deep orange, the orange

JOHNNY DARTERS. 29

often edged with patches of white. The cheeks
are deep blue, the breast deep orange; while the
_expanded fins are gorgeous in scarlet, indigo, and
crimson. The female, as is usually the case when
the male of the species is resplendent, is plainly
colored, —a speckly green, with no trace of blue
or orange.

When the War of the Rebellion broke out, there
were some good people who were anxiously look-
ing for some sign or omen, that they might know
on which side the “stars in their courses”’ were
fighting. It so happened that in a little brook in
Indiana, called Clear Creek, some one caught a
rainbow darter. This fish was clothed in a new
suit of the red, white, and blue of his native land,
in the most unmistakably patriotic fashion. There
were some people who had never seen a darter
before, and who knew no more of the fishes in
their streams than these fishes knew of them, by
whom the coming of this little ‘‘soldier-fish” into
their brooks was hailed as an omen of victory. Of
course, these little fishes had really “always been
there.” They were there when America was dis-
covered and for a long time before, but the people
had not seen them. The warblers lived, you re-
member, in Spalding’s woods at Concord; but
Spalding did not know that they were there, and
they had no knowledge of Spalding. So with the
darters in Spalding’s brooks. Still, when the day
comes when history shall finally recount all the
influences which held Indiana to her place in the
Union, shall not, among greater things, this least
of little fishes receive its little meed of praise?

30 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

Pecilichthys is a chubby little fish, as compared
with the other darters. In its movements it is
awkward and ungraceful, though swift and savage
as a pike. One of the mildest of its tricks which
we have noticed, is this. It would gently put its
head over a stone and catch a water-boatman by
one of its swimming legs, release it, catch it again
and again release it, until at last the boatman, evi-
dently much annoyed, swam away out of its reach.
It will follow to the surface of the water a piece of
meat suspended bya string. It is more alert in
discovering this than a hungry sunfish or rock-
bass, and it can be led around like a pet lamb
by a thread to which is fastened a section of a
worm.

A more beautiful fish than this — beyond ques-
tion the handsomest of them all—is the Blue-
breasted Darter (Vothonotus camurus Cope). It is
a deep olive-green little fish, sprinkled over with
dots of carmine like a brook trout. Its breast is of a
deep ultramarine blue, and its fins gayly variegated
with blue, yellow, and crimson. But we hardly
learned to know it as an aquarium acquaintance;
for we found it but twice, both times in the clearest
of water, and our specimens never survived con-
finement more than two or three hours. We can
only say of their habits that they died where other
darters lived, and that before they died all other
fishes seemed cheap and common beside them.

The darter of darters is the Fan-tail (Z¢heostoma
fiabellare Rafinesque). MHardiest, wiriest, wariest
of them all, it is the one which is most expert in,
catching other creatures, and the one which most

JOHNNY DARTERS. 31

surely evades your clutch. You can catch a
weasel asleep when you can put your finger on
one of these. It is a slim, narrow, black, pirate-
rigged little fish, with a long pointed head, anda
projecting, prow-like lower jaw. It carries no flag,
but is colored like the rocks, among which it lives.
It is dark brown in hue, with a dusky spot on each
scale, so that the whole body seems covered with
lengthwise stripes; and these are further relieved
by cross-bands of the same color. Its fins, espe-
cially the broad fan-shaped caudal, are likewise
much checkered with spots of black. The spines
of the dorsal fin are very low; and each of these in
the male ends in a little fleshy pad of a rusty-red
color, the fish’s only attempt at ornamentation.
The fan-tail darter chooses the coldest and swift-
est waters; and in these, as befits his form, he leads
an active, predatory life. He is the terror of water-
snails and caddis-worms, and the larve of mosqui-
toes. Inthe aquarium this darter is one of the most
interesting of fishes; for though plainly colored
it is very handsome, and in its movements is the
most graceful of all the darters. Its mouth opens
wider than that of any of the others, and it is fuller
of bristling teeth. Its large, yellow-rimmed black
eyes are ever on the watch. The least of a “ fish”
and the most of a darter, the fan-tail is worthily
left as the type of the genus £theostoma, in which
it was first placed by its discoverer, Rafinesque.
We often brought home with us a “Johnny,”
Speck," or‘ Crawl-a-bottom,” of a different type
from any of those whose habits we already knew.
It had a very sharp nose which projected over its

32 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

mouth; its body was exceedingly slim and round,
as transparent as jelly, but hard and firm to the
touch. Its belly and much of its back were quite
bare of scales, and those along its sides were small
and inconspicuous. After much searching through
the scattered descriptions which Eastern naturalists
have given us of the darters found in their bottles
of alcohol, we decided that our little friend was the
Pellucid Darter (Ammocrypta pellucida Baird),
better called the “Sand Darter” for reasons soon
to be given.

Our aquarium had been arranged for the con-
venience of our other Etheostomine friends, and
the bottom was thickly covered with stones among
which a small fish might easily hide. Several days
passed after the introduction of the first Azmzmo-
crypta+ which survived the change of water, when
we noticed that it had disappeared. Careful search
among the stones and around the geode only made
it the more certain that it had gone, and increased
our wonder as to the way; for surely it had not
been.eaten,: nor had. it jumped, out,.sunless; dike
Ariel, it could assume a “shape invisible.” Finally,
after going over every inch of the ground, there
was discovered, under the nose of Soleosoma,
which was standing as usual on its hands and tail,
the upper edge of a caudal fin, and on each side
of Boly’s tail appeared a little black eye set in a
yellow frame. Pleurolepis was buried! Was he
dead? Slowly one eye was closed in a darter’s
inimitable way, — for they can outwink all animals

1 Or, as we then called it, Pleurolepis ; this name being earlier,
but already preoccupied by a genus of extinct ganoid fishes.

YOHNNY DARTERS. 33

in creation except owls, — and a touch of a finger
on its tail showed that it had lost none of its activ-
ity. It was quite improbable that it had been
buried so completely by accident. We therefore
cleared of stones a small spot, leaving the hard
white sand exposed, and awaited developments.
Then for days we watched it closely, only to learn
that it could bury itself with great celerity, for it
was not caught in the act. But our patience was
at last rewarded; for one morning, as we came out
to breakfast, it put its nose, that we now know has
a tip nearly as hard as horn, against the bottom,
stood up nearly straight on its head, and with a
wift beating of the tail to right and left was in less
than five seconds completely buried. The sand
had been violently stirred, of course; and just as
it had nearly settled, probably in less than half a
minute, its nose was put quietly out, and settling
back left the twinkling eyes and narrow forehead
alone visible.

Since then we have kept scores of them in an
aquarium arranged especially for their conven-
ience, and have often seen them burrow into the
sand. They will remain buried so long as the water
is pure and cool. Indeed, we now rely almost en-
tirely on them to warn us when the water needs
changing. When this need is felt, they come out
of the sand and lie on the bottom panting vio-
lently. We have been unable to discover any 1m-
mediate’ incentive: for the: act... It seems to be
entirely unpremeditated. A number of them in
confinement lie helplessly on the bottom, motion-
less and slowly breathing, when one suddenly

3 :

34 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

starts and buries his head and neck in the now
whirling sand, by a motion as quick as thought;
his tail beats frantically about, and when again the
clean sand lies smooth on the bottom, the little eyes
are looking at you like two glistening beads, as if
to witness your applause at so clever a trick.

We have never seen Ammocrypta taste of food,
nor do we ever expect to do so; for although its
mouth bristles with teeth, its small size forbids an
attack on any game which we can offer. Its qui-
escent habits and the character of the bottoms to
which it confines itself seem to indicate that its
prey is minute if not microscopic. But speculation
about what we do not know as to its food might
lead us to speculation as to the origin of its char-
acteristic features, —how, for instance, the hard
snout, the transparent muscles, and the burrowing
habits are consequent on its loss of scales, or how
the loss of unnecessary scales and of pigment cells
is consequent on its burrowing habits. Then,
when we have finished these matters, we might
inquire how it came about that there are “Johnny
Darters” at all, and why no other continent has
them. And we might go on with endless queries
like these, which would take us far beyond the
purpose of this article. We have wished only to
introduce our aquarium friends, and to commend
them to all lovers of beautiful things in Nature.

THE SALMON FAMILY. 35

THE SALMON FAMILY.

F all the families of fishes, the one most inter-
esting from almost every point of view is
that of the Salmonide, the Salmon family. As
now restricted, it is not one of the largest families,
as it comprises less than a hundred species; but in
beauty, activity, gaminess, quality as food, and
even in size of individuals, different members of
the group stand easily with the first among fishes.
The following are the chief external characteristics
which are common to the members of the family
as here understood; the Avgentinzde and the Sa-
langid@, usually included with them, being here
placed in separate groups: —

Body oblong or moderately elongate, covered
with cycloid scales of varying size. Head naked.
Mouth terminal or somewhat inferior, varying con-
siderably among the different species, those having
the mouth largest usually having also the strongest
teeth. Maxillary provided with a supplemental
bone, and forming the lateral margin of the upper
jaw. Pseudobranchiz present. Gill-rakers vary-
ing with the species. Opercula complete. No
barbels. Dorsal fin of moderate length, placed
near the middle of the length of the body. Adii-
pose fin well developed. Caudal fin forked. Anal
fin moderate or rather long. Ventral fins nearly

36 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

median in position. Pectoral fins inserted low.
Lateral line present. Outline of belly rounded.
Vertebre in large number, usually about sixty.

The stomach in all the Salmonzd@é is siphonal,
and at the pylorus are many (15 to 200) com-
paratively large pyloric coeca. The air-bladder
is large. The eggs are usually much larger than
in fishes generally, and the ovaries are without
special duct, the ova falling into the cavity of the
abdomen before exclusion. The large size of the
eggs, their lack of adhesiveness, and the readi-
ness with which they may be impregnated, render
the Salmonide peculiarly adapted for artificial
culture.

The Salmonide are peculiar to the North Tem-
perate and Arctic regions, and within this range
they are almost equally abundant wherever suitable
waters occur. Some of the species, especially the
larger ones, are marine and anadromous, living and
srowing in the sea, and ascending fresh waters to
spawn. Still others live in running brooks, en-
tering lakes or the sea when occasion serves, but
not habitually doing so. Still others are lake
fishes, approaching the shore or entering brooks
in the spawning season, at other times retiring to
waters of considerable depth. Some of them are
active, voracious, and gamy; while others are com-
paratively defenceless, and will not take the hook.
They are divisible into eight easily recognized
genera, — Coregonus, Plecoglossus, Brachymystax,
Stenodus, Thymallus, Oncorhynchus, Salmo, and
Salvelinus. These groups may be discussed in
order.

THE SALMON FAMILY. a7

The genus Coregonus, which includes the vari-
ous species known in America as lake white-fish,
is distinguishable in general by the small size of
its mouth, the weakness of its teeth, and the large
Bize-oL its’Sscaless (The teeth, especially,.are either
reduced to very slight asperities, or else are alto-
gether wanting. The species reach a length of
one to two feet or more. With scarcely an ex-
ception they inhabit clear lakes, and rarely enter
streams except to spawn. In far northern regions
they often descend to the sea; but in the latitude
of the United States this is rarely possible for
them, as they are unable to endure impurities in
the water. They seldom take the hook, and rarely
feed on other fishes. From their restriction to the
waters of the different lake systems in which they
live, numerous local varieties have been developed
both in Europe and America, distinguished by
characters less constant and less important than
those which separate the different species. Euro-
pean writers have somewhat inconsistently re-
garded these varying and intangibly different
forms as distinct species, and many of them have
come to the conclusion that almost every lake
system of Scandinavia, Scotland, and Russia has
several species which are peculiar to it. Dr. Giin-
ther observes that ‘‘the species of this genus are
not less numerous than those of Sa/mzo, some hav-
ing a very extended geographical range, whilst
others are confined to very limited localities.
They are less subject to variation than the trout,
and therefore more easily characterized and dis-
tinguished. Hence we find that naturalists who

38 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

look with distrust on the different species of Salmo
are quite ready to admit those of Coregonus.”

It seems to me, however, that the variableness
in Coregonus has been underestimated. The Amer-
ican species at least are all fishes of wide range,
varying considerably with their surroundings.

None of the other species reach the size, or have
the value as food, of our common white-fish. The
species of Coregonus differ from each other in the
form and size of the mouth, in the form of the
body, and in the development of the gill-rakers.
These differences have led to the establishment of
about five sections, or subgenera, the extremes of
which differ remarkably, but which gradually pass
from one into another. Of the species, the follow-
ing are among the most noteworthy: —

Coregonus oxyrhynchus —the Schnabel of Hol-
land, Germany, and Scandinavia— has the mouth
very small, the sharp snout projecting far be-
yond it. No species similar to this is found in
America.

The Rocky Mountain White-fish (Coregonus
williamsoni) has also a small mouth and project-
ing snout, but the latter is blunter and much
shorter than in C. oxyrhynchus. This is a small
species abounding everywhere in the clear lakes
of the Rocky Mountains and the Sierra Nevada,
from Colorado to Vancouver Island. It is a hand-
some fish, and excellent as food.

Closely allied to Coregonus williamsont is the
Pilot-fish, Shad-waiter, Round-fish, or Menomonee
White-fish (Coregonus quadrilateralis). This spe-
cies is found in the Great Lakes, the Adirondack

THE SALMON FAMILY. 39

region, the lakes of New Hampshire, and thence
northwestward to Alaska, abounding in cold deep
waters, its range apparently nowhere coinciding
with that of Coregonus williamsont.

The common White-fish (Coregonus clupeiformis)
is the largest in size of the species of Coregonus,
- and is unquestionably the finest as an article of
food. It varies considerably in appearance with
age and condition, but in general it is proportion-
ately much deeper than any of the other small-
mouthed Coregont. The adult fishes develop a
considerable fleshy hump at the shoulders, which
causes the head, which is very small, to appear
disproportionately so. The white-fish spawns in
November and December, on rocky shoals in the
great lakes. Its food, which was for a long time
unknown, was ascertained by Dr. P. R. Hoy to
consist chiefly of deep-water crustaceans, with a
few mollusks, and larve of water insects. ‘‘The
white-fish,” writes Mr. James W. Milner, “has
been known since the time of the earliest explorers
as pre-eminently a fine-flavored fish. In fact, there
are few table-fishes its equal. To be appreciated
in its fullest excellence, it should be taken fresh
from the lake and broiled. Father Marquette,
Charlevoix, Sir John Richardson, — explorers who
for months at a time had to depend on the white-
fish for their staple article of food— bore testimony
to the fact that they never lost their relish for it,
and deemed it a special excellence that the appe-
tite never became cloyed with it.” The range of
the white-fish extends from the lakes of New York
and New England northward to the Arctic Circle.

40 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

The “ Otsego bass” of Otsego Lake in New York,
celebrated by De Witt Clinton, is the ordinary
white-fish.

Allied to the American white-fish, but smaller
in size, is the Lavaret, Weissfisch, Adelfisch, or
Weissfelchen (Coregonus lavaretus), of the moun-
tain lakes of Switzerland, Germany, and Sweden.
Several other related species occur in northern
Europe and Siberia.

Another American species is the Sault White-
fish, Lake Whiting, or Musquaw River White-fish
(Coregonus labradoricus). Its teeth are stronger,
especially on the tongue, than in any of our other
species, and its body is slenderer than that of the
white-fish. It is found in the upper Great Lakes,
in the Adirondack region, in Lake Winnepesaukee,
and in the lakes of Maine and New Brunswick. It
is said to rise to the fly in the Canadian lakes.
This species runs up the St. Mary’s River, from
Lake Huron to Lake Superior, in July and August.
Great numbers are snared or speared by the In-
dians at this season at the Sault Ste. Marie.

The smallest and handsomest of the American
white-fish is the Cisco of Lake Michigan (Coregonus
hoyt). It is a slender fish, rarely exceeding ten
inches in length, and its scales have the brilliant
silvery lustre of the Moon-eye and the Lady-fish.

The Lake Herring, or Cisco (Coregonus artedi),
is, next to the white-fish, the most important of the
American species. It is more elongate than the
others, and has a comparatively large mouth, with
projecting under jaw. It is correspondingly more
voracious, and often takes the hook. During the

THE SALMON FAMILY. 4I

spawning season of the white-fish the lake herring
feeds on the ova of the latter, thereby doing a
great amount of mischief. As food, this species is
fair, but much inferior to the white-fish. Its geo-
graphical distribution is essentially the same, but
to a greater degree it frequents shoal waters. In
the small lakes around Lake Michigan, in Indiana
and Wisconsin (Tippecanoe, Geneva, Oconomo-
woc, etc.), the cisco has long been established;
and in these waters its habits have undergone
some change, as has also its external appearance.
These lake ciscoes remain for most of the year in
the depths of the lake, coming to the surface only
in search of certain insects, and to shallow water
only in the spawning season. ‘This periodical dis-
appearance of the cisco has led to much foolish
discussion as to the probability of their returning
by an underground passage to Lake Michigan
during the periods of their absence. One author,
confounding “ cisco”’ with “‘ siscowet,” has assumed
that this underground passage leads to Lake Su-
perior, and that the cisco is identical with the
fat lake trout which bears the latter name. The
name “lake herring” alludes to the superficial
resemblance which this species possesses to the
marine herring, a fish of quite a different family.
Closely allied to the lake herring is the Blue-fin
of Lake Michigan and of certain lakes in New
York (Coregonus nigripinnis), a fine large species
inhabiting deep waters, and recognizable by the
blue-black color of its lower fins. In Alaska and
Siberia) are still othervspecies of. the cisco type
(Coregonus laurettea, C. merki, C. nelsont); and in

42 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

Europe very similar species are the Scotch Ven-
dace (Coregonus vandesius) and the Scandinavian
Lok-Sild (lake herring), as well as others less
perfectly known.

The Tullibee, or “‘ Mongrel White-fish” (Covrego-
nus tullibee), has a deep body, like the shad, with
the large mouth of the ciscoes. Fishermen think
ita hybrid between Coregonus clupeiformis and C.
artedt. It is found in the Great Lake region and
northward, and very little is known of its habits.
A similar species (Coregonus cyprinoides) is re-
corded from Siberia,—a region which is pecu-
liarly suited for the growth of the Coregonz, but in
which the species have never received much study.

Allied to the Coregonz is Plecoglossus altivelis, a
small fish of the waters of Japan and Formosa. It
has small, compressed, serrated, movable teeth in
the jaws. This is said to be an annual fish, the life
of each individual ceasing at the end of the season
of reproduction.

Another little-known form, intermediate between
the white-fish and the salmon, is Brachymystax
lenock, a large fish of the mountain streams of
Siberia. Only the skins brought home by Pallas
about a century ago seem to be known as yet. Ac-
cording to Pallas, it sometimes reaches a weight of
eighty pounds.

Still another genus, intermediate between the
white-fish and the salmon, is Stenodus, distin-
guished by its elongate body, feeble teeth, and
projecting lower jaw. The Inconnu, or Mackenzie
River Salmon (Szexodus mackenziz) belongs to this
genus. It reaches a weight of twenty pounds or

THE SALMON FAMILY. 43

more, and in the far north is a food fish of good
quality. Little is recorded of its habits, and few
specimens exist in museums. Species of Sztenodus
are said to inhabit the Volga, Obi, Lena, and other
northern rivers; but as yet little is definitely known
of them.

The Grayling (7hymatlus), termed by Saint Am-
brose ‘the flower of fishes,” is likewise interme-
diate between the white-fish and the trout, having
larger scales and feebler teeth than the latter.
The teeth on the tongue, found in all the trout and
salmon, are obsolete in grayling. The chief dis-
tinctive peculiarity of the genus Thyma/lus is the
great development of the dorsal fin, which has
more rays (20 to 24) than are found in any other
of the Salmonide, and the fin is also higher. All
the species are gayly colored, the dorsal fin es-
pecially being marked with purplish or greenish
bands and bright rose-colored spots; while the
body is mostly purplish-gray, often with spots of
black. Most of the species rarely exceed a foot in
length, but northward they grow larger. Grayling
weighing five pounds have been taken in England;
and according to Dr. Day, they are said in Lap-
land to reach a weight of eight or nine pounds.
The grayling in all countries frequent clear, cold
brooks, and rarely, if ever, enter the sea, or even
the larger lakes. They are said to congregate in
small shoals in the streams, and to prefer those
which have a succession of pools and_ shallows,
with a sandy or gravelly rather than rocky bottom.
The grayling spawns on the shallows in April or
May (in England). It is said to be non-migratory

A4 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

in its habits, depositing its ova in the neighbor-
hood of its usual haunts. The ova are said to be
far more delicate and easily killed than those of
the trout or charr:) The) grayline’ and the. trout
often inhabit the same waters, but not altogether
in harmony. It is said that the grayling devour
the eggs of the trout. It is certain that the trout
feed on the young grayling. As a food-fish, the
grayling,’ of course; ranks high; | but), the irae
sportsman will hardly seek such fish as these to
fill his frying-pan. They are considered gamy
fishes, although less strong than the brook-trout,
and perhaps less wary. The five or six known
species of grayling are very closely related, and are
doubtless comparatively recent offshoots from a
common stock, which has now spread itself widely
through the northern regions.

The common Grayling of Europe (7hymallus
thymallus) is found throughout northern Europe,
and as far south as the mountains of Hungary and
northern Italy. The name Z7hymallus was given
by the ancients, because the fish, when fresh, had
the odor of water thyme,—an odor which the
duller sense of the moderns now fails to detect.
Grayling belonging to this or other species are
found in the waters of Russia and Siberia.

The American Grayling (7hymallus siguifer) is
widely distributed in British America and Alaska.
In several streams in northern Michigan and in
Montana occurs a dwarfish variety of this species,
known to anglers as the Michigan Grayling ( Z/y-
mallus signifer ontariensis)1 This form has a

1 Thymallus tricolor Cope = Thymallus montanus Milner.

THE SALMON FAMILY. 45

longer head, rather smaller scales, and the dorsal
fin rather lower than in the northern form (szg-
nifer); but the constancy of these characters in
specimens from intermediate localities is yet to be
proved. It is probable that the grayling once had
a wider range to the southward than now, and that
so far as the waters of the United States are con-
cerned, it is tending towards extinction. This
tendency is, of course, being accelerated in Michi-
gan by lumbermen and anglers. The colonies of
erayling in Michigan and Montana are probably
remains of a post-glacial fauna.

The genus Oxcorhynchus contains those species
of Salmonitde which have the greatest size and
value. They are in fact, as well as in name, the
king salmon. The genus is closely related to
Salmo, with which it agrees in general as to the
structure of its vomer, and from which it differs in
the increased number of anal rays, branchiostegals,
pyloric cceca, and gill-rakers. The character most
convenient for distinguishing Oncorhynchus, young
or old, from all the species of Salmo, is the num-
ber of developed rays in the anal fin. These in
Oncorhynchus are thirteen to twenty, in Sa/mo nine
or ten.

The species of Oncorhynchus have long been
known as anadromous salmon, confined to the
North Pacific. The species were first made known
one hundred and thirty years ago, by that most
exact of early observers, Steller, who described and
distinguished them with perfect accuracy, under
their Russian vernacular names. These Russian
names were, in 1792, adopted by Walbaum as

46 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

specific names, in giving to these animals a scientific
nomenclature. Since Steller’s time, writers of all
degrees of incompetence, and writers with scanty
material or with no material at all, have done their
worst to confuse our knowledge of these salmon,
until it became evident that no exact knowledge of
any of the species remained. In the current sys-
tem of a few years ago, the breeding males of the
five species known to Steller constituted a separate
genus of many species (Oxcorhynchus Suckley) ; the
females were placed in the genus Sa/mo, and the
young formed still other species of a third genus,
called -ario, supposed to be a genus of trout.
The young breeding males (gvz/se) of one of the
species (Oncorhynchus nerka) made still a fourth
genus designated as Hyfszfarzo. Not one of the
writers on these fishes of twenty-five years ago
knew a single species definitely, at sight, or used
knowingly in their descriptions a single character
by which species are really distinguished. Not less
than thirty-five nominal species of Oxcorhyuchus
have already been described from the North Pa-
cific, although, so far as is now known, only the
five originally noticed by Steller really exist.
The descriptive literature of the Pacific salmon
is among the very worst extant in science. This
is not, however, altogether the fault of the authors,
_ but it is in great part due to the extraordinary
variability in appearance of the different species of
salmon. These variations are, as will be seen, due
to several different causes, notably to differences
in surroundings, in sex, and in age, and in con-
ditions connected with the process of reproduction.

THE SALMON FAMILY. 47

The writer and his associate, Professor Charles H.
Gilbert, have had, under the auspices of the United
States Fish Commission, better opportunities to
study the different species of Ozcorhynchus than
have fallen to the lot of any other ichthyologists.
The following discussion of the different species
is condensed from our report to the United States
Census Bureau, portions of which were published
in the “ American Naturalist” for March, 1881. En-
tirely similar conclusions have been independently
reached by Dr. Tarleton H. Bean, who visited Alaska
in 1880, and whose means of studying the species
have been scarcely less. extensive. _

There are five species of salmon (Oxcorhynchus)
in the waters of the North Pacific. We have at
present no evidence of the existence of any more
on either the American or the Asiatic side. These
species may be called: (1) the Quinnat, or King
Salmon, (2) the Blue-back Salmon, or Red-fish,
(3) the Silver Salmon, (4) the Dog Salmon, and
(5) the Humpback Salmon; or (1) Oncorhynchus
tschawytscha, (2) Oncorhynchus nerka, (3) Oncorhyn-
_ chus kisutch, (4) Oncorhynchus keta, and (5) Oxco-
rhynchus gorbuscha. All these species are now
known to occur in the waters of Kamtschatka as
well as in those of Alaska and Oregon. These
species, in all their varied conditions, may usually
be distinguished by the characters given below.
Other differences of form, color, and appearance
are absolutely valueless for distinction, unless
specimens of the same age, sex, and condition
are compared.

The Quinnat Salmon (Oncorhynchus tschawytscha)

48 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

has an average weight of 22 pounds, but individ-
uals weighing 70 to 100 pounds are occasionally
taken. It has about 16 anal rays, 15 to 19 branchi-
ostegals, 23 (9+ 14) gill-rakers on the anterior
gill arch, and 140 to 185 pyloric cceca. The scales
are comparatively large, there being from 130 to
155 in a longitudinal series. In the spring the
body is silvery, the back, dorsal fin, and caudal fin
having more or less of round black spots, and the
sides of the head having a peculiar tin-colored
metallic lustre. In the fall the color is often black
or dirty-red, and the species can then only be
distinguished from the dog-salmon by its technical
characters. .

The Blue-back Salmon (Oxcorhynchus nerka)
usually weighs from 5 to 8 pounds. It has about
14 developed anal rays, 14 branchiostegals, and
75 to 95 pyloric cceca. The gill-rakers are more
numerous than in any other salmon, the number
being usually about 39 (16+ 23). The scales are
larger, there being 130 to 140 in the lateral line.
In the spring the form is plumply rounded, and
the color is a clear bright blue above, silvery be-
low, and everywhere immaculate. Young fishes
often show a few round black spots, which disappear
when they enter the sea. Fall specimens in the
lakes are bright red in color, hook-nosed and slab-
sided, and bear little resemblance to the spring
run. Young spawning male grilse are also pecu-
liar in appearance, and were for a time considered
as forming a distinct genus, under the name of
“ F[Iypsifario Kennerlyt.”’ This species appears to
be sometimes landlocked in mountain lakes, in

THE SALMON FAMILY. 49

which case it reaches but a small size. Such
specimens, called ‘‘ Kokos” by the Indians, have
been sent us from Lake Whatcom, Washington
Dermitory, by: Mri D.J..smith of Whatcom;

The Silver Salmon ( Oxcorhynchus kisutch) reaches
a weight of 3 to 8 pounds. It has 13 developed
* rays in the anal, 13 branchiostegals, 23 (10+ 13)
gill-rakers, and 45 to 80 pyloric coeca. There are
about 127 scales in the lateral line. In color, it is
silvery in spring, greenish above, and with a few
faint black spots on the upper parts only. In the
fall the males are mostly of a dirty red.

The Dog Salmon (Oxcorhynchus keta) reaches an
average weight of about 12 pounds. It has about
14 anal rays, 14 branchiostegals, 24 (9-+15 ) gill-
rakers, and 140 to 185 pyloric coeca. There are
about 150 scales in the lateral line. In spring it
is dirty silvery, immaculate, or sprinkled with small
black specks, the fins dusky. In the fall the male
is brick-red or blackish, and its jaws are greatly
distorted.

The Humpback Salmon (Oxcorhynchus gorbus-
cha) is the smallest of the species, weighing
from 3 to 6 pounds. It has usually 15 anal rays,
12 branchiostegals, 28 (13-15) gill-rakers, and
about 180 pyloric cceca. Its scales are much
smaller than in any other salmon, there being 180
to 240 in the lateral line. In color it is bluish
above, silvery below, the posterior and upper parts
with many round black spots. The males in fall
are red, and are more extravagantly distorted than
in any other of the Salmonide.

Of these species the blue-back predominates in

4

50 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

Frazer River, the silver salmon in Puget Sound,
the quinnat in the Columbia and the Sacramento,
and the silver salmon in most of the streams along
the coast. All the species have been seen by us
in the Columbia and in Frazer River; all but the
blue-back in the Sacramento and in waters tribu-
tary to Puget Sound. Only the quinnat has been
noticed south of San Francisco. Its range has
been traced as far as Ventura River. Of these
species, the quinnat and blue-back salmon habitu-
ally “run”? inthe spre; the: others im the fall:
The usual order of running in the rivers is as fol-
lows: xerka, tschawytscha, kisutch, gorbuscha, keta.

The economic value of the spring-running sal-
mon is far greater than that of the other species,
because they can be captured in numbers when at
their best, while the others are usually taken only
after deterioration. To this fact the worthlessness
of Oncorhynchus keta as compared with the other
species is probably wholly due.

The habits of the salmon in the ocean are not
easily studied. Quinnat and silver salmon of all
sizes are taken with the seine at almost any season
in Puget Sound. This would indicate that these
species do.not go far from the shore. The quinnat
takes the hook freely in Monterey Bay, both near
’ the shore and at a distance of six to eight miles out.
We have reason to believe that these two species
do not necessarily seek great depths, but proba-
bly remain not very far from the mouth of the
rivers in which they were spawned. The blue-back
and the dog salmon probably seek deeper water,
as the former is seldom or never taken with the

THE SALMON FAMILY. SI

seine in the ocean, and the latter is known to enter
the Strait of Fuca at the spawning season, therefore
coming in from the open sea. The great majority
of the quinnat salmon, and nearly all the blue-back
salmon enter the rivers in the spring. The run of
both begins generally at the last of March; it lasts,
with various modifications and interruptions, until
the actual spawning season in November; the time
of running and the proportionate amount in each
of the subordinate runs varying with each different
river. In general, the runs are slack in the sum-
mer and increase with the first high water of
autumn. By the last of August only straggling
blue-backs can be found in the lower course of
any stream; but both in the Columbia and in the
Sacramento the quinnat runs in considerable num-
bers at least till October. In the Sacramento the
run is greatest in the fall, and more run in the
summer than in spring. In the Sacramento and
the smaller rivers southward, there is a winter
run, beginning in December. The spring salmon
ascends only those rivers which are fed by the
_ melting snows from the mountains, and which have
sufficient volume to send their waters well out to
sea. Those salmon which run in the spring are
chiefly adults (supposed to be at least three years
old). ‘Their milt and spawn are no more devel-
oped than at the same time in others of the same
species which are not to enter the rivers until fall.
It would appear that the contact with cold fresh
water, when in the ocean, in some way causes
them to run towards it, and to run before there
is any special influence to that end exerted by the

52 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

development of the organs of generation. High
water on any of these rivers in the spring is always
followed by an increased run of salmon. The
salmon-canners think — and this is probably true —
that salmon which would not have run till later
are brought up by the contact with the cold water.
The cause of this effect of cold fresh water is not
understood. We may call it an instinct of the
salmon, which is another way of expressing our
ignorance. In general, it seems to be true that in
those rivers and during those years when the
spring run is greatest, the fall run is least to be
depended on.

As the season advances, smaller and younger
salmon of these species (quinnat and blue-back)
enter the rivers to spawn, and in the fall these
young specimens are very numerous. We have
thus far failed to notice any gradations in size or
appearance of these young fish by which their
ages could be ascertained. It is, however, prob-
able that some of both sexes reproduce at the age
of one year. In Frazer River, in the fall, quinnat
male grilse of every size, from eight inches up-
wards, were running, the milt fully developed, but
usually not showing the hooked jaws and dark
colors of the older males. Females less than eigh-
teen (inches in: length were rare. .cAllsof either
sex, large and small, then in the river, had the
ovaries or milt developed. Little blue-backs of
every size, down to six inches, are also found in
the upper Columbia in the fall, with their organs
of generation fully developed. Nineteen twenticths
of these young fish are males, and some of them

THE SALMON FAMILY. 53

have the hooked jaws and red cclor of the old
males.

The average weight of the quinnat in the Colum-
bia, in the spring, is twenty-two pounds; in the
Sacramento, about sixteen. Individuals weighing
from forty to sixty pounds are frequently found in
both rivers, and some as high as eighty or even
one hundred pounds are recorded. It is questioned
whether these large fishes are those which, of the
same age, have grown more rapidly; those which
are older, but have for some reason failed to
spawn; or those which have survived one or more
spawning seasons. All these origins may be pos-
sible in individual cases; we are, however, of the
opinion that the majority of these large fishes are
those which have hitherto run in the fall, and thus
having spawned not far from the sea, have survived
the spawning season of the previous year.

Those fish which enter the rivers in the spring
continue their ascent till death or the spawning
season overtakes them. Probably none of them
ever return to the ocean, and a large proportion
fail to spawn. They are known to ascend the Sac-
-ramento to its extreme head-waters, about four
hundred miles. In the Columbia they ascend as
far as the Bitter Root Mountains and at least
to the Spokane Falls, and their extreme limit is
not known. This is a distance of six to eight
hundred miles. At these great distances, when
the fish have reached the spawning grounds, be-
sides the usual changes of the breeding season,
their bodies are covered with bruises, on which
patches of white fungus develop. The fins become

54 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

mutilated, their eyes are often injured or destroyed,
parasitic worms gather in their gills, they become
extremely emaciated, their flesh becomes white
from the loss of oil; and as soon as the spawning
act is accomplished, and sometimes before, a// of
them die. The ascent of the Cascades and the
Dalles probably causes the injury or death of a
great many salmon.

When the salmon enter the river they refuse to
take bait, and their stomachs are always found
empty and contracted. In the rivers they do not
feed; and when they reach the spawning grounds,
their stomachs, pyloric cceca and all, are said to be
no larger than one’s finger. They will sometimes
take the fly, or a hook baited with salmon roe, in
the clear waters of the upper tributaries, but there
is no other evidence known to us that they feed
when there. Only the quinnat and _ blue-back
(there called red-fish) have been found at any great
distance from the sea, and these (as adult fishes)
only in late summer and fall.

The spawning season is probably about the same
for all the species. It varies for each of the differ-
ent rivers, and for different parts of the same river.
It doubtless extends from July to December. The
manner of spawning is probably similar for all
the species, but we have no data for any except the
quinnat. In this species the fishes pair off; the
male, with tail and snout, excavates a broad, shal-
low “nest” in the gravelly bed of the stream, in
rapid water, at a depth of one to four feet; the
female deposits her eggs in it, and after the exclu-
sion of the milt, they cover them with stones and

THE SALMON FAMILY. 55

sravel. They then float down the stream tail fore-
most. As already stated, a great majority of them
die. In the head-waters of the large streams, un-
questionably, all die; in the small streams, and
near the sea, an unknown percentage probably sur-
vive. The young hatch in about sixty days, and
most of them return to the ocean during the high
water of the spring.

The salmon of all kinds in the spring are silvery,
spotted or not according to the species, and with
the mouth about equally symmetrical in both
sexes. As the spawning season approaches, the
female loses her silvery color, becomes more slimy,
the scales on the back partly sink into the skin,
and the flesh changes from salmon red and be-
comes variously paler, from the loss of oil; the
degree of paleness varying much with individuals
and with inhabitants of different rivers. In the
Sacramento the flesh of the quinnat, in either spring
or fall, is rarely pale. In the Columbia a few with
pale flesh are sometimes taken in spring, and a
good many in the fall. In Frazer River the fall
-run of the quinnat is nearly worthless for canning
purposes, because so many are “ white-meated.”
In the spring very few are “ white-meated; ” but the
number increases towards fall, when there is every
variation, some having red streaks running through
them, others being red toward the head and pale
toward the tail. The red and pale ones cannot be
distinguished externally, and the color is dependent
on neither age norsex. There is said to be no differ-
ence in the taste, but there is no market for canned
salmon not of the conventional orange-color.

56 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

As the season advances, the difference between
the males and females becomes more and more
marked, and keeps pace with the development of
the milt, as is shown by dissection. The males
have (1) the premaxillaries and the tip of the lower
jaw more and more prolonged, both of the jaws
becoming finally strongly and often extravagantly
hooked, so that either they shut by the side of
each other like shears, or else the mouth cannot be
closed. (2) The front teeth become very long and
canine-like, their growth proceeding very rapidly,
until they are often half an inch long. (3) The
teeth on the vomer and tongue often disappear.
(4) The body grows more compressed and deeper
at the shoulders, so that a very distinct hump is
formed; this is more developed in Oxcorhynchus
gorbuscha, but is found in all. (5) The scales dis-
appear, especially on the back, by the growth of
spongy skin. (6) The color changes from silvery
to various shades of black and red, or blotchy, ac-
cording to the species. The blue-back turns rosy
red, the dog salmon a dull blotchy red, and the
quinnat generally blackish. The distorted males
are commonly considered worthless, rejected by
the canners and salmon-salters, but preserved by the
Indians. These changes are due solely to influences
connected with the growth of the reproductive or-
gans. They are not in any way due to the action
of fresh water. They take place at about the same
time in the adult males of all species, whether in the
ocean or in the rivers. At the time of the spring
runs all are symmetrical. In the fall all males,
of whatever species, are more or less distorted.

THE SALMON FAMILY. 57

Among the dog salmon, which run only in the fall,
the males are hook-jawed and red-blotched when
they first enter the Strait of Fuca from the outside.
The humpback, taken in salt water about Seattle,
have the same peculiarities. The male is slab-
sided, hook-billed, and distorted, and is rejected
by the canners. No hook-jawed females of any
species have been seen. It is not positively known
that any fully hook-jawed male survives the repro-
ductive act. If any do, the jaws must resume the
normal form.

On first entering a stream the salmon swim
about as if playing. They always head towards the
current, and this appearance of playing may be
simply due to facing the moving tide. Afterwards
they enter the deepest parts of the stream and
swim straight up, with few interruptions. Their
rate of travel at Sacramento is estimated by Stone
at about two miles per day; on the Columbia at
about three miles per day. Those who enter the
Columbia in the spring and ascend to the moun-
tain rivers of Idaho, must go at a more rapid rate
than this, as they must make an average of nearly
four miles per day.

As already stated, the economic value of any
species depends in great part on its being a
“spring salmon.” It is not generally possible to
capture salmon of any species in large numbers
until they have entered the rivers, and the spring
salmon enter the rivers long before the growth of
the organs of reproduction has reduced the rich-
ness of the flesh. The fall salmon cannot be taken
in quantity until their flesh has deteriorated; hence

58 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

the dog salmon is practically almost worthless, ex-
cept to the Indians, and the humpback salmon
is little better. The silver salmon, with the same
breeding habits as the dog salmon, is more valu-
able, as it is found in the inland waters of Puget
Sound for a considerable time before the fall rains
cause the fall runs, and it may be taken in large
numbers with seines before the season for entering
the rivers. The quinnat salmon, from its great size
and abundance, is more valuable than all the other
fishes on our Pacific coast taken together. The blue-
back, similar in flesh, but much smaller and less
abundant, is worth much more than the combined
value of the three remaining species of salmon.

The fall salmon of all species, but especially of
the dog salmon, ascend streams but a short dis-
tance before spawning. They seem to be in great
anxiety to find fresh water, and many of them
work their way up little brooks only a few inches
deep, where they perish miserably, floundering
about on the stones, Every stream, of whatever
kind, has more or less of these fall salmon.

It is the prevailing impression that the salmon
have some special instinct which leads them to
return to spawn in the same spawning grounds
where they were originally hatched. We fail to
find any evidence of this in the case of the Pacific
coast salmon, and we do not believe it to be true.
It seems more probable that the young salmon
hatched in any river mostly remain in the ocean
within a radius of twenty, thirty, or forty miles of
its mouth. These, in their movements about in
the ocean, may come into contact with the cold

THE SALMON FAMILY. 59

waters of their parent rivers, or perhaps of any
other river, at a considerable distance from the
shore. In the case of the quinnat and the blue-
back, their “ instinct’ seems to lead them to ascend
these fresh waters, and in a majority of cases these
waters will be those in which the fishes in question
were originally spawned. Later in the season the
erowth of the reproductive organs leads them to
approach the shore and search for fresh waters,
and still the chances are that they may find the
original stream. But undoubtedly many fall salmon
ascend, or try to ascend, streams in which no salmon
was ever hatched. In little brooks about Puget
Sound, where the water is not three inches deep,
are often found dead or dying salmon, which have
entered them for the purpose of spawning. It is
said of the Russian River and other California
rivers, that their mouths, in the time of low water
in summer, generally become entirely closed by
sand-bars, and that the salmon, in their eagerness
to ascend them, frequently fling themselves en-
tirely out of water on the beach. But this does
not prove that the salmon are guided by a mar-
vellous geographical instinct which leads them
to their parent river in spite of the fact that the
river cannot be found. The waters of Russian
River soak through these sand-bars, and the salmon
instinct, we think, leads them merely to search
for fresh waters. This matter is much in need of
further investigation; at present, however, we find
no reason to believe that the salmon enter the
Rogue River simply because they were spawned
there, or that a salmon hatched in the Clackamas

60 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

River is more likely, on that account, to return to
the Clackamas than to go up the Cowlitz or the
Des Chites. ‘At the hatchery on Rogue River,
the fish are stripped, marked, and set free, and
every year since the hatchery has been in opera-
tion some of the marked fish have been re-caught.
The young fry are also marked, but none of them
have been re-caught.” The shad is another spe-
cies of fish supposed to possess this remarkable
homing instinct. Shad have been planted in the
Sacramento River, and considerable numbers de-
scended from this plant have been already taken
in the Columbia River and in Monterey Bay, but
not a single one, so far as known to me, in the origi-
nal stream, the Sacramento.

In regard to the diminution of the number of
salmon on the coast we may make these observa-
tions. In Puget Sound, Frazer River, and the
small streams, there appears to be little or no evi-
dence of diminution. In the Columbia River the
evidence appears somewhat conflicting. The catch
in 1880 was considerably greater than ever before
(nearly 540,000 cases of 48 pounds each having
been packed), although the fishing for three or
four years has been very extensive. On the other
hand, the high water of that year undoubtedly
caused many fish to become spring salmon which
would otherwise have run in the fall. Moreover,
it is urged that a few years ago, when the number
caught was about half as great as in 1880, the
amount of netting used was perhaps one eighth as
much. With a comparatively small outfit the can-
ners caught half the fish; now, with nets much

THE SALMON FAMILY. 61

larger and more numerous, they catch them nearly
all, scarcely any escaping during the fishing season
(April 1 to August 1). Whether an actual reduc-
tion in the number of fish running can be proved
or not, there can be no question that the present
rate of destruction of the salmon will deplete the
river before many years. A considerable number
of quinnat salmon run in August and September,
and some stragglers even later; these are all which
now keep up the supply of fish in the river. The
non-molestation of this fall run, therefore, does
something to atone for the almost total destruction
of the spring run. This, however, is insufficient.
A well-ordered salmon hatchery is the only means
by which the destruction of the salmon fisheries of
the Columbia River can be prevented.

The fact that the humpback salmon runs only
on alternate years in Puget Sound (1875, 1877,
1870, etc.) is well attested and at present unex-
plained. Stray individuals only are taken in other
years. This species has a distinct run in the United
States in Puget Sound only, although individuals
“(called “lost salmon”) are occasionally taken in
the Columbia and in the Sacramento.

Numerous attempts have been made to introduce
- the quinnat salmon into the waters of the Eastern
States and of Europe. Individuals thus planted
have been taken in several different localities, but
as yet not in any considerable number.

The genus Salmo comprises those forms of
salmon and trout which have been longest known.
As in related genera, the mouth is large, and the
jaws, palatines, and tongue are armed with strong

62 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

teeth. The vomer is flat, its shaft not depressed
below the level of the head or chevron (the ante-
rior end). There are a few teeth on the chevron;
and behind it, on the shaft, there is either a double
series of teeth or an irregular single series. These
teeth in the true salmon disappear with age, but
in the others (the black-spotted trout) they are
persistent. The scales are silvery, and moderate
or smallin size. There are 9 to 11 developed rays
in the anal fin. The caudal fin is truncate, or va-
riously concave or forked. There are usually 4o
to 70 pyloric coeca, II or 12 branchiostegals, and
about 20 (8-+ 12) gill-rakers. The sexual pecu-
liarities are in general less marked than in Ovxco-
rhynchus ; they are also greater in the anadromous
species than in those which inhabit fresh waters.
In general, the male in the breeding season is
redder, its jaws are prolonged, the front teeth en-
larged, the lower jaw turned upwards at the end,
and the upper jaw notched, or sometimes even
perforated, by the tip of the lower. All the species
of Salmo (like those of Oxcorhynchus) are more or
less spotted with black.

Two species (salmon) are marine and anadro-
mous, taking the place in the North Atlantic occu-
pied in the North Pacific by the King Salmon or
species of Oncorhynchus. The others (trout), form-
ing the sub-genus Sa/arv, are non-migratory, or at
least irregularly or imperfectly anadromous. They
abound in all streams of northern Europe, north-
ern Asia, and in that part of North America which
lies west of the Mississippi Valley. The black-
spotted trout are entirely wanting in eastern

THE SALMON FAMILY. 63

America, —a remarkable fact in geographical dis-
tribution, perhaps explained only on the hypoth-
esis of the comparatively recent and Eurasiatic
origin of the group, which, we may suppose, has
not yet had opportunity to extend its range across
the plains, unsuitable for salmon life, which separate
the upper Missouri from the Great Lakes.

The Salmon (Salmo salar) is the only black-
spotted salmonoid found in American waters tribu-
tary to the Atlantic. In Europe, where other
species similarly colored occur, the species may
be best distinguished by the fact that the teeth on
the shaft of the vomer mostly disappear with age.
From the only other species positively known
(Salmo trutta) which shares this character, the
true salmon may be distinguished by the presence
of but eleven scales between the adipose fin and the
lateral line, while Sa/mo trutta has about fourteen.
The scales are comparatively large in the salmon,
there being about one hundred and twenty-five in
the lateral line. The caudal fin, which is forked
in the young, becomes, as in other species of sal-
mon, more or less truncate with age. The pyloric
coeca are fifty to sixty in number.

The following account of the coloration of
the salmon is from Dr. Day’s “Fishes of Great
Britain: ”? —

“Color in adults superiorly of a steel blue, becoming
lighter on the sides and beneath. Mostly a few rounded
or x-shaped spots scattered above the lateral line and
upper half of the head, being more numerous in the
female than in the male. Dorsal, caudal, and pectoral
_fins dusky ; ventrals and anal white, the former grayish

64 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

internally. Prior to entering fresh waters these fish are
of a brilliant steel blue along the back, which becomes
changed to a muddy tinge when they enter rivers. After
these fish have passed into the fresh waters for the pur-
pose of breeding, numerous orange streaks appear in the
cheeks of the male, and also spots or even marks of the
same, and likewise of a red color, on the body. It is
now termed a ‘red-fish.’ The female, however, is dark in
color, and known as ‘ black-fish.’ ‘Smolts’ (young river
fish) are bluish along the upper half of the body, silvery
along the sides, due to a layer of silvery scales being
formed over the trout-like colors, while they have darker
fins than the yearling ‘ pink ;’ but similar bands and spots,
which can be seen (as in the parr) if the example be held
in certain positions of light. ‘Parr’ (fishes of the year)
have two or three black spots only on the opercle, and
black spots and also orange ones along the upper half of
the body, and no dark ones below the lateral line, al-
though there may be orange ones which can be seen in
its course. Along the side of the body are a series (12 to
15) of transverse bluish bands, wider than the ground
color and crossing the lateral line, while in the upper half
of the body the darker color of the back forms an arch
over each of these bands, a row of spots along the middle
of the rayed dorsal fin and the adipose orange-tipped.”

The dusky cross-shades found in the young sal-
mon or parr are characteristic of the young of
nearly all the Salmonide.

The salmon of the Atlantic is, as already stated,
an anadromous fish, spending most of its life in the
sea, and entering the streams in the fall for the
purpose of reproduction. The time of running
varies much in different streams and also in dif-
ferent countries. As with the Pacific species, these

THE SALMON FAMILY. 65

salmon are not easily discouraged in their prog-
ress, leaping cascades and other obstructions, or,
if these prove impassable, dying after repeated
fruitless attempts.

The young salmon, known as the “parr,” is
hatched in the spring. It usually remains about
two years in the rivers, descending at about the
third spring to the sea, when it is known as
“smolt.” In the sea it grows much more rapidly,
and becomes more silvery in color, and is known
as “grilse.” The grilse rapidly develop into the
adult salmon; and some of them, as is the case
with the grilse of the Pacific salmon, are capable of
reproduction.

After spawning the salmon are very lean and
unwholesome in appearance, as in fact. They are
then known as “kelts.” The Atlantic salmon does
not ascend rivers to any such distances as those
traversed by the quinnat and the blue-back. Its
kelts, therefore, for the most part survive the act
of spawning. Dr. Day thinks that they feed upon
the young salmon in the rivers, and that, therefore,
the destruction of the kelts might increase the
supply of salmon.

As a food-fish, the Atlantic salmon is very
similar to the Pacific species, neither better
nor worse, so far as I can see, when equally
fresh. In both the flesh is rich and finely fla-
vored; but the appetite of man becomes cloyed
with salmon-flesh sooner than with that of white-
fish, smelt, or charr. In size, the Atlantic salmon
does not fall far short of the quinnat. The aver-
age weight of the adult is probably less than

§

66 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

fifteen pounds. The largest one of which I find
a record was taken on the coast of Ireland in
1881, and weighed eighty-four and three-fourths
pounds.

The salmon is found in Europe between the lati-
fude of 45° and 75". In the United States itas
now rarely seen south of Cape Cod, although for-
merly the Hudson and numerous other rivers were
salmon streams. Over-fishing, obstructions in the
rivers, and pollution of the water by manufactories
and by city sewage are agencies against which the
salmon cannot cope.

Seven species of salmon (as distinguished from
trout) are recognized by Dr. Giinther in Europe,
and three in America. The landlocked forms,
abundant in Norway, Sweden, and Maine, which
cannot, or at least do not, descend to the sea, are
regarded by him as distinct species. ‘“‘ The ques-
tion,’ observes Dr. Giinther, ‘whether any of the
migratory species can be retained by artificial
means in fresh water, and finally accommodate
themselves to a permanent sojourn therein, must
be negatived for the present.” On this point I
am compelled to disagree with Dr. Giinther. I
have compared numerous specimens of the com-
mon landlocked salmon (Salmo salar sebago) of
the lakes of Maine and New Brunswick with land-
locked salmon (Salmo salar hardint) from the
lakes of Sweden, and with numerous migratory
salmon, both from America and Europe. I can
have no hesitation in regarding them all as specifi-
cally identical. The differences are very trivial in
kind, and not greater than would be expected on

THE SALMON FAMILY. 67

the hypothesis of recent adaptation of the sal-
mon to lake-life. We have, therefore, on our
Atlantic coast but one species of salmon, Salmo
salar. Dr. Francis Day, who has very thoroughly
studied these fishes, takes, in his memoir on ‘‘ The
Fishes of Great Britain and Ireland,” and in other
papers, a similar view in regard to the European
species. Omitting the species with permanent
teeth on the shaft of the vomer (sub-genus Sa/ar),
he finds among the salmon proper only two
species, Salmo salar and Salmo trutta. The latter
species, the sea-trout or salmon-trout of England,
is similar to the salmon in many respects, but has
rather smaller scales, there being fourteen in an
oblique series between the adipose fin and the
lateral lime, ; Itias not.so strong a fish, as the. sal-
mon, nor does it reach so large a size. Although
naturally anadromous, like the true salmon, land-
locked forms of the salmon-trout are not un-
common. These have been usually regarded as
different species, while aberrant or intermediate
individuals are usually regarded as hybrids.

The present writer has examined many thou-
sands of American Salmonide, both of Oxcorhyn-
chus and Salmo. While many variations have
come to his attention, and he has been compelled
more than once to modify his views as to specific
distinctions, he has never yet seen an individual
which he had the slightest reason to regard as a
“hybrid.” It is evident that in America but few
species of salmonoids exist, and that these are
subject to many variations. It is certainly illogical
to conclude that every specimen which does not

68 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

correspond to our closet-formed definition of its
species must therefore be a “hybrid” with some
other. There is no evidence worth mentioning,
known to me, of extensive hybridization in a state
of nature in any group of fishes. This matter is
much in need of further study; for what is true of
the species in one region, in this regard, may not
be true of others. The species of trout, also, may
perhaps hybridize, while Salmo salar and the
species of Oncorhynchus certainly do not. Dr.
Giinther observes : —

“Johnson, a correspondent of Willughby, had already
expressed his belief that the different salmonoids inter-
breed ; and this view has since been shared by many who
have observed these fishes in Nature. Hybrids between
the sewin (Salmo trutta cambricus) and the river-trout
(Salmo fario) were numerous in the Rhymney and other
rivers of South Wales before salmonoids were almost ex-
terminated by the pollutions allowed to pass into these
streams, and so variable in their characters that the pas-
sage from one species to the other could be demonstrated
in an almost unbroken series, which might induce some
naturalists to regard both species as identical. Abundant
evidence of a similar character has accumulated, showing
the frequent occurrence of hybrids between Salmo fario
and 5S. ¢rutta. . . . In some rivers the conditions appear
to be more favorable to hybridism than in others, in which
hybrids are of comparatively rare occurrence. Hybrids
between the salmon and other species are very scarce
everywhere.”’

The black-spotted trout, forming the sub-genus
Salar, differ from Salmo salar and Salmo trutta in
the greater development of the vomerine teeth,

THE SALMON FAMILY. 69

which are persistent throughout life, in a long
double series on the shaft of the vomer. About
~ seven species are laboriously distinguished by Dr.
Giinther, in the waters of western Europe. Most
of these are regarded by Dr. Day as varieties of
Salmo fario. The latter species, the common
river-trout or lake-trout of. Europe, is found
throughout northern and central Europe, wher-
ever suitable waters occur. It is abundant, gamy,
takes the hook readily, and is excellent as food.
It is more hardy than the different species of charr,
although from an esthetic point of view it must
be regarded as inferior to all of the Sa/velinz.
The largest river-trout recorded by Dr. Day
weighed twenty-one pounds. Such large indi-
viduals are usually found in lakes in the north,
well stocked with smaller fishes on which trout
may feed. Farther south, where the surroundings
are less favorable to trout-life, they become mature
at a length of less than a foot, and a weight of a
few ounces. These excessive variations in the
size of individuals have received too little notice
from students of Salmonide. Similar variations
occur in all the non-migratory species of Salmo
and of Salvelinus. Numerous river-trout have
been recorded from northern Asia, but as yet
nothing can be definitely stated as to the number
of species actually existing.

In North America, only the region west of the
Mississippi Valley, and the valley of Mackenzie
River, have species of black-spotted trout. If we
are to follow the usage of the names “salmon”
and “trout,” which prevails in England, we should

70 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

say that it is only these Western regions which
have any trout at all. Of the number of species
(about twenty in all) which have been indicated
by authors, certainly not more than four can
possibly be regarded as distinct species; and of
these four, two are, as will be seen, still extremely
doubtful. The other names are either useless
synonymes, or else they have been applied to
local varieties which pass by degrees into the
ordinary types.

Of the American species the Rainbow Trout
(Salmo irideus) most nearly approaches the Eu-
ropean Salmo fario. It has the scales compara-
tively large, although rather smaller than in Salmo
fario, the usual number in a longitudinal series
being about 135. The mouth is smaller than in
other American trout; the maxillary, except in
old males, rarely extending beyond the eye. The
caudal fin is well forked, becoming in very old
fishes more nearly truncate. The color, as in all
the other species, is bluish, the sides silvery in the
males, with a red lateral band, and reddish and
dusky blotches. The head, back, and upper fins
are sprinkled with round black spots, which are
very variable in number. In specimens taken in
the sea, this species, like most other trout in sim-
ilar conditions, is bright silvery, and sometimes
immaculate. This species is especially charac-
teristic of the waters of California. It abounds in
every clear brook, from the Mexican line north-
ward to Mount Shasta, and occasionally in coast-
wise streams to Alaska. No specimens have been
anywhere obtained to the eastward of the Cascade

THE SALMON FAMILY. 71

Range or of the Sierra Nevada. It varies much
in size; specimens from northern California often
reach a weight of six pounds, while in the Rio San
Luis Rey, the southernmost locality from which I
have obtained trout, they seldom exceed a length
of six inches. Although not an anadromous spe-
cies, the rainbow trout frequently moves about in
the rivers, and it often enters the sea. Several at-
tempts have been made to introduce it in Eastern
streams. It is apparently more hardy and less
greedy than the American Charr, or Brook Trout
(Salvelinus fontinals). On the other hand, it is
distinctly inferior to the latter in beauty and in
gaminess.

The Steel-head (Salmo gairdneri) is a large
trout, of twelve to twenty pounds in weight, found
very abundantly in the mouth of the Columbia
and other rivers, in the spring, at the time of the
early salmon run. These are evidently spent
fishes. This fact would indicate a spawning time
later (probably midwinter) than that of the sal-
mon, and their occurrence in the river at the
salmon run is evidently due to a return toward the
sea. Steel-heads are occasionally taken in the Sac-
ramento, but in the Columbia they are abundant.
They are rejected by the salmon fishermen, as
their flesh is pale, and the bones are much more
firmly ossified than in the species of Oncorhynchus.
The soft characters of the bones in the latter
group, as compared with those of the larger trout,
is one feature of their excellence as food, espe-
cially in the canned condition.

- Comparing the steel-heads with the rainbow

72 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

trout, we find no differences, other than that the
former is of much larger size, and has a larger
mouth, and its caudal fin is truncate instead of
forked. But the tail becomes more truncate, and
the mouth larger with age in all species of salmon
and trout. If a rainbow trout were to reach the
size of the steel-head, it ought to acquire charac-
ters similar to those of the latter species. Con-
versely, unless the rainbow trout are young of the
steel-head, the young of the latter are unknown.
It is my belief that the steel-head is simply the
large rainbow trout which has lived in the sea, and
ascends the river to spawn. If this be true, Salmo
zvideus must be omitted from our lists, as identical
with Salmo gairdnert, the latter name being the
earlier one.

The most widely distributed, and decidedly the
most important, of the American black-spotted
trout is the Salmo mykiss (= Salmo purpuratus
and clarki of authors), or, as we call it, the Red-
throated Trout. This species has much smaller
scales than the rainbow trout or steel-head, the
usual number in a longitudinal series being 150
to 170. Its mouth is proportionately larger, and
there is usually a narrow band of small teeth on
the hyoid bone at the base of the tongue.
These teeth are always wanting in Salmo trideus
and gairduert. The color in Salmo mykiss is, as
in other species, excessively variable. In almost
all specimens there is a deep-red blotch on the
throat, between the branches of the lower jaw and
the membrane connecting them. This I have not
found in other species; and as it seems to be

THE SALMON FAMILY. 73

constant in all varieties of Salmo mykiss, at all ages,
it will furnish a good distinctive character. The
red-throated trout is found in every suitable river
and lake in the great basin of Utah, in the streams
of Colorado, Wyoming, and Montana, on both
sides of the Rocky Mountains. It is also found
throughout Oregon, Washington, Idaho, British
Columbia, and Alaska, probably no stream or lake
suitable for salmonoid life being without it. In
California the species seems to be comparatively
rare, and its range has not been well made out.
Large sea-run individuals apparently analogous to
the steel-heads are sometimes found in the mouth
of the Sacramento. In Washington Territory and
Alaska this species regularly enters the sea. In
Puget Sound it isa common fish. These sea-run
individuals are more silvery and less spotted than
those found in the mountain streams and lakes.
Numerous more or less tangible varieties of Salmo
mykiss occur, one of the most marked of which is
the beautiful trout (Salmo mykiss henshawz) found
in Lake Tahoe, the finest of all the mountain lakes
of the Sierra Nevada. The size of Salmo mykiss
is subject to much variation. Ordinarily, four to
six pounds is a large size; but in certain favored
waters, as Lake Tahoe, and the fjord bays of the
Northwest, specimens from twenty to thirty pounds
are occasionally taken. No attempt has been
made (1880) to transport this, the finest known
species of black-spotted trout, to Eastern waters.
The writer thinks it much worthier of experiment,
in this regard, than the rainbow trout. The
great variety of the waters in which it occurs

74. SCIENCE SKETCHES.

seems to promise a ready adaptation to other
surroundings.

The Rio Grande Trout (Salmo mykiss spilurus)
is a large and profusely spotted trout, found in
the head-waters of the Rio Grande, the mountain
streams of the great basin of Utah, and as far
south as the northern part of Chihuahua. Its
scales are still smaller than those of the red-
throated trout, to which it bears much resem-
blance, and of which it is probably simply a local
variety.

The genus Hucho has been framed for the Huchen
or Rothfisch (/fucho hucho) of the Danube, —a large
salmon, differing from the genus Sa/mo in having
no teeth on the shaft of the vomer, and from the
Salvelinit at least in form and coloration. The
real characters of the genus, which seems to be
distinct from Salvelinus, have not yet been
worked out. The Huchen is a long and slender,
somewhat pike-like fish, with depressed snout and
strong teeth. The color is silvery, sprinkled with
small black dots. It reaches a size little inferior
to that of the salmon, and it is said to be an
excellent food-fish. Little is known of its habits.
It has, however, the reputation of being unusually
voracious for a salmon.

The genus Salvelinus comprises the finest of the
Salmonide, from the point of view of the angler
or the artist. In England the species are known
as charr, in contradistinction to the black-spotted
species of Salmo, which are called trout. The
former name has unfortunately been lost in Amer-
ica, where the name “‘trout” is given indiscrimi-

THE SALMON FAMILY. 76

nately to both groups, and, still worse, to numerous
other fishes (Cestreus, Micropterus, Hexagrammus)
wholly unlike the Sa/monide@ in all respects. It is
sometimes said that the “ American brook-trout is
no trout, nothing but a charr,”’ almost as though
“charr” were aword of reproach. Nothing higher,
however, can be said of a salmonoid than that it is
ay char, mie technicalcharacter of the ‘genus
Salvelinus lies in the form of its vomer. This is
deeper than in Salmo; and when the flesh is re-
moved the bone is found to be somewhat boat-
shaped above, and with the shaft depressed and out
of the line of the chevron. Only the chevron is
armed with teeth, and the shaft is covered by skin.
In one species (S. xamaycush) the chevron sends a
projection backward which bears teeth; these teeth
appearing, unless the flesh is removed, as if stand-
ing on the shaft of the bone.

In color all the charrs differ from the salmon
and trout. The body in all is covered with round
spots which are paler than the ground color, and
crimson or gray. The lower fins are usually edged
with bright colors. The sexual differences are not
great. The scales, in general, are smaller than in
other Salmonide, and they are imbedded in the skin
to such a degree as to escape the notice of casual
observers and even of most anglers.

“One trout scale in the scales I ’d lay

(If trout had scales), and ’t will outweigh

The wrong side of the balances.”
LOWELL.

The charrs inhabit, in general, only the clearest
‘and coldest of mountain streams and lakes. They

76 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

are not migratory, or only to a limited extent. In
northern regions they descend to the sea, where
they grow much more rapidly, and assume a nearly
uniform silvery-gray color. The different species
are found in all suitable waters throughout the
northern parts of both continents, except in the
Rocky Mountains and Great Basin, where only
the black-spotted trout occur. The number of
species of charr is very uncertain, as, both in
America and Europe, trivial variations and indi-
vidual peculiarities have been raised to the rank
of species. More types, however, seem to be rep-
resented in America than in Europe.

The only really well-authenticated species of
charr in European waters is the Red Charr, Salb-
ling, or Ombre Chevalier (Salvelinus alpinus).
This species is found in cold clear streams in
Switzerland, Germany, and throughout Scandina-
via and the British Islands. Compared with the
American charr or brook-trout, it is a slenderer
fish, with smaller mouth, longer fins, and smaller
red spots, which are confined to the sides of the
body. It isa ‘gregarious and deep-swimming fish,
shy of taking the bait and feeding largely at night-
time. It appears to require very pure and mostly
deep water for its residence.’ It is less tenacious
of life than the trout. It reaches a weight of from
one to five pounds, probably rarely exceeding the
latter in size. The various charr described from
Siberia are far too little known to be enumerated
here.

Of the American charr the one most resembling
the European species is the Rangeley Lake Trout

THE SALMON FAMILY. vi

(Salvelinus stagnalis). The exquisite little fish is
known in the United States only from the Rangeley
chain of lakes in western Maine. Quite lately
specimens of what appears to be the same species
have been taken in Arctic America, about Cum-
berland Gulf. Still later, Dr. T. H. Bean has shown
its identity with the Greenland charr. Whether
the species still inhabits any intervening waters is
unknown. The Rangeley trout is much slenderer
than the common brook-trout, with much smaller
head and smaller mouth. In life it is dark blue
above, and the deep red spots are confined to the
sides of the body. The species rarely exceeds the
_length of a foot in the Rangeley Lakes, but in some
other waters it reaches a much larger size. So far
as is known it keeps itself in the depths of the lake
until its spawning season approaches, in October,
when it ascends the stream to spawn.

Another beautiful little charr, allied to Salvelinus
stagnalis, is the Floeberg Charr (Salvelinus arcturus).
This species has been brought from Victoria Lake
and Floeberg Beach, in the extreme northern part
of Arctic America, the northernmost point whence
any salmonoid has been obtained.

The American Charr, or, as it is usually called,
the Brook Trout (Salvelinus fontinalis), although
one of the most beautiful of fishes, is perhaps the
least graceful of all the genuine charrs. It is tech-
nically distinguished by the somewhat heavy head
and large mouth, the maxillary bone reaching more
or less beyond the eye. There are no teeth on the
hyoid bone, traces at least of such teeth being
found in nearly all other species. Its color is

78 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

somewhat different from that of the others, the red
spots being large and the back more or less mot-
tled and barred with darker olive. The dorsal and
caudal fins are likewise barred or mottled, while in
the other species they are generally uniform in
color. The brook-trout is found only in streams
east of the Mississippi and Saskatchewan. It
occurs in all suitable streams of the Alleghany re-
gion and the Great Lake system, from the Chatta-
hoochee River in northern Georgia northward at
least to Labrador and Hudson Bay, the northern lim-
its of its range being as yet not well ascertained. It
' varies greatly in size, according to its surroundings,
those found in lakes being larger than those resi-
dent in small brooks. Those found farthest south,
in the head-waters of the Chattahoochee, Savannah,
Catawba, and French Broad, rarely pass the dimen-
sions of fingerlings. The largest specimens are
recorded from the sea along the Canadian coast.
These frequently reach a weight of ten pounds;
and from their marine and migratory habits, they
may be regarded as forming a distinct variety (Sa/-
velinus fontinalis tmmaculatus). The largest fresh-
water specimens rarely exceed seven pounds in
weight. Some unusually large brook-trout have
been taken in the Rangeley lakes, the largest known
to me having a reputed weight of eleven pounds.
The brook-trout is the favorite game-fish of Amer-
ican waters, pre-eminent in wariness, in beauty, and
in delicacy of flesh. It inhabits all clear and cold
waters within its range, the large lakes and the
smallest ponds, the tiniest brooks and the largest
rivers; and when it can do so without soiling its

THE SALMON FAMILY. 79

aristocratic gills on the way, it descends to the
sea and grows large and fat on the animals of the
ocean. Although a bold biter it is a wary fish,
and ‘it often requires much skill to capture it. It
can be caught too with artificial or natural flies,
minnows, crickets, worms, grasshoppers, grubs, the
spawn of other fish, or even the eyes or cut pieces
of other trout. It spawns in the fall, from Septem-
ber to late in November. It begins to reproduce
at the age of two years, then having a length of
about six inches. In spring-time the trout delight
in rapids and swiftly running water; and in the hot
months of midsummer they resort to deep, cool,
and shaded pools. Later, at the approach of the
spawning season, they gather around the mouths
of cool, gravelly brooks whither they resort to
make their beds.!

The trout are rapidly disappearing from our
streams through the agency of the manufacturer
and the summer-boarder. In the words of an ex-
cellent angler, Rev. Myron W. Reed, —

“This is the last generation of trout-fishers. The
children will not be able to find any. Already there are
well-trodden paths by every stream in Maine, in New
York, and in Michigan. I know of but one river in North
America by the side of which you will find no paper collar
or other evidence of civilization. It is the Nameless River.
Not that trout will cease to be. They will be hatched by
machinery and raised in ponds, and fattened on chopped
liver, and grow flabby and lose their spots. The trout of
the restaurant will not cease to be. He is no more like
the trout of the wild river than the fat and songless reed-

1 Hallock.

80 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

bird is like the bobolink. Gross feeding and easy pond
life enervate and deprave him. ‘The trout that the chil-
dren will know only by legend is the gold-springled living
arrow of the white water; able to zigzag up the cataract ;
able to loiter in the rapids; whose dainty meat is the
glancing butterfly.”

The brook-trout adapts itself readily to cultiva-
tion in artificial ponds. It has been successfully
transported to Europe, and is already abundant in
certain streams in England and elsewhere.

The “ Dolly Varden” Trout (Salvelinus malma)
is very similar to the brook-trout, closely resem-
bling it in size, form, color, and habits. It is
found in the streams of northern California, Ore-
gon, Washington, British Columbia, Alaska, and
Kamtschatka, mostly to the westward of the Cas-
cade Range. It often enters the sea, and specimens
of eleven pounds’ weight have been obtained by the
writer in Puget Sound. The Dolly Varden trout
is, in general, deeper in body, and less compressed
than the Eastern brook-trout. The red spots are
found on the back of the fish as well as on the
sides, and the back and upper fins are without the
marblings and blotches seen in Salvelinus fon-
tinalis. In value as food, in beauty, and in ga-
miness, Salvelinus malma is very similar to its
Eastern cousin.

Allied to the true charrs, and now placed by us
with them in the genus Sa/velinus, is the Great Lake
Trout, otherwise known as Mackinaw Trout, Longe,
or Togue (Salvelinus namaycush). Technically,
this fish differs from the true charrs in having on
its vomer a raised crest behind the chevron, and

THE SALMON FAMILY. SI

free from the shaft. This crest is armed with
strong teeth. There are also large hooked teeth
on the hyoid bone, and the teeth generally are
proportionately stronger than in most of the other
species. The great lake-trout is grayish in color,
light or dark according to its surroundings; and
’ the body is covered with round paler spots, which
are gray instead of red. The dorsal and caudal
fins are marked with darker reticulations, some-
what as in the brook-trout. The great lake-trout
is found in all the larger lakes from New England
and New York to Wisconsin, Montana, and Alaska.
It reaches a much larger size than any other Sa/-
velinus, specimens of from fifteen to twenty pounds’
weight being not uncommon, while it occasionally
attains a weight of fifty to eighty pounds. Asa
food-fish it ranks high, although it may be re-
garded as somewhat inferior to the brook-trout or
the white-fish. Compared with other salmonoids,
the great lake-trout is a sluggish, heavy, and rav-
enous fish. It has been known to eat raw potato,
liver, and corn-cobs, — refuse thrown from passing
steamers. According to Herbert, “a coarse,
heavy, stiff rod, and a powerful oiled hempen or
flaxen line, on a winch, with a heavy sinker; a
cod-hook, baited with any kind of flesh, fish, GF
fowl, — is the most successful, if not the most or-
thodox or scientific, mode of capturing him. His
great size and immense strength alone give him
value as a fish of game; but when hooked, he pulls
strongly and fights hard, though he is a boring,
deep fighter, and seldom if ever leaps out of the

water, like the true salmon or brook-trout.”
6

82 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

In the depths of Lake Superior is a variety of
the great lake-trout known as the Siscowet (Sa/-
velinus namaycush stiskawitz), remarkable for its
extraordinary fatness of flesh. The cause of this
difference lies probably in some peculiarity of food,
as yet unascertained.

DISPERSION OF FRESH-WATER FISHES. 8 3

THE DISPERSION OF FRESH-WATER
BIS ED:

HEN I was a boy and went fishing in the

brooks of western New York, I noticed
that the different streams did not always have the
same kinds of fishes in them. Two streams in
particular in Wyoming County, not far from my
father’s farm, engaged in this respect my special
attention. Their sources are not far apart, and
they flow in opposite directions, on opposite sides
of a low ridge, — an old glacial moraine, something
more than a mile across. The Oatka Creek flows
northward from this ridge, while the East Coy
runs toward the southeast on the other side of it,
both flowing ultimately into the same river, the
Genesee.

It does not require a very careful observer to
see that in these two streams the fishes are not
quite the same. The streams themselves are simi-
lar enough. In each the waters are clear and fed
by springs. Each flows over gravel and clay,
through alluvial meadows, in many windings, and
with elms and alders “in all its elbows.” In both
streams we were sure of finding Trout,! and in one
of them the trout are still abundant. In both we
used to catch the Brook Chub,? or, as we called

1 Salvelinus fontinalis Mitchill.
2 Semotilus atromaculatus Mitchill.

84 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

it, the “Horned Dace;” and in both were large
schools of Shiners! and of Suckers.? But in every
deep hole, and especially in the mill-ponds along
the East Coy Creek, the Horned Pout? swarmed
on the mucky bottoms. In every eddy, or in the
deep hole worn out at the root of the elm-trees,
could be seen the Sun-fish,’ strutting in green and
scarlet, with spread fins keeping intruders away
from its nest. But in the Oatka Creek were found
neither Horned Pout nor Sun-fish, nor have I ever
heard that either has been taken there. Then be-
sides these nobler fishes, worthy of a place on
every school-boy’s string, we knew by sight, if not
by name, numerous smaller fishes, Darters® and
Minnows,® which crept about in the gravel on the
bottom of the East Coy, but which we never recog-
nized in the Oatka.

There must be a reason for differences like these,
in the streams themselves or in the nature of the
fishes. The Sun-fish and the Horned Pout are
home-loving fishes to a greater extent than the
others which I have mentioned; still, where no ob-
stacles prevent, they are sure to move about.
There must be, then, in the Oatka some sort of
barrier, or strainer, which keeping these species
back permits others more adventurous to pass;
and a wider knowledge of the geography of the
region showed that such is the case. Farther

1 Notropis megalops Rafinesque.
2 Catostomus teres Mitchill.

8 Ameiurus melas Rafinesque.

4 Lepomis gibbosus Linnxus.

5 Etheostoma fiabellare Rafinesque.
6 Rhinichthys atronasus Mitchill.

DISPERSION OF FRESH-WATER FISHES. 85

down in its course, the Oatka falls over a ledge of
rock, forming a considerable waterfall at Rock
Glen. Still lower down its waters disappear in the
eround, sinking into some limestone cavern or
eravel-bed, from which they reappear, after some six
miles, in the large springs at Caledonia. Either
of these barriers might well discourage a quiet-
loving fish; while the trout and its active associates
have sometime passed them, else we should not
find them in the upper waters in which they alone
form the fish-fauna. This problem is a simple
one; a boy could work it out, and the obvious
solution seems to be satisfactory.

Since those days I have been a fisherman in
many waters, — not an angler exactly, but one who
fishes for fish, and to whose net nothing large or
small ever comes amiss; and wherever I go, I find
cases like this.

We do not know all the fishes of America yet,
nor all those well that we know by sight; still this
knowledge will come with time and patience, and
to procure it is a comparatively easy task. It is
also easy to ascertain the more common inhabi-
tants of any given stream. It is difficult, however,
to obtain negative results which are really results.
You cannot often say that a species does not live
in a certain stream. You can only affirm that you
have not yet found it there, and you can rarely fish
in any stream so long that you can find nothing
that you have not taken before. Still more difficult
is it to gather the results of scattered observations
into general statements regarding the distribution
of fishes, |The facts may be so’ few as to be

86 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

misleading, or so numerous as to be confusing;
and the few writers who have taken up this subject
in detail have found both these difficulties to be
serious. Whatever general propositions we may
maintain must be stated with the modifying clause
of “other things being equal;” and other things
are never quite equal. Dr. Wilder’s saying that
“Nature abhors a generalization ” is especially ap-
plicable to all discussions of the relations of species
to environment.

Still less satisfactory is our attempt to investi-
gate the causes on which our partial generaliza-
tions depend, — to attempt to break to pieces the
“other things being equal” which baffle us in our
search for general laws. Scarcely anything has
been written on this phase of the subject from an
American point of view. This little I have tried
to include with my own observations, in preparing
this paper. The same problems, of course, come
up on each of the other continents and in all
sroups of animals or plants; but most that I
shall say will be confined to the question of the
dispersion of fishes in the fresh waters of North
America. The broader questions of the bounda-
ries of faunz and of faunal areas I shall bring up
only incidentally.

Some of the problems to be solved were first
noticed by Professor Agassiz in 1850, in his work
on Lake Superior. Later (1854), in a paper on
the fishes of the Tennessee River,! he makes the
following statement: —

1 On Fishes from Tennessee River, Alabama. American Jour-
nal of Science and Arts, xvii. 2d series, 1854, p. 26.

DISPERSION OF FRESH-WATER FISHES. 87

“The study of these features [of distribution] is of the
greatest importance, inasmuch as it may eventually lead
to a better understanding of the intentions implied in this
seemingly arbitrary disposition of animal life... .

“There is still another very interesting problem re-
specting the geographical distribution of our fresh-water
animals, which may be solved by the further investigation
of the fishes of the Tennessee River. The water-course,
taking the Powells, Clinch, and Holston Rivers as its
head-waters, arises from the mountains of Virginia in
latitude 37° ; it then flows S. W. to latitude 34° 25’, when
it turns W. and N. W., and finally empties into the Ohio,
under the same latitude as its source in 37°.

“The question now is this: Are the fishes of this water
system the same throughout its extent? In which case
we should infer that water communication is the chief
condition of geographical distribution of our fresh-water
fishes. Or do they differ in different stations along its
course? And if so, are the differences mainly controlled
by the elevation of the river above the level of the sea, or:
determined by climatic differences corresponding to dif-
ferences of latitude? We should assume that the first
alternative was true if the fishes of the upper course of
the river differed from those of the middle and lower
courses in the same manner as in the Danube, from its
source to Pesth, where this stream flows nearly for its
whole length under the same parallel. We would, on
the contrary, suppose the second alternative to be well
founded if marked differences were observed between
the fish of such tracts of the river as do not materially
differ in their elevation above the sea, but flow under
different latitudes. Now, a few collections from different
stations along this river, like that sent me by Dr. New-
man from the vicinity of Huntsville, would settle at once
this question, not for the Tennessee River alone, but for

88 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

most rivers flowing under similar circumstances upon the
surface of the globe. Nothing, however, short of such
collections, compared closely with one another, will fur-
nish a reliable answer. . . . Whoever will accomplish
this survey will have made a highly valuable contribution
to our knowledge.”

Certain conclusions were also suggested by
Professor Cope in his excellent memoir on the
fishes of the Alleghany region? in 1868. From
this paper I make the following quotations: —

“The distribution of fresh-water fishes is of special
importance to the questions of the origin and existence of
species in connection with the physical conditions of the
waters and of the land. This is, of course, owing to the
restricted nature of their habitat, and the impossibility of
their making extended migrations. With the submer-
gence of land beneath the sea, fresh-water fish are de-
stroyed in proportion to the extent of the invasion of salt
water, while terrestrial vertebrates can retreat before it.
Hence every inland fish-fauna dates from the last total
submergence of the country.

‘“‘ Prior to the elevation of a given mountain chain, the
courses of the rivers may generally have been entirely
different from their later ones. Subsequent to this period,
they can only have undergone partial modifications. As
subsequent submergences can rarely have extended to
the highlands where such streams originate, the fishes of
such rivers can only have been destroyed so far as they
were unable to reach those elevated regions, and preserve
themselves from destruction from salt water by sheltering
themselves in mountain streams. On the other hand,

1 On the Distribution of Fresh-Water Fishes in the Alleghany
Region of Southwestern Virginia. Journ. Acad. Nat. Sci.,; Phila.,
1868, pp. 207-247.

DISPERSION OF FRESH-WATER FISHES. 89

a period of greater elevation of the land, and of conse-
quent greater cold, would congeal the waters and cover
their courses with glaciers. The fishes would be driven
to the neighborhood of the coast, though no doubt in
more southern latitudes a sufficient extent of uncongealed
fresh waters would flow by a short course into the ocean,
to preserve from destruction many forms of fresh-water
fishes. Thus, through many vicissitudes, the fauna of a
given system of rivers has had opportunity of uninter-
rupted descent, from the time of the elevation of the
mountain range, in which it has its sources. .. .

“As regards the distinction of species in the discon-
nected basins of different rivers, which have been sepa-
rated from an early geologic period, if species occur
which are common to any two or more of them, the sup-
porter of the theory of distinct creations must suppose
that such species have been twice created, once for each
hydrographic basin, or that waters flowing into the one
basin have been transferred to another. The develop-
mentalist, on the other hand, will accept the last propo-
sition, or else suppose that time has seen an identical
process and similar result of modification in these dis-
tinct regions.

“ Facts of distribution in the eastern district of North
America are these. Several species of fresh-water fishes
occur at the same time in many Atlantic basins, from
the Merrimac or from the Hudson to the James, and
throughout the Mississippi Valley, and in the tributaries
of the Great Lakes. On the other hand, the species of
each river may be regarded as pertaining to four classes,
whose distribution has direct reference to the character
of the water and the food it offers: first, those of the
tide-waters, of the river channels, bayous, and sluggish
waters near them, or in the flat lands near the coast ;
second, those of the river channels of its upper course,

gO SCIENCE SKETCHES.

where the currents are more distinct; third, those of

the creeks of the hill country; fourth, those of the
~ elevated mountain streams which are subject to falls and
rapids.”

Farther on in the same paper, Professor Cope
reaches two important general conclusions, thus
stated by him: —

“TY. That species not generally distributed exist in wa-
ters on different sides of the great water-shed.

“TI. That the distribution of the species is not gov-
erned by the outlet of the rivers, streams having similar
discharges (Holston and Kanawha, Roanoke and Susque-
hanna) having less in common than others having differ-
ent outlets (Kanawha, or Susquehanna and James).

“In view of the first proposition, and the question of
the origin of species, the possibility of an original or sub-
sequent mingling of the fresh waters suggests itself as
more probable than that of distinct origin in the different
basins.”’

Two questions in this connection are raised by
Professor Cope. The first question is this: ‘‘ Has
any destruction of the river faune taken place
since the first elevation of the Alleghanies, when
the same species were thrown into waters flowing
In opposite directions?” Of such destruction by
submergence or otherwise, Professor Cope finds
no evidence. The second question is, ‘ Has any
means of communication existed, at any time, but
especially since the last submergence, by which
the transfer of species .might ocedr?? Some
evidence of such transfer exists in the wide dis-
tribution of certain species, especially those which

DISPERSION OF FRESH-WATER FISHES. OI

seek the highest streamlets in the mountains; but
except to call attention to the cavernous character
of the Subcarboniferous and Devonian limestones,
Professor Cope has made little attempt to account
for it.

Professor Cope finally concludes with this im-
portant generalization : —

“Jt would appear, from the previous considerations,
that the distribution of fresh-water fishes is governed by
laws similar to those controlling terrestrial vertebrates and
other animals, in spite of the seemingly confined nature of
their habitat.”

Dr. Giinther! has well summarized some of the
known facts in regard to the manner of dispersion
of fishes : —

“The ways in which the dispersal of fresh-water fishes
has been effected were various. They are probably all
still in operation, but most work so slowly and imper-
ceptibly as to escape direct observation; perhaps they
will be more conspicuous after science and _ scientific
inquiry shall have reached a somewhat greater age.
From the great number of fresh-water forms which we
see at this present day acclimatized in, gradually accli-
matizing themselves in, or periodically or sporadically mi-
grating into, the sea, we must conclude that under certain
circumstances salt water may cease to be a barrier at
some period of the existence of fresh-water species, and
that many of them have passed from one river through
salt water into another. Secondly, the head-waters of
some of the grandest rivers, the mouths of which are at
opposite ends of the continents which they drain, are
sometimes distant from each other a few miles only. The

1 Guide to the Study of Fishes, 1880, p. 211.

92 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

intervening space may have been easily bridged over for
the passage of fishes by a slight geological change affect-
ing the level of the water-shed or even by temporary
floods ; and a communication of this kind, if existing for
a limited period only, would afford the ready means of an
exchange of a number of species previously peculiar to
one or the other of these river or lake systems. Some
fishes provided with gill-openings so narrow that the
water moistening the gills cannot readily evaporate, and
endowed, besides, with an extraordinary degree of vitality,
like many Siluroids (Clarias, Callichthys), Eels, etc., are
enabled to wander for some distance over land, and may
thus reach a water-course leading them thousands of
miles from their original home. Finally, fishes or their
ova may be accidentally carried by water-spouts, by
aquatic birds or insects, to considerable distances.”

A somewhat detailed statement of the known
facts, arranged in the form of twenty-eight propo-
sitions, was given by me in 1878.1 To these some
further data were added in a paper by Professor
Gilbert and myself on the fishes of Arkansas and
Texas,? published during the past year. These
few memoirs, four or five in number, and dealing
chiefly with other things, give about all that has
been done in the way of generalization on this
subject; and in none of these is the question of
causes or methods in distribution dealt with in
detail or to any important extent.

1 On the Distribution of the Fishes of the Alleghany Region, of

South Carolina, Georgia, and Tennessee, with Descriptions of new
or little-known Species. Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., xii. 1878, pp. 91-
95:

2 List of Fishes collected in Arkansas, Indian Territory, and
Texas, in September, 1884, with Notes and Descriptions. Proc.
U. S. Nat. Mus., 1886, pp. 1-25.

DISPERSION OF FRESH-WATER FISHES. 93

We now recognize about six hundred species!
of fishes as found in the fresh waters of North

1 The table below shows approximately the composition of the
fresh-water fish-fauna of Europe, as compared with that of North
America north of the Tropic of Cancer. (See a review of Seeley’s
“Fresh Water Fishes of Europe,” Zhe Dial,Chicago, June, ’86, p. 35.)

FAMILIES. EUROPE. N. AMERICA.
Lamprey . Petromyzontide . . 3 species. 8 species.
Paddle-fish . Polyodontide . — * I =
Sturgeon Acipenseride . .« .» 10 . 6 &
Gar-pike Lepisosteide . ». .— % 3 =
Bow-fin . Amiatide .. - — . I =
Cat-fish . milUnide + « I oy Was as
Sucker Catostomide 2. ae te a
Loach Cobden, a ar 3 ee re
Carp. Cyprinide 61 230 ae
Characin Characinide eo i I
Moon-eye fodontide: «sa | She
Herring . : Clupeide 2 es 5 He
Gizzard-shad . Dorosomide — ee I ss
Salmon . Salmonide . 12 ye) RS &
Trout-perch Percopside . - — sf I a
Blind-fish . Amblyopside . . .— * 5 =
Killifish . Cyprinodontide . 3 ce a
Mud-minnow Wagbride- «(ss I a I s
ts eee ae ESONDe s 5 5 I Hy 5 ‘5
Alaska Black-fish . Dallide . «6 «sm % I a
fk | nee eae Anguillide « 2 a I
Stickleback. . Gasterosteide . a reat
Silverside Atherinide. . s 2 & 2 Gs
Pirate Perch Aphredoderid@ . .— be I
Elassoma Elassomide . « «.— “a 2 <
Sun-fish . Comivarchideé 2s «— “ - 34
Perch Percide . «RE # 72 ig
Fess ides Serranidé . ‘ Me 4
Drum . Scienide .. — KK I %
Surf-fish. Embiotocide PT es ie I a
Cichlid Cichlid@. « «© «+ == 2 es
Goby. . Gobiide.. . oe ee 6 a
Sculpin , COMa@ a a « 2 “ 21 «
Blenny . BRA. st a F Cc _ a
Cod ° Gadde Sc ss I & I ey
Flounder . Pleuronectide. . I oe 3
Sole . Soleide . I a I

Total: Europe, 21 families ; 126 species. North America, 34 families ;
587 species. }
According to Dr. Giinther (Guide to the Study of Fishes, p.

243), the total number of species now known from the temperate

O4 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

America, north of the Tropic of Cancer, these
representing thirty-four of the natural families.
As to their habits, we can divide these species
rather roughly into the four categories pro-
posed by Professor Cope, or, as we may call
them, —

(1) Lowland fishes; as the Bow-fin,! Pirate
Perch,? large-mouthed Black Bass,? Sun-fishes and
some Cat-fishes.

(2) Channel-fishes; as the Channel Cat-fish,*
the Moon-eye,®> Gar-pike,® Buffalo-fishes,’ and
Drum. |

(3) Upland fishes; as many of the Darters,
Shiners and Suckers, and the small-mouthed
Black Bass.?

(4) Mountain-fishes; as the Brook Trout, and
many of the Darters and Minnows.

To these we may add the more or less distinct
classes of (5) Lake-fishes, inhabiting only waters
which are deep, clear, and cold, as the various spe-
cies of White-fish?® and the Great Lake Trout; "

regions of Asia and Europe is about 360. The fauna of India,
south of the Himalayas, is much more extensive, numbering 625
species. This latter fauna bears little resemblance to that of
North America, being wholly tropical in its character.

1 Amiatus calvus Linnzus.

2 Aphredoderus sayanus Gilliams.

8 Micropterus salmoides Lacépede.

* ctalurus punctatus Rafinesque.

5 Hiodon tergisus Le Sueur.

6 Lepisosteus osseus Linnzus.

1 Tctiobus bubalus, cyprinella, etc.

8 Aplodinotus grunniens Rafinesque.

9 Micropterus dolomieu Lacépede.

10 Coregonus clupeiformis, artedi, etc.

ll Salvelinus namaycush Walbaum.

DISPERSION OF FRESH-WATER FISHES. 95

(6) Anadromous fishes, or those which run up
from the sea to spawn in fresh waters, as the
Salmon,! Sturgeon,? Shad,? and Striped Bass; 4
(7) Catadromous fishes, like the Eel,® which pass
down to spawn in the sea; and (8) brackish-water
fishes, which thrive best in the debatable waters
of the river-mouths, as most of the Sticklebacks
and the Killifishes.

As regards the range of species, we have every
possible gradation from those which seem to be
confined to a single river, and are rare even in
their restricted habitat, to those which are in a
measure cosmopolitan,” ranging everywhere in
suitable waters.

Still, again, we have all degrees of constancy and
inconstancy in what we regard as the characters
of aspecies. Those found only in a single river-
basin are usually uniform enough; but the species
having a wide range usually vary much in different
localities. Such variations have at different times
been taken to be the indications of as many differ-
ent species. Continued explorations bring to light,
from year to year, new species; but the number of
new forms now discovered each year is usually less
than the number of recognized species which are
yearly proved to be intenable. Three complete
lists of the fresh-water fishes of the United States

1 Salmo salar Linnezus. 2 Acipenser, sp.

3 Clupea sapidissima Wilson. 4 Morone lineata Bloch.

5 Anguilla anguilla Linneus.

€ Thus the Chub-sucker (Zrimyzon sucetta) in some of its varie-
ties ranges everywhere from Maine to Dakota, Florida, and Texas ;
while a number of other species are scarcely less widely distributed.

96 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

have been published by the present writer. That
of Jordan and Copeland,’ published in 1876, enu-
merates 670 species. That of Jordan? in 1878
contains 665 species, and that of Jordan? in 1885,
587 species, although upwards of 75 new species
were detected in the nine years which elapsed be-
tween the first and the last list. Additional spe-
cimens from intervening localities are often found
to form connecting links among the nominal spe-
cies, and thus several supposed species become
in time merged in one. Thus the Common Chan-
nel Cat-fish* of our rivers has been described as
a new species not less than twenty-five times, on
account of differences real or imaginary, but com-
paratively trifling in value.

Where species can readily migrate, their uniform-
ity is preserved; but whenever a form becomes
localized its representatives assume some charac-
ters not shared by the species as a whole. When
we can trace, as we often can, the disappearance by
degrees of these characters, such forms no longer
represent to us distinct species. In cases where
the connecting forms are extinct, or at least
not represented in collections, each form which is

1 Check List of the Fishes of the Fresh Waters of North Amer-
ica, by David S. Jordan and Herbert E. Copeland. Bulletin of the
Buffalo Society of Natural History, 1876, pp. 133-164.

2 A Catalogue of the Fishes of the Fresh Waters of North
America. Bulletin of the United States Geological Survey, 1878,
PP. 407-442.

8 A Catalogue of the Fishes known to inhabit the Waters of
North America North of the Tropic of Cancer. Annual Report
of the Commissioners of Fish and Fisheries for 1884 and 1885.

4 Jctalurus punctatus Rafinesque.

DISPERSION OF FRESH-WATER FISHES. Q7

apparently different must be regarded as a distinct
species.

The variations in any type become, in general,
more marked as we approach the tropics. The
genera are represented, on the whole, by more
species there, and it would appear that the pro-
cesses of specific change go on more rapidly under
the easier conditions of life in the Torrid Zone.

We recognize now in North America twenty-five
distinct species of fresh-water Cat-fishes,! although
nearly a hundred (93) nominal species of these
fishes have been from time to time described.
But these twenty-five species are among them-
selves very closely related, and all of them are
subject to a variety of minor changes. It requires
no strong effort of the imagination to see in them
all the modified descendants of some one species
of Cat-fish, not unlike our Common “ Bull-head,?
—an immigrant probably from Asia, and which
has now adjusted itself to its surroundings in each
of our myriad of Cat-fish breeding streams.

The word “species,” then, is simply a term of
convenience, including such members of a group
similar to each other as are tangibly different
from others, and are not known to be connected
with these by intermediate forms. Such connect-
ing links we may suppose to have existed in all
cases. We are only sure that they do not now
exist in our collections, so far as these have been
carefully studied.

When two or more species of any genus now
inhabit the same waters, they are usually species

1 Svluride. 2 Ameiurus nebulosus.

98 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

whose differentiation is of long standing, — species,
therefore, which can be readily distinguished from
one another. When, on the other hand, we have
“representative species,” —closely related forms,
neither of which is found within the geographical
range of the other, — we can with some confidence
look for intermediate forms where the territory
occupied by the one bounds that inhabited by the
other. In very many such cases the intermediate
forms have been found; and such forms are con-
sidered as sub-species of one species, the one
being regarded as the parent stock, the other
as an offshoot due to the influences of differ-
ent environment. Then, besides these; * species ~
and “sub-species,” groups more or less readily
recognizable, there are varieties and variations of
every grade, often too ill-defined to receive any
sort of name, but still not without significance to
the student of the origin of species. Comparing a
dozen fresh specimens of almost any kind of fish
from any body of water with an equal number
from somewhere else, one will rarely fail to find
some sort of differences, — in size, in form, in color.
These differences are obviously the reflex of dif-
ferences in the environment, and the collector of
fishes seldom fails to recognize them as such;
olten itis not difficult to, refer thesetfect to ‘the
conditions. ‘Thus, fishes from grassy bottoms are
darker than those taken from over sand, and
those from a bottom of muck ‘are darker still,
the shade of color being, in some way not well
understood, dependent on the color of the sur-
roundings. Fishes in large bodies of water reach

DISPERSION OF FRESH-WATER FISHES. 99

a larger size than the same species in smaller
streams or ponds. Fishes from foul or sediment-
laden waters are paler in color and slenderer in
form than those from waters which are clear and
pure. Again, it is often true that specimens from
northern waters are less slender in body than those
from farther south; and soon. Other things be-
ing equal, the more remote the localities from each
other, the greater are these differences.

In our fresh-water fishes each species on an
average has been described as new from three to
four times, on account of minor variations, real or
supposed. In Europe, where the fishes have been
studied longer and by more different men, upwards
of six or eight nominal species have been described
for each one that is now considered distinct.

It is evident, from these and other facts, that the
idea of a separate creation for each species of fishes
in each river basin, as entertained by Agassiz, is
wholly incompatible with our present knowledge
of the specific distinctions or of the geographical
distribution of fishes. This is an unbroken grada-
tion in the variations from the least to the greatest,
— from the peculiarities of the individual, through
local varieties, geographical sub-species, species,
sub-genera, genera, families, super-families, and so
on, until all fish-like vertebrates are included in a
single bond of union.

It is, however, evident that not all American
types of fishes had their origin in America, or even
first assumed in America their present forms.
Some of these are perhaps immigrants from
northern Asia, where they still have their nearest

100 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

relatives. Still others are evidently modified im-
portations from the sea; and of these some are
very recent immigrants, landlocked species which
have changed very little from the parent stock.

The character and possible origin of each of the
thirty-four families of North American fresh-water
fishes may be briefly summarized as follows : —

The Lampreys are evidently of marine origin, as
the marine species are still anadromous. The
fresh-water species, compared with the marine
ones, are smaller in size and weaker in organiza-
tion, and represent larval conditions or arrests of
development of the latter form.

The Paddle-jish is allied to extinct ganoid types.
The group is now represented by one species in
America and another in central Asia.

The Sturgeons, like the Lampreys, are anadro-
mous. But two of the American species are now
confined to the fresh waters, and one of these be-
longs to a peculiar genus (Scaphirhynchus), which
(like Polyodon) has representatives also in central
Asia. As to whether the parent stock in either
case is American or Asiatic, I know of no positive
evidence.

The Gar-pfikes and the Bow-fins are strictly
American types allied to extinct ganoid forms,
and doubtless developed from such in the waters
they now inhabit.

The Cat-fishes of America are all probably de-
scendants of a common stock, not allied to South
American forms, but probably finding its nearest
relatives in India. A single species of this type
now exists in China (Amezurus cantonensis); but

DISPERSION OF FRESH-WATER FISHES. IO!

this is perhaps a returned emigrant from America,
rather than a direct offshoot of the parent stock.

The Suckers are modified Cyprinide, probably
developed originally in America, although one
species has spread from Alaska to Siberia, and
another very peculiar form exists in China. What-
ever its origin, this group is now one of the most
characteristic of our fauna.

The Cyprinide of western America are more or
less closely related to Old World types, and some
of them, like the Old World species, reach a great
size. East of the Rocky Mountains are found a
multitude of species, mostly of small size and
weak organization, which seem to be degenerate
or reduced representatives of Old World types,
and which have for the most part no immediate
relatives among the latter. The majority of these
species are now placed in a single genus, Votropzis,
which is found only in America, and is one of the
most characteristic of our fish-fauna.

The Characius belong to the tropics, especially
to South America. The single species which
crosses the Rio Grande is doubtless an immigrant
from Mexico. The same remarks apply also to
the Cichlids, —a group especially characteristic of
tropical America, one species of which reaches
southern Texas.

The d/oon-eyes are characteristically American
type, with no near relatives elsewhere in the world.
Their ancestors were probably immigrants from
the sea.

The Herring permanently resident in our fresh
waters are simply landlocked representatives of

102 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

species still found in the sea along our coasts.
Other species are anadromous, ascending the rivers
in the spring.

The Gzzsard-shad is indifferently marine, anad-
romous, or landlocked, and is still extending its
range in sluggish waters through the agency of
canals.

The various forms of Salmonitde abound in the
streamsand lakes of all northern regions. The larger
species are marine and anadromous, the smaller
confined to lakes and brooks; but all seek streams
or at least shallower waters for the purpose of
spawning. The whole group had probably a ma-
rine origin; the more strictly fresh-water species
being, as is usually the case, smaller in size, weaker
in organization, and with feebler dentition. It is
often assumed that this group has had its origin
in the Atlantic; but whether in America or in
Europe, we have no means of inferring.

The 7vout-perch show a curious combination of
characters of spiny and soft-rayed fishes. The sin-
gle species is probably, as suggested by Agassiz, a
relic of an ancient fauna.

The Liind-fishes are also very unique in their
organization. Two of the known species have
well-developed eyes, and live in lowland streams
and springs. Such are doubtless ancestors of the
eyeless forms of the cave streams, but the imme-
diate progenitors and relatives of these seem to be
extinct. They were probably fresh-water rather
than marine forms, and of the same general stock
as the ancestors of the Kullifishes, Mud-minnows,
and Pike.

LISPERSION OF FRESH-WATER FISHES. 103

The K7llifishes have their greatest abundance in
tropical America, which is perhaps the place of
their origin. They are especially fishes of the
brackish waters, rarely going far out to sea.
Some of them ascend streams; and these fre-
quent spring waters, and waters which are clear
* and cold.

The two species of Wud-minnow are now very
widely separated as to habitat, although very simi-
lar to each other in structure. The one belongs
properly to our Great Lake Fauna, the other to
the streams of Austria. The two are probably re-
mains of a past fauna, in which the group was
more fully represented. Our Mud-minnow! is one
of the most tenacious of life of all our fishes, and
will often live for weeks in damp muck after the
waters of a pond have evaporated.

Of the five known species of Pzke, one is cos-
mopolitan, being spread over northern Asia and
Europe as well as America, while the other species
are somewhat restricted in their range. The Com-
mon Pike? is probably the parent stock of all; but
whether originally American or not, we cannot
say. The affinities of the Mud-minnow with the
Pike are not remote, and doubtless forms between
the two have existed.

The Black-fish® of Alaska is another relative of
the Mud-minnow and Pike. The single known
species is found in Alaska and eastern Siberia.
It too is probably an isolated relic of a disap-
pearing group.

1 Umbra limi Kirtland. 2 Esox lucius Linneus.

8 Dallia pectoralis Bean.

104 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

The Common £el' is more or less regularly
catadromous. It is doubtless of marine origin;
and the same species is widely diffused in America
and Europe, though curiously wanting on our
Pacific coasts, as well as in South America.

The Sticklebacks and the Szlversides are sea-
shore fishes, the former of cold, the latter of warm
regions. Some species of both are now permanent
residents in fresh water. The Sticklebacks espe-
cially show all degrees of transition, the strictly
fluviatile forms being as usual smaller in size and
weaker in armature than the marine ones.

The Pirate Perches and the Elassoma are two
very small families, related to each other, and
distantly related perhaps to the Sun-fishes. They
are probably remains of some older fauna, and are
possibly allied to the Berycozds ; but this relation,
if real, is not very close.

The Sun-fishes are peculiarly North American,
nothing similar being found in any other region.
Their ancestry is probably to be sought among
the marine Serranide, the large-mouthed Black
Bass? being probably the member of the former
group nearest the parent stock.

The fresh-water (striped) Bass? are evidently
allied to the anadromous members of the same
group.

The Perch family is perhaps originally an off-
shoot from the Sea Bass. It has, However, re-
ceived a peculiar development in American waters.

1 Anguilla anguilla Linneus.

2 Micropterus salmoides Lacépeéde.
3 Morone chrysops, mississippiensis, etc.

DISPERSION OF FRESH-WATER FISHES. 105

The large group or genus of Darters! is com-
posed of small, brilliantly colored Perches, whose
structure is especially adapted for life on the
rocky bottoms of small clear streams. The re-
lations of these species to the typical Perches
have been admirably discussed by Professor S. A.
Forbes, from whose paper? I make the following
quotations : —

“We must inquire, therefore, into the causes which have
operated on a group of Percoids to limit their range to
such apparently unfavorable conditions, to diminish their
size, to develop unduly the paired fins and reduce the
air-bladder, to remove the scales of several species more
or less completely, . . . and to restrict their food chiefly
to a few forms [of insect-larvee and crustacea ].

“No species can long maintain itself anywhere which
cannot in some way find a sufficient supply of food and
also protect itself against its enemies. In its contests
with its enemies it may acquire defensive structures or
powers of escape sufficient for its protection, or it may
become adapted to some place of refuge where other
fishes will not follow. What better refuge could a har-
assed fish desire than the hiding-places among stones in
the shallows of a stream where the water dashes cease-
lessly by with a swiftness few fish can stem? And if at
the same time the refugee develop a swimming power
which enables it to dart like a flash against the strongest
current, its safety would seem to be insured. But what
food could it find in such a place? Let us turn over the
stones in such a stream, sweeping the roiled water at the
same time with a small cloth net, and we shall find larva

1 Etheostoma.
2 A Catalogue of the Native Fishes of Illinois. Report of the
Illinois Fish Commissioners, 1884, p. 95.

106 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

of Chironomus and small Ephemerids, and other such
prey and little else, — food too minute and difficult of
access to support a large fish, but answering very well if
our immigrant can keep down his size. . . . The limited
supply of food early arrests the growth of the young;
while every fish which passes the allowable maximum is
forced for food to brave the dangers of the deeper waters,
where the chances are that it falls a prey. On the other
hand, the smaller the size of those which escape this
alternative, the less likely will they be to attract the appe-
tite of the small gar or other guerilla, which may occa-
sionally raid their retreat, and the more easily will they
slip about under stones in search of their microscopic
game.

“ Like other fishes, the darters must have their periods
of repose, all the more urgent because of the constant
struggle with the swift current which their habitat im-
poses. Shut out from the deep, still pools and slow
eddies where the larger species lurk, they are forced to
spend their leisure on or beneath the bottom of the
stream, resting on their extended ventrals and anal, or
wholly buried in the sand... .

“Doubtless the search for food has much to do with
this selection in a habitat. I have found that the young
of nearly all species of our fresh-water fishes are com-
petitors for food, feeding almost entirely on Aztomostraca
and the larvee of minute Diptera. As a tree sends out its
roots in all directions in search of nourishment, so each of
the larger divisions of animals extends its various groups
into every place where available food occurs, each group
becoming adapted to the special features of its situation.
Given this supply of certain kinds of food, nearly inacces-
sible to the ordinary fish, it is to be expected that some
fishes would become especially fitted to its utilization.
Thus the E¢heostomatine [Darters] as a group are to be

DISPERSION OF FRESH-WATER FISHES. 107

explained, in a word, by the hypothesis of the progressive
adaptation of the young of certain Percid@ to a peculiar
place of refuge and a peculiar food-supply.

“Perhaps we may, without violence, call these the
mountaineers among fishes. Forced from the populous
and fertile valleys of the river beds and lake bottoms, they
have taken refuge from their enemies in the rocky high-
lands, where the free waters play in ceaseless torrents, and
there they have wrested from stubborn Nature a meagre
living. Although diminished in size by their continual
struggle with the elements, they have developed an ac-
tivity and hardihood, a vigor of life, and glow of high
color almost unknown among the easier livers of the lower
lands.”

It is noteworthy that among the European gen-
era of Percid@, one of them, Aspro, has assumed
a similar habitat, and adapted — apparently as a
result of. its surroundings—characters similar to
those of Etheostoma. It is not likely that Aspro is
an ancestor of £theostoma, still less likely that As-
pro is descended from the latter genus. The simi-
lar development of the two seems rather a case of
analogous variation, the influence of similar condi-
tions in different places on similar organisms.

It is remarkable, also, that in mountain regions
in which no Perctd@é are found, fishes very similar
to the Darters in appearance and habits, though
totally different in structure, have by analogous
agencies been developed. Loaches, Cat-fishes,
Gobies, Characins, Sculpins, in different parts of
the world inhabit swift mountain streams, and in
a similar way become dwarfed .and concentrated,
taking the place in their respective habitats which

108 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

the Darters occupy in the waters of the Mississippi
Valley.

By the same process of “analogous variation”
the Czchlide of South America parallel the Sun-
fishes of the United States, although in structure
and in origin the two groups are diverse.

The single species each of Drum,! Surf-fish,? and
Cod? found in our fresh waters are evidently immi-
grants from the sea, although not of recent origin.
The several species of Sculpin have apparently
come from two separate marine stocks,—the one
(Cottus) comparatively ancient and probably origi-
nating in the Pacific, the other (Z77zglopsis) more
modern and descended from an Atlantic species
(Acanthocottus quadricornis,L.). The former type
is now diffused in all cold waters of North Amer-
ica, Europe, and northern Asia. The latter be-
longs only to the depths of the Great Lakes.

The Flounders and Soles when found in fresh
waters are merely temporary sojourners from the
sea.

We can say, in general, that in all waters not
absolutely uninhabitable there are fishes. The
processes of natural selection have given to each
kind of river or lake species of fishes adapted to
the conditions of life which obtain there. There
is no condition of water, of bottom, of depth, of
speed of current, but finds some species with
characters adjusted to it. These adjustments are,
for the most part, of long standing; and the fauna

1 Aplodinotus grunniens Rafinesque.
2 Hysterocarpus traski Gibbons.
3 Lota lota Linneus.

oo

DISPERSION OF FRESH-WATER FISHES. 109

of any single stream has, as a rule, been produced
by immigration from other regions or from other
streams. Each species has an ascertainable range
of distribution, and within this range we may
be reasonably certain to find it in any suitable
waters.

But every species has beyond question some
sort of limit to its distribution, some sort of bar-
rier which it has never passed in all the years of
its existence. That this is true becomes evident
when we compare the fish-faune of widely sepa-
rated rivers. Thus the Sacramento, Connecticut,
Rio Grande, and St. John’s Rivers have not a
single species in common; and with one or two
exceptions, not a species is common to any two
of them. None of these! has any species pecu-
liar to itself, and each shares a large part of its
fish-fauna with the water-basin next to it. It is
probably true that the faune of no two distinct
hydrographic basins are wholly identical, while on
the other hand there are very few species con-
fined to a single one. The supposed cases of this
character, some twenty in number, occur chiefly
in the streams of the South Atlantic States and of
Arizona. All of these need, however, the confir-
mation of further exploration. It is certain that
in no case has an entire river-fauna? originated
independently from the divergence into separate
species of the descendants of a single type.

The existence of boundaries to the range of

1 Except possibly the Sacramento.
2 Unless the fauna of certain cave-streams in the United States
and Cuba be regarded as forming an exception.

IIo SCIENCE SKETCHES.

species implies, therefore, the existence of barriers
to their diffusion. We may now consider these
barriers; and, in the same connection, the degree
to which they may be overcome.

Least important of these are the barriers which
may exist within the limits of any single basin,
and which tend to prevent a free diffusion through
its waters of species inhabiting any portion of it.
In streams flowing southward, or across different
parallels of latitude, the difference in climate be-
comes a matter of importance. The distribution
of species is governed very largely by the tempera-
ture of the water. Each species has its range in
this respect, —the free-swimming fishes, notably
the Trout, being most affected by it; the mud-
loving or bottom fishes, like the Cat-fishes, least.
The latter can reach the cool bottoms in hot
weather, or the warm bottoms in cold weather,
thus keeping their own temperature more even
than that of the surface of the water. Although
water-communication is perfectly free for most of
the length of the Mississippi, there is a material
difference between the faunz of the stream in
Minnesota and in Louisiana. This difference is
caused chiefly by the difference in temperature oc-
cupying the difference in latitude. That a similar
difference in longitude, with free water communi-
cation, has no appreciable importance, is shown
by the almost absolute identity of the fish-faunz
of Lake Winnebago and Lake Champlain. While
many large fishes range freely up and down the
Mississippi, a majority of the species do not do so,
and the fauna of the upper Mississippi has more in

DISPERSION OF FRESH-WATER FISHES. Ul!

common with that of the tributaries of Lake Michi-
gan than it has with that of the Red River or the
Arkansas. The influence of climate is again shown
in the paucity of the fauna of the cold waters of
Lake Superior, as compared with that of Lake
Michigan. The majority of our species cannot
endure the cold. In general, therefore, cold or
Northern waters contain fewer species than South-
ern waters do, though the number of individuals
of any one kind may be greater. This is shown
in all waters, fresh or salt. The fisheries of the
Northern seas are more extensive than those of
the Tropics. There are more) fishes there; but
they are far less varied in kind. The writer
once caught seventy-five species of fishes in a
single haul of the seine at Key West, while
on Cape Cod he obtained with the same net
but forty-five species in the course of a week’s
work. Thus it comes that the angler, contented
with many fishes of few kinds, goes to Northern
streams to fish, while the naturalist goes to the
South.

But in most streams the difference in latitude is
insignificant, and the chief differences in tempera-
ture come from differences in elevation, or from
the distance of the waters from the colder source.
Often the lowland waters are so different in charac-
ter as to produce a marked change in the quality
of their fauna. These lowland waters may form a
barrier to the free movements of upland fishes; but
that this barrier is not impassable is shown by
the identity of the fishes in the streams! of the

1 For example, Elk River, Duck River, etc.

112 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

uplands of middle Tennessee with those of the
Holston and French Broad. Again, streams of the
Ozark Mountains, similar in character to the rivers
of East Tennessee, have an essentially similar fish-
fauna, although between the Ozarks and the Cum-
berland range lies an area of lowland bayous, into
which such fishes are never known to penetrate.
We can, however, imagine that these upland fishes
may be sometimes swept down from one side or
the other into the Mississippi, from which they
might ascend on the other side. But such trans-
fers certainly do not often happen. This is appar-
ent from the fact that the two faunz! are not quite
identical, and in some cases the same species are
represented by perceptibly different varieties on one
side and the other. The time of the commingling
of these faunz is perhaps now past, and it may
have occurred only when the climate of the inter-
vening regions was colder than at present.

The effect of waterfalls and cascades as a barrier
to the diffusion of most species is self-evident; but
the importance of such obstacles is less, in the
course of time, than might be expected. In one
way or another very many species have passed
these barriers. The falls of the Cumberland limit

1 There are three species of Darters (Z¢theostoma copelandi
Jordan; Ltheostoma evides Jordan and Copeland; L£¢heostoma
scierum Swain) which are now known only from the Ozark region
or beyond and from the uplands of Indiana, not yet having been
found at any point between Indiana and Missouri. ‘These consti-
tute perhaps isolated colonies, now separated from the parent
stock in Arkansas by the prairie districts of Illinois, a region at
present uninhabitable for these fishes. But the non-occurrence of

these species over the intervening areas needs confirmation, as do
most similar cases of anomalous distribution.

DISPERSION OF FRESH-WATER FISHES. 113

the range of most of the larger fishes of the river,
but the streams above it have their quota of Dart-
ers and Minnows. It is evident that the past his-
tory of the stream must enter as a factor into this
discussion, but this past history it is not always
possible to trace. Dams or artificial waterfalls
now check the free movement of many species,
especially those of migratory habits; while, con-
versely, numerous other species have extended
their range through the agency of canals.!
Every year fishes are swept down the rivers by
the winter’s floods; and in the spring, as the spawn-
ing season approaches, almost every species is
found working its way up the stream. In some
cases, notably the Quinnat Salmon? and the Blue-
back Salmon,’ the length of these migrations is
surprisingly great. To some species rapids and
shallows have proved a sufficient barrier, and other
kinds have been kept back by unfavorable condi-
tions of various sorts. Streams whose waters are
always charged with silt or sediment, as the Mis-
souri, Arkansas, or Brazos, do not invite fishes; and
even the occasional floods of red mud such as dis-
figure otherwise clear streams, like the Red River
or the Colorado (of Texas), are unfavorable. Ex-
tremely unfavorable also is the condition which
obtains in many rivers of the Southwest; as for
example, the Red River, the Sabine, and the Trin-
ity, which are full from bank to bank in winter and

1 Thus, Dorosoma cepedianum Le Sueur, and Clupea chrysochloris
Rafinesque, have found their way into Lake Michigan through
canals.

2 Oncorhynchus tschawytscha Walbaum.

3 Oncorhynchus nerka Walbaum.

8

IIl4 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

spring, and which dwindle to mere rivulets in the
autumn droughts.

In general, those streams which have conditions
most favorable to fish-life will be found to contain
the greatest number of species.. Such streams in-
vite immigration; and in them the struggle for
existence is individual against individual, species
against species, and not a mere struggle with hard
conditions of life. Some of the conditions most
favorable to the existence in any stream of a large
number of species of fishes are the following, the
most important of which is the one mentioned
first: connection with a large hydrographic basin;
a warm climate; clear water; a moderate current;
a bottom of gravel (preferably covered by a growth
of weeds); little fluctuation during the year in the
volume of the stream or in the character of the
water.

Limestone streams usually yield more species
than streams flowing over sandstone, and either
more than the streams of regions having metamor-
phic rocks. Sandy bottoms usually are not favor-
able to fishes. In general, glacial drift makes a
suitable river bottom, but the higher temperature
usual in regions beyond the limits of the drift gives
to certain Southern streams conditions still more fa-
vorable. These conditions are all well realized in
the Washita River in Arkansas, and in various trib-
utaries of the Tennessee, Cumberland, and Ohio;
and in these, among American streams, the great-
est number of species has been recorded.

The isolation and the low temperature of the
rivers of New England have given to them a very

DISPERSION OF FRESH-WATER FISHES. 115

scanty fish-fauna as compared with the rivers of
the South and West. This fact has been noticed
by Professor Agassiz, who has called New England
a “ zoological island.” }

In spite of the fact that barriers of every sort
are sometimes crossed by fresh-water fishes, we
must still regard the matter of freedom of water
communication as the essential one in determining
the range of most species. The larger the river
basin, the greater the variety of conditions likely
to be offered in it, and the greater the number of
its species. In case of the divergence of new
forms by the processes called “natural selection,”
the greater the number of such forms which may
have spread through its waters; the more extended
any river basin, the greater are the chances that
any given species may sometime find its way into
it; hence the greater the number of species that
actually occur in it, and, freedom of movement
being assumed, the greater the number of species
to be found in any one of its affluents.

Of the six hundred species of fishes found in
the rivers of the United States, about two hun-
dred have been recorded from the basin of the
Mississippi. From fifty to one hundred of these

1 “Tn this isolated region of North America, in this zodlogical
island of New England, as we may call it, we find neither Lepidos-
teus, nor Amia, nor Polyodon, nor Amblodon (Aflodinotus), nor
Grystes (Micropterus), nor Centrarchus, nor Pomoxis, nor Am-
bloplites, nor Calliurus (Chenobryttus), nor Carpiodes, nor Hyodon,
nor indeed any of the characteristic forms of North American
fishes so common everywhere else, with the exception of two Po-
motis (ZLepfomzs), one Boleosoma, and a few Catostomus.” —
AGASSIZ, Amer. Journ. Sct. Arts, 1854.

116 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

species can be found in any one of the tributary
streams of the size, say, of the Housatonic River
or the Charles. In the Connecticut River there
are but about eighteen species permanently resi-
dent; and the number found in the streams of
Texas is not much larger, the best-known of these,
the Rio Colorado, having yielded but twenty-four
species.

The waters of the Great Basin have not yet been
fully explored. The number of species now
known from this region is about seventy-five.
This number includes the fauna of the upper Rio
Grande, the Snake River, and the Colorado, as
well as the fishes of the tributaries of the Great
Salt Lake. This list is composed almost entirely
of a few genera of Suckers,’ Minnows,? and Trout.’
None of the Cat-fishes, Perch, Darters, or Sun-
fishes, Moon-eyes, Pike, Killifishes, and none of
the ordinary Eastern types of Minnows?# have
passed the barrier of the Rocky Mountains.

West of the Sierra Nevada, the fauna is still
more scanty, but fifty species being enumerated.
This fauna, except for certain immigrants® from
the sea, is of the same general character as that of
the Great Basin, though most of the species are
different. This latter fact would indicate a con-
siderable change, or “evolution,” since the con-
tents of the two faunz were last mingled. There

1 Catostomus, Pantosteus, Chasmistes.

2 Sgualius, Gila, Ptychocheilus, etc.

3 Salmo mykiss and its varieties.

4 Genera WVotropis, Chrosomus, etc.

5 As the fresh-water Surf-fish (ysterocarpus traski) and the
species of Salmon.

DISPERSION OF FRESH-WATER FISHES. 117

is a considerable difference between the fauna of
the Columbia and that of the Sacramento. The
species which these two basins have in common
are chiefly those which at times pass out into the
sea. The rivers of Alaska contain but few species,
barely a dozen in all, most of these being found
also in Siberia and Kamtschatka. In the scanti-
ness of its faunal list, the Yukon agrees with the
Mackenzie River, and with Arctic rivers generally.

There can be no doubt that the general ten-
dency is for each species to extend its range more
and more widely until all localities suitable for its
growth are included. The various agencies of
dispersal which have existed in the past are still
in operation. There is apparently no limit to
their action. It is probable that new “colonies”
of one species or another may be planted each
year in waters not heretofore inhabited by such
species. But such colonies become permanent
only where the conditions are so favorable that
the species can hold its own in the struggle for
food and subsistence. That various modifications
in the habitat of certain species have been caused
by human agencies is of course too well known to
need discussion here.

We may next consider the question of water-
sheds, or barriers which separate one river basin
from another.

Of such barriers in the United States, the most
important and most effective is unquestionably
that of the main chain of the Rocky Mountains.
This is due in part to its great height, still more
to its great breadth, and most of all, perhaps, to

118 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

the fact that it is nowhere broken by the passage
of ariver. But two species — the Red-throated, or
Rocky Mountain Trout,! and the Rocky Mountain
White-fish 2— are found on both sides of it, at least
within the limits of the United States; while many
genera, and even several families, find in it either
an eastern or a western limit to their range. In
a few instances representative species, probably
modifications or separated branches of the same
stock, occur on opposite sides of the range, but
there are not many cases of correspondence even
thus close. The two faunz are practically distinct.
Even the widely distributed Red-spotted, or ‘“ Dolly
Varden” Trout,? of the Columbia River and its
affluents, does not cross to the east side of the
mountains; nor does the Great Lake Trout‘ nor
the Montana Grayling ° ever make its way to the
West.

It is easy to account for this separation of the
faunz; but how shall we explain the almost uni-
versal diffusion of the White-fish and the Trout in
suitable waters on both sides of the dividing ridge?
We may notice that these two are the species which
ascend highest in the mountains, the White-fish in-
habiting the mountain pools and lakes, the Trout
ascending all brooks and rapids in search of their
fountain-heads. In many cases the ultimate divid-
ing ridge is not very broad, and we may imagine

1 Salmo mykiss Walbaum (= purpuratus Pallas).
2 Coregonus williamsoni Girard.

8 Salvelinus malma Walbaum.

4 Salvelinus namaycush Walbaum.

5 Thymallus signifer ontariensis Valenciennes.

‘

DISPERSION OF FRESH-WATER FISHES. 19

that at some time spawn or even young fishes may
have been carried across by birds or other animals,
or by man,—or more likely by the dash of some
summer whirlwind. Once carried across in favor-
able circumstances, the species might survive and
spread.

I saw last summer an: example of how such
transfer of species may be accomplished, which
shows that we need not be left to draw on the
imagination to invent possible means of transit.

There are few water-sheds in the world better
defined than the mountain range which forms the
“backbone” of Norway. I lately climbed a peak
im tais tance, the Suletind.. From, its summit, .]
could look down into the valleys of the Lara and
the Bagna, flowing in opposite directions to oppo-
site sides of the peninsula. To the north of the
Suletind is a large double lake called the Sletnin-
genvand. The maps show this lake to be one of
the chief sources of the westward-flowing river
Lara. Vgs/iake is) in August swollen by ‘the
melting of the snows, and at the time of my visit
it was visibly the source of both these rivers.
From its southeastern side flowed a large brook
into the valley of the Bagna, and from its south-
western corner, equally distinctly, came the waters
which fed the Lara. This lake, like similar moun-
tain ponds in all northern countries, abounds in
trout; and these trout certainly have for part of
the year an uninterrupted line of water communi-
cation from the Sognefjord on the west of Norway
to the Christianiafjord on the southeast, — from the
North Sea to the Baltic. Part of the year the lake

I20 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

has probably but a single outlet through the Lara.
A higher temperature would entirely cut off the
flow into the Bagna, and a still higher one might
dry up the lake altogether. This Sletningenvand,}
with its two outlets on the summit of a sharp
water-shed, may serve to show us how other lakes,
permanent or temporary, may elsewhere have
acted as agencies for the transfer of fishes. We
can also see how it might be that certain mountain
fishes should be so transferred while the fishes of
the upland waters may be left behind. In some
such way as this we may imagine the Trout and
the White-fish to have attained their present wide
range in the Rocky Mountain region; and in simi-
lar manner perhaps the Eastern Brook Trout?
and some other mountain species? may have been
carried across the Alleghanies.

1 Since the above was written I have been informed by Professor
John M. Coulter, who was one of the first explorers of the Yel-
lowstone Park, that such a condition still exists on the Rocky
Mountain Divide. In the Yellowstone Park is a marshy tract,
traversable by fishes in the rainy season, and known as the “‘ Two-
Ocean Water.” In this tract rise tributaries both of the Snake
River and of the Yellowstone. Similar conditions apparently
exist on other parts of the Divide, both in Montana and in
Wyoming.

Professor John C. Branner calls my attention to a marshy upland
which separates the valley of the La Plata from that of the Ama-
zon, and which permits the free movement of fishes from the
Paraguay River to the Tapajos. It is well known that through
the Cassiquiare River the Rio Negro, another branch of the
Amazon, is joined to the Orinoco River. It is thus evident that
almost all the waters of eastern South America form a single
basin, so far as the fishes are concerned.

2 Salvelinus fontinalis Mitchill.

3 Notropis rubricroceus Cope; Rhinichthys atronasus Mitchill;
ett.

DISPERSION OF FRESH-WATER FISHES. 121

The Sierra Nevada constitutes also a very im-
portant barrier to the diffusion of species. This is,
however, broken by the passage of the Columbia
River, and many species thus find their way across
it. That the waters to the west of it are not un-
favorable for the growth of eastern fishes is shown
by the fact of the rapid spread of the Common
Eastern Cat-fish,! or Horned Pout, when trans-
ported from the Schuylkill to the Sacramento.
This fish is now one of the important food-fishes
of the San Francisco markets. It has become, in
fact, an especial favorite with the Chinaman, —
himself also an immigrant, and presenting certain
analogies with the fish in question, as well in tem-
perament as in habits.

The mountain mass of Mount Shasta is, as al-
ready stated, a considerable barrier to the range
of fishes, though a number of species find their
way around it through the sea. The lower and
irregular ridges of the Coast Range are of small
importance in this regard, as the streams of their
east slope reach the sea on the west through San
Francisco Bay. Yet the San Joaquin contains a
few species, not yet recorded from the smaller rivers
of southwestern California.

The main chain of the Alleghanies forms a bar-
rier of importance separating the rich fish-fauna
of the Tennessee and Ohio basins from the scan-
tier faunz of the Atlantic streams. Yet this bar-
rier is crossed by many more species than is the
case with either the Rocky Mountains or the Sierra
“Nevada. It is lower, narrower, and much more

1 Ameturus nebulosus Le Sueur.

122 SCLENCE: SKETCHES.

broken, — as in New York, in Pennsylvania, and in
_ Georgia there are several streams which pass
through it or around it. The much greater age of
the Alleghany chain, as compared with the Rocky
Mountains, seems not to be an element of any
importance in this connection. Of the fish which
cross this chain, the most prominent is the Brook
Trout,! which is found in all suitable waters from
Hudson’s Bay to the head of the Chattahoochee.
A few other species are locally found in the head-
waters of certain streams on opposite sides of the
range. An example of this is the little red “ Fall-
fish,’ 2 found only in the mountain tributaries of
the Savannah and the Tennessee. We may sup-
pose the same agencies to have assisted these
species that we have imagined in the case of the
Rocky Mountain Trout, and such agencies were
doubtless more operative in the times imme-
diately following the glacial epoch than they are
now. Professor Cope calls attention also to the
numerous caverns existing in these mountains, as
a sufficient medium for the transfer of many spe-
cies. I doubt whether the main chains of the Blue
Ridge or the Great Smoky can be crossed in that
way, though such channels are not rare in the sub-
carboniferous limestones of the Cumberland range.

The passage of species from stream to stream
along the Atlantic slope deserves a moment’s
notice. It is, under present conditions, impos-
sible for any mountain or upland fish, as the Trout
or the Miller’s Thumb,’ to cross from the Potomac

1 Salvelinus fontinalis. 2 Notropis rubricroceus Cope.
3 Cottus richardsoni Agassiz.

DISPERSION OF FRESH-WATER FISHES. 123

River to the James, or from the Neuse to the
Santee, by descending to the lower courses of the
rivers, and thence passing along either through
the swamps or by way of the sea. The lower
courses of these streams, warm and muddy, are
uninhabitable by such fishes. Such transfers are,
however, possible farther north. From the rivers
of Canada and from many rivers of New England
the Trout does descend to the sea and into the sea,
and farther north the White-fish does this also.
Thus these fishes readily pass from one river
basin to another. As this is the case now every-
where in the North, it may have been the case
farther south in the time of the glacial cold. We
may, I think, imagine a condition of things in
which the snow-fields of the Alleghany chain might
have played some part in aiding the diffusion of
cold-loving fishes. A permanent snow-field on the
Blue Ridge in western North Carolina might ren-
der almost any stream in the Carolinas suitable
for trout, from its source to its mouth. An in-
creased volume of colder water might carry the
trout of the head-streams of the Catawba and the
Savannah as far down as the sea. We can even
imagine that the trout reached these streams in
the first place through such agencies, though of
this there is no positive evidence. For the pres-
ence of trout in the upper Chattahoochee, we
must account in some other way.

It is noteworthy that the upland fishes are
nearly the same in all these streams, until we
reach the southern limit of possible glacial in-
fluence. South of western North Carolina, the

124 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

faune of the different river basins appear to be
more distinct from one another. Certain ripple-
loving types! are represented by closely related
but unquestionably different species in each river
basin, and it would appear that a thorough ming-
ling of the upland species in these rivers has never
taken place.

With the lowland species of the Southern rivers
it is different. Few of these are confined within
narrow limits. The streams of the whole South
Atlantic and Gulf Coast flow into shallow bays,
mostly bounded by sand-spits or sand-bars which
the rivers themselves have brought down. In
these bays the waters are often neither fresh nor
salt; or rather, they are alternately fresh and
salt, the former condition being that of the winter
and spring. Many species descend into these

1 The best examples of this are the following: in the Santee
basin are found Wotropis pyrrhomelas, Notropis niveus, and Notropis
chloristius ; in the Altamaha, Wotropis xenurus and LVotropis calli-
semus ; in the Chattahoochee, Votropfis hypselopterus and Votropis
eurystomus ; in the Alabama, /Votropis ceruleus, Notropis trichrois-
tius, and Notropis callistius. In the Alabama, Escambia, Pearl,
and numerous other rivers, is found JVotropis cercostigma. ‘This
species descends to the sea in the cool streams of the pine-woods.
Its range is wider than that of the others, and in the rivers of
Texas it reappears in the form of a scarcely distinct variety,
Notropis venustus. In the Tennessee and Cumberland, and in the
rivers of the Ozark range, is Votrofis galacturus ; and in the upper
Arkansas JVotropis camurus,—all distinct species of the same
general type. Northward, in all the streams from the Potomac to
the Oswego, and westward to the Des Moines and the Arkansas,
occurs a single species of this type, /Votropis whipplet. But this
species is not known from any of the streams inhabited by any of
the other species mentioned, although very likely it is the parent
stock of them all.

DISPERSION OF FRESH-WATER FISHES. 125

bays, thus finding every facility for transfer from
river to river. There is a continuous inland pas-
sage in fresh or brackish waters, traversable by
such fishes, from Chesapeake Bay nearly to Cape
Fear; and similar conditions exist on the coasts of
Louisiana, Texas, and much of Florida. In Per-
dido Bay I have found fresh-water Minnows! and
Silversides? living together with marine Gobies3
and salt-water Eels.* Fresh-water Alligator Gars®
and marine Sharks compete for the garbage
thrown over from the Pensacola wharves. In Lake
Pontchartrain the fauna is a remarkable mixture
of fresh-water fishes from the Mississippi and ma-
rine fishes from the Gulf. Channel-cats, Sharks,
Sea-crabs, Sun-fishes, and Mullets can all be found
there together. It is therefore to be expected
that the lowland fauna of all the rivers of the Gulf
States would closely resemble that of the lower
Mississippi; and this, in fact, is the case.

The streams of southern Florida and those of
southwestern Texas offer some peculiarities con-
nected with their warmer climate. The Florida
streams contain a few peculiar fishes;® while
the rivers of Texas, with the same general fauna
as those farther north, have also a few distinctly
tropical types,’ immigrants from the lowlands of
Mexico.

The fresh waters of Cuba are inhabited by fishes
unlike those found in the United States. Some

1 Notropis cercostigma ; Notropis xenocephalus.

2 Labidesthes sicculus. 3 Gobiosoma molestum.
4 Myrophis punctatus. 5 Lepisosteus tristechus.
6 Jordanella, Rivulus, Heterandria, etc.

1 Heros, Tetragonopterus.

126 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

of these are evidently indigenous, derived in the
waters they now inhabit directly from marine
forms. Two of these are eyeless species,! inhabit-
ing streams in the caverns. They have no rela-
tives in the fresh waters of any other region, the
Blind-fishes? of our caves being of a wholly dif-
ferent type. Some of the Cuban fishes are com-
mon to the fresh waters of the other West Indies.
Of Northern types, only one, the Alligator Gar,
is found in Cuba, and this is evidently a filibuster
immigrant from the coasts of Florida.

The low and irregular water-shed which sepa-
rates the tributaries of Lake Michigan and Lake
Erie from those of the Ohio is of little importance
in determining the range of species. Many of the
distinctively Northern fishes are found in the head-
waters of the Wabash and the Scioto. The con-
siderable difference in the general fauna of the
Ohio Valley as compared with that of the streams
of Michigan is due to the higher temperature of
the former region, rather than to any existing bar-
riers between the river and the Great Lakes. In
northern Indiana the water-shed is often swampy,
and in many places large ponds exist in the early
spring.

At times of heavy rains many species will move
through considerable distances by means of tem-
porary ponds and brooks. Fishes that have thus
emigrated often reach places ordinarily inacces-

1 Lucifuga and Stygicola, fishes allied to the Cod, and belonging
to the family of Brotulide.

2 Amblyopsis, Typhlichthys.

3 Lepisosteus tristachus.

DISPERSION OF FRESH-WATER FISHES. 127

sible, and people finding them in such localities
often imagine that they have “rained down.”
Once, near Indianapolis, after a heavy shower, I
found in a furrow in a corn-field a small Pike,!
some half a mile from the creek in which he should
belong. The fish was swimming along in a tempo-
rary brook, apparently wholly unconscious that he |
was not in his native stream. Migratory fishes,
which ascend small streams to spawn, are espe-
cially likely to be transferred in this way. By
some such means any of the water-sheds in Ohio,
Indiana, or Illinois may be passed.

It is certain that the limits of Lake Erie and
Lake Michigan were once more extended than
now. It is reasonably probable that some of
the territory now drained by the Wabash and the
Illinois was once covered by the waters of Lake
Michigan. The Cisco? of Lake Tippecanoe, Lake
Geneva, and the lakes of the Oconomowoc chain,
is evidently a modified descendant of the so-called
Lake Herring? Its origin most likely dates from
the time when these small deep lakes of Indiana
and Wisconsin were connected with Lake Michigan.
The changes in habits which the Cisco has under-
gone are considerable. The changes in external
characters are but trifling. The presence of the
Cisco in these lakes and its periodical disappear-
ance — that is, retreat into deep water when not in
the breeding season — has given rise to much non-
sensical discussion as to whether any or all of

1 Esox vermiculatus Le Sueur.

2 Coregonus artedi sisco, Jordan.
8 Coregonus artedi Le Sueur.

128 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

these lakes are still joined to Lake Michigan by
subterranean channels. Several of the larger fishes,
properly characteristic of the Great Lake Region,}
are occasionally taken in the Ohio River, where
they are usually recognized as rare stragglers.
The difference in physical conditions is probably
the sole cause of their scarcity in the Ohio basin.
The similarity of the fishes in the different streams
and lakes of the Great Basin is doubtless to be at-
tributed to the general mingling of their waters
which took place during and after the glacial epoch.
Since that period the climate in that region has
grown hotter and drier, until the overflow of the
various lakes into the Columbia basin through the
Snake River has long since ceased. ‘These lakes
have become isolated from each other, and many of
them have become salt or alkaline and therefore un-
inhabitable. In some of these lakes certain species
may now have become extinct which still remain
in others. In some cases, perhaps, the differences
in surrounding may have caused divergence into
distinct species of what was once one parent stock.
The Suckers in Lake Tahoe? and those in Utah
Lake are certainly now different from each other
and from those in the Columbia. The Trout? in
the same waters can be regarded as more or less
tangible varieties only, while the White-fishes * show
no differences at all. The differences in the present
1 As, Lota lota maculosa ; Percopsis guttatus ; Esox masguinongy.
2 Catostomus tahoensis, in Lake Tahoe ; Catostomus macrocheilus
and discobolus, in the Columbia; Catostomus fecundus, Catostomus
ardens; Chasmistes liorus and Pantosteus generosus, in Utah Lake.

3 Salmo mykiss, et vars. henshawi and virginalis.
4 Coregonus williamsoni.

DISPERSION OF FRESH-WATER FISHES. 129

faunz of Lake Tahoe and Utah Lake must be
chiefly due to influences which have acted since
the glacial epoch, when the whole Utah Basin was
part of the drainage of the Columbia.

Connected perhaps with changes due to glacial
influences is the presence in the deep waters of the
Great Lakes of certain marine types,! as shown
by the explorations of Professor Sidney I. Smith
and others. One of these is a genus of fishes,” of
which the nearest allies now inhabit the Arctic
Seas. In his review of the fish-fauna of Finland,?
Professor A. J. Malmgren finds a number of Arctic
species in the waters of Finland which are not
found either in the North Sea or in the southern
portions of the Baltic. These fishes are said to
“aetee with their “forefathers’ in the \:Glacial
Ocean in every point, but remain comparatively
smaller, leaner, almost starved.” Professor Lovén 4
also has shown that numerous small animals of ma-
rine origin are found in the deep lakes of Sweden
and Finland as well as in the Gulf of Bothnia.
These anomalies of distribution are explained by
Lovén and Malmgren on the supposition of the
former continuity of the Baltic through the Gulf
of Bothnia with the Glacial Ocean. During the
second half of the glacial period, according to
Loven, “the greater part of Finland and of the

1 Species of AZyszs and other genera of Crustaceans, similar
to species described by Sars and others, in lakes of Sweden and
Finland.

2 Triglopsis thompsoni Girard, a near ally of the marine species
Acanthocottus quadricornis L.

8 Kritisk Ofversigt af Finlands Fisk-Fauna: Helsingfors, 1863.

* See Giinther, Zoological Record for 1864, p. 137.

q

130 SCIENCE: SKETCHES.

middle of Sweden was submerged, and the Baltic
was a great gulf of the Glacial Ocean, and not con-
nected with the German Ocean. By the gradual
elevation of the Scandinavian Continent, the Baltic
became disconnected from the Glacial Ocean, and
the great lakes separated from the Baltic. In
consequence of the gradual change of the salt
water into fresh, the marine fauna became gradu-
ally extinct, with the exception of the glacial forms
mentioned above.”

It is possible that the presence of marine types
in our Great Lakes is to be regarded as due to
some depression of the land which would connect
their waters with those of the Gulf of St. Law-
rence. On this point, however, our data are still
incomplete.

To certain species of upland or mountain fishes,
the depression of the Mississippi basin itself forms
a barrier which cannot be passed. The Black-
spotted Trout,! very closely related species of
which abound in all waters of northern Asia,
Europe, and western North America, has nowhere
crossed the basin of the Mississippi, although one
of its species finds no difficulty in passing Behring
Strait. The Trout and White-fish of the Rocky
Mountain region are all species different from
those of the Great Lakes or the streams of the
Alleghany system. To the Grayling, the Trout,

1 Salmo fario L., in Europe; Salmo labrax Pallas, etc. in
Asia; Salmo gairdneri Richardson, in streams of the Pacific
Coast. Salmo mykiss Walbaum, in Kamtschatka, Alaska, and
throughout the Rocky Mountain range to the Mexican boundary,
and the head-waters of the Kansas, Platte, and Missouri.

DISPERSION OF FRESH-WATER FISHES. 131

the White-fish, the Pike, and to arctic and sub-
arctic species generally, Behring Strait have evi-
dently proved no serious obstacle to diffusion:
and it is not unlikely that much of the close re-
semblance of the fresh-water faune of northern
Europe, Asia, and North America is due to this
fact. To attempt to decide from which side the
first migration came in regard to each group of
fishes might be interesting; but without a wider
range of facts than is now in our possession, such
attempts would be mere guesswork and without
value. The interlocking of the fish-faunz of Asia
and North America presents, however, a number of
interesting problems, for numerous migrations in
both directions have doubtless taken place.

I could go on indefinitely with the discussion of
special cases, each more or less interesting or sug-
gestive in itself, but the general conclusion is in all
cases the same. The present distribution of fishes
is the result of the long-continued action of forces
still in operation. The species have entered our
waters in many invasions from the Old World or
from the sea. Each species has been subjected to
the various influences implied in the term “ natural
selection,” and under varying conditions its repre-
sentatives have undergone many different modifi-
cations. Each of the six hundred species we now
know may be conceived as making every year in-
roads on territory occupied by other species. If
these colonies are able to hold their own in the
struggle for possession, they will multiply in the
new conditions, and the range of the species be-
comes widened. If the surroundings are different,

132 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

new species or varieties may be formed with time;
and these new forms may again invade the terri-
tory of the parent species. Again, colony after
colony of species after species may be destroyed
by other species or by uncongenial surroundings.

The ultimate result of centuries on centuries of
the restlessness of individuals is seen in the facts
of geographical distribution. Only in the most
general way can the history of any species be
traced; but could we know it all, it would be
as long and as eventful a story as the history of
the colonization and settlement of North America
by immigrants from Europe. But by the fishes
each river in America has been a hundred times
discovered, its colonization a hundred times at-
tempted. In these efforts there is no co-operation.
Every individual is for himself, every struggle a
struggle of life and death; for each fish is a canni-
bal, and to each species each member of every
other species is an alien and a savage.

NOMENCLATURE OF AMERICAN BIRDS. 133

THE NOMENCLATURE OF AMERICAN
BIRDS

EW scientific books of recent years have been
awaited with so much interest as the ‘“ Check-
List” of birds and its accompanying “Code,” pub-
lished by the American Ornithologists’ Union. To
those interested in systematic ornithology the work
is, of course, of the highest importance, as giving
an authoritative settlement, so far as authority can
settle anything in science, of the much-vexed ques-
tions in bird nomenclature. But to the systematic
workers in other departments of zodlogy, and
even to botanists, its interest is scarcely less great.
For we who work in other fields are very willing
to recognize the fact that the great questions
which underlie all systematic nomenclature must
be first met and settled by the ornithologists.
The abundance and attractiveness of birds, and
the ease with which they may be collected and
studied, have combined to render ornithology one
of the best cultivated of all departments of science.
In spite of a good deal of crude or ‘‘ amateur”
work, which, in one way or another, gets pub-
lished, it is, I think, not too much to say that in
all the various matters which make up the ground-
work of systematic science — in the discrimination

1 A Review ot the ‘*Code of Nomenclature and Check-List of
the American Ornithologists’ Union.”

134 SCLLNCE SALE TCHES.

of species and varieties, in the study of the rela-
tions of these groups to each other and to their |
environment — American ornithology stands in the
very front of systematic science.

We may therefore, in the various stages through
which our ornithology has passed or is passing,
read the future history of our own branches of
science. In many regards the ornithologists are
fighting our battles for us, and we may take ad-
vantage of the results won by their efforts. Thus
the discussion of climatic influences on the char-
acter of species, first seriously taken up by Mr.
Joel A. Allen in 1871, which has culminated in
the trinomial system of nomenclature, has relieved
workers in other fields from the need of urging
the same considerations. As soon as our facts are
sufficient for us to use the trinomial system, we
shall find it ready for our service, perfected in all
its details. Again, the absolute importance of the
law of priority has impressed itself on the orni-
thologists in spite of themselves; for in past times
the students of birds have been among those who
have most sinned against this law. The efforts
of Cassin, Coues, Stejneger and others to ascer-
tain the facts in regard to old names, have shown
that no possible middle ground exists between
chaos and law in matters of nomenclature. It
is quite true, as the authors of the “ Code” have
insisted, that ‘nomenclature is a means and not an
end in science.” But the experience of ornitholo-
gists has shown us that in systematic zodlogy and
in zo6geography, this means is one absolutely es-
sential to any end of importance. A system of

NOMENCLATURE OF AMERICAN BIRDS. 135

nomenclature based on common fairness and on
common-sense, and stable because above the reach
of individual whim or choice, is as necessary to
success in this kind of work as a sharp scalpel is
to good work in anatomy. So long as no rules
superior to the caprice of the individual or the tra-
ditions of some museum are recognized, so long is
systematic work a mere burlesque, and our schemes
of classification anything but a mirror of Nature.

But besides the positive advances made by the
ornithologists, from which others may profit when
the time comes, there is something for us to learn
from the results of their less fortunate experiments.
An illustration of this may be taken from the last
Check hise? of Dr, Coues.)) | This) work (is) in
many respects most valuable. In it, however, so
much learning has been expended in the mending
and remodelling of scientific names, as fairly to
bring purism in this regard to a reductio ad ab-
surdum. Hence the Committee on the new code,
with Dr. Coues at its head, are forced to declare
that ‘‘a name is only a name, and has no neces-
sary meaning,” and therefore no necessarily cor-
rect orthography. Its only proper spelling is the
way its author first spelled it. After this experi-
ence the work of strengthening the lame and halt-
ing words is hardly likely to be continued in other
fields of science.

Another illustration may be drawn from the ex-
cessive multiplication of genera, —a stage through
which ornithology has naturally passed, and which
other sciences, profiting from this experience, may
possibly be able to avoid.

136 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

The “Code” may be considered first in its adap-
tation to the needs of ornithologists. In this re-
smect there is little to criticise. 4 The fact’ that the
ornithologists have been able to agree upon it, and
that they have applied it in detail to the produc-
tion of a check-list, would show that for their use
the rules are good and sufficient. There are in
the “Code” some traces of compromise, — cases
in which the sharpness of a positive ruling is
somewhat blunted by exceptions. Some of these
doubtless arise from difference of opinion among
the ornithologists, and others, perhaps, from pe-
culiarities in the literature of ornithology. But
whether these modifications be unavoidable or not,
it must be remembered that no compromise can
be binding on future authors, and exceptions not
necessary in the nature of the case will be ignored.

A serious difficulty with all preceding codes of
nomenclature has been the lack of explicitness in
dealing with details. It has been hoped by zodlo-
gists generally that in this “Code” all the more
important difficulties would be fairly met and dis-
posed of in ways which could be followed in other
sciences. In other words, we have hoped that this
“ Code” would be one for zodlogists and botanists
generally, and not solely for ornithologists. That
such a hope was in the minds of the Committee
also, is evident from the care with which they have
considered and worked over all previous codes, as
well as from their own explicit statement (page
11): ‘These rules were considered in their bearing
upon zodlogy at large, as well as upon ornithology
alone; it being obvious that sound principles of

NOMENCLATURE OF AMERICAN BIRDS. 137

nomenclature should be susceptible of general ap-
plication.” From this view-point, then, should
the “Code” be judged; and any rules or pro-
visions based on compromise of opinions, as well
as any arising from special peculiarities of birds
or of ornithological literature, must be regarded as
blemishes: in’ the “ Code,”

Speaking only for himself and for his special
line of work, the present writer wishes to express
his great satisfaction with the “Code.” In all its
essential features the “Code” must commend itself
at once to those who have made questions of no-
menclature a subject of serious thought, and its
rules for the most part need only formulation to
secure adoption, | But) this is not) quite: true, I
think, of all of them. Where so much has been
done, and so well done, any word of criticism
seems thankless. A few points, however, occur
to the writer, viewing this code of rules from the
standpoint of his own experience. The first of
these is in) regard to Canon XVII.! in so far as

1 Canon XVII. reads as follows: “Preference between com-
petitive specific names published simultaneously in the same work,
or in two works of the same actual or ostensible date (no exact
date being ascertainable), is to be decided as follows : —

“7, Of names the equal pertinency of which may be in ques-

tion, preference shall be given to that which is open to least
doubt.

“2, Of names of undoubtedly equal pertinency, (a) that founded
upon the male is to be preferred to that founded upon the female ;
(4) that founded on the adult to that on the young; and (c) that
founded on the nuptial condition to that of the pre- or post-nuptial
conditions.

“3, Of names of undoubtedly equal pertinency, and founded
upon the same condition of sex, age, or season, that is to be pre-
ferred which stands first in the book.”

138 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

this applies to different names given in the same
_work to the same group.

It is certain that Clause 2 in this canon is based
on special peculiarities of ornithology, while Clauses
1 and 3 are doubtless due to compromise among
ornithologists. The question of equal pertinency
of description is very often a subjective one, and
this rule gives room to individual judgment or
caprice, and this it is the business of the “‘ Code”
to eliminate. As to Clause 2 we may notice that
in most groups of animals, as in the fishes for
example, we cannot discriminate in any such way
between males, females, and young, or between
the various nuptial and non-nuptial conditions.
The clause is for ornithologists alone, and by
other naturalists it must of necessity be disre-
garded. Of synonymous names which admit of
positive identification, and which are printed in
the same book, we shall doubtless continue to use
that name which stands first upon the page, without
regard to other considerations. I believe that the
law of primogeniture is made to apply in the case
of twins. The chief aim of the law of priority, like
that of the law of primogeniture, is not the survival
of the fittest, nor yet justice, but simply jxzty.
The present Canon XVII. will not secure fixity.
The same remarks apply to Canon XVIII., which
refers to synonymous genera of the same date of
publication.

In the cases of Canons XXI. and XXIII., which
treat of the restriction of composite genera in which
no type has been clearly indicated by the author,
some important matters are left obscure. It is

NOMENCLATURE OF AMERICAN BIRDS. 139

not stated to what degree, if at all, we may be
allowed to select the type of such a genus by
(metaphorically) questioning its author as to which -
species he himself would have regarded as typical. -
This method of selecting a type for the compre- -
hensive genera of Linnzus! and others has been -
practised by certain writers; and where the indica-
tions are unquestionable, this seems a very just .
method of procedtre, Nor is it clear from the -
“Code,” whether the results of the application of
Canon XXI1. (by which the earliest restriction of |
a comprehensive genus is held to be valid) could
be set aside either by the application of the pro-
cess of elimination (as set forth in Canon XXIII.),
or on account of the supposed views of the author
of the genus. There are thus three different ways
for selecting the type of a comprehensive genus,
all three of them sanctioned by the ‘“ Code.”
These three methods will often lead to different
results, and the ‘‘ Code” nowhere states which is
ity, Case./on conmict tentitled fo. precedence.) “My:
own idea is that if the author has indicated in any
unequivocal way which species was in his mind
typical, that species should be regarded as the
type. If no such selection is unquestionable,
the species (originally contained in the genus)
which is selected as type by the earliest author

1 Professor A. E. Verrill has called my attention to the fact
that Linnzeus himself has distinctly stated that he regards the type
of each of his genera as being “ the best known European or offi-
cinal species.” I have not been able to verify this statement ; but
if it is correct, it ought not to be overlooked in the process of
selecting types for the Linnzean genera.

I40 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

who undertakes to restrict the comprehensive
genus should be taken as the type. If no such
restriction has taken place, the process of elimi-
nation, as laid down in Canon XXIII., may be
applied. In both the latter cases, only those re-
strictions kxow7ngly made should be considered.
The “Code” agrees with most others in the
rejection of “ zomina nuda” (bare names intro-
duced without explanation), but it differs from
most others in regarding a“ typonym” (or generic
name established only by the indication of a typi-
cal species, and without diagnosis) as something
more than a “ bare name,” and as therefore worthy
of recognition. In this regard the “ Code,” justly
or not, is most likely to receive criticism from
workers in other fields. Most other departments
of zodlogy have but little to do with “new gen-
era,’ defined solely by the specification of a type-
species. These “typonyms” have been generally
discarded as the useless product of lazy or “ liter-
ary ” naturalists on the general ground formulated
by Professor Cope, that “science! is science and

1 The following are Professor Cope’s remarks on this point:
“In the Proceedings of the United States National Museum, Pro-
fessor Gill insists on the adoption of a generic name proposed by
himself without description, in preference to a name proposed later,
by another author, whose description contains some errors. The
opposite course had been pursued by Professors Jordan and Gil-
bert, —a circumstance which gives rise to the criticism in question.
Professor Gill admits the facts to be as above stated, and there-
upon makes the following remarks: ‘ What is the advantage of
any description? According to the rules of the British and Amer-
ican Associations for the Advancement of Science, a description
is necessary as the basis of permanent nomenclature, but like
many of the other rules propounded in those codes, there is no

NOMENCLATURE OF AMERICAN BIRDS. I41

not literature,’ and that its names are meaningless
except as “handles to facts.” It is, however, ap-
parently the general feeling of ornithologists, that
names of this sort are too firmly fixed in their
science to be now set aside. The Committee goes
so far as to say (page 52) that ‘the mere mention
of a type has been found to be often a better in-
dex to an author's meaning than is frequently

proper logical basis therefor.’ Professor Gill then proceeds to
make the usual statements about the inadequacy of the earlier
generic descriptions, etc., — a mode of reasoning generally resorted
to under similar circumstances.

‘Tn taking his position, it is evident that Professor Gill and his
school (for he is not alone in his views) have to contend not only
with the wisdor. of the American and British Associations, but
with that of the other bodies above mentioned. It would seem
superfluous for us to defend a fortification so strongly held; but
the heresy in question has had considerable run in America,
and it is fitting that linen should be washed where it has been
soiled. In brief, then, one reason why a description is necessary
in adding a new name to scientific nomenclature is that science
is science and not literature, —a distinction occasionally lost sight
of by a few writers on natural history. In other words, it deals
with things, and not words; and the only connection words have
with science is to represent things. As this cannot be done with-
out a preliminary definition, names alone (7omzna nuda) do not
belong to science at all, but to the arts of composition and litera-
ture. Second, the inconvenience of the substitution of literary
methods for scientific methods in scientific work is so great that
scientists have felt compelled to protect themselves against these
‘literary fellows.’ By insisting on definitions, these gentlemen
are placed in a somewhat embarrassing position. They do not
wish to forego the pleasure of creating a new lexicon, but to com-
pose a diagnosis is for them a very serious business. Literature,
a critic says, deals with ‘manner,’ while science treats of ‘matter,’
and a diagnosis is a concentrated extract of matter. Between the
two horns of the dilemma he will generally (not always, we are
sorry to say) prefer the less conspicuous course, and abandon no-
menclature as a profession.” — American Naturalist, Nov. 8, 1881.

142 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

a diagnosis or a long description.” This may be
true; but it is equivalent to saying that if a given
author will tell us what he is talking about, we
can form a better idea of his meaning than we
shall have if we listen to his statements. Possibly
the line must be drawn somewhere between the
“typonym” and the “ xomen nudum,” but both
are valueless in fact, and it is a pity that any
science should feel compelled to notice either.

Canons XLIV. and XLV., requiring absolute iden-
tification to secure priority, will offer some difficul-
ties in practice; and it is in this regard that most
fluctuations in nomenclature in future are likely
to occur. Really “ absolute” identification of de-
scriptions is often difficult among birds, and in
more obscure groups it becomes less and less easy
of attainment.

With these exceptions, the rules of the “ Code”’
seem to the present writer to be above cavil, and
to fill the needs of other naturalists quite as well as
they do those of ornithologists. With the exceptions
of Canons XVII. and XVIII., which seem to him
unwise, and which, in fact, he cannot use at all, and
possibly that of Canon XLII. in so far as this rec-
ognizes the validity of typonyms, the entire “Code”’
must certainly be adopted by workers in ichthy-
ology. I hope and believe that other branches of
science will find these rules equally satisfactory,
and that this may soon become in all important
respects the code of nomenclature for zodlogy
and botany as well as for American ornithology.

AN ECCENTRIC NATURALIST. 143

AN ECCENTRIC ONATURALIST.

T is now nearly seventy years since the first
student of our Western fishes crossed the Falls
of the Ohio and stood on Indiana soil. He came
on foot, with a note-book in one hand and a hickory
stick in the other, and his capacious pockets were
full of wild-flowers, shells, and toads. He wore
“a long, loose coat of yellow nankeen, stained yel-
lower by the clay of the roads, and variegated by
the juices of plants.” In short, in all respects of
dress, manners, and appearance, he would be de-
scribed by the modern name of “tramp.” Nev-
ertheless, no more remarkable figure has ever
appeared in the annals of Indiana or in the annals
of science. To me it has always possessed a pecu-
liar interest; and so, for a few moments, I wish to
call up before you the figure of Rafinesque, with his
yellow nankeen coat, “his sharp tanned face, and
his bundle of plants, under which a pedler would
groan,’ before it recedes into the shadows of
oblivion.

Constantine Samuel Rafinesque was born in
Constantinople in the year 1784. His father was
a French merchant from Marseilles doing business
in Constantinople, and his mother was a German
girl, born in Greece, of the family name of Schmaltz.
Rafinesque himself, son of a Franco-Turkish father

144 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

and a Greco-German mother, was an American.
Before he was a year old his life-long travels be-
gan, his parents visiting ports of Asia and Africa
on their way to Marseilles. Asa result of this trip,
we have the discovery, afterward characteristically
announced by him to the world, that “ infants are
not subject to sea-sickness.” At Marseilles his
future career was determined for him; or, in his
own language: “It was among the flowers and
fruits of that delightful region that I first began to
enjoy life, and I became a botanist. Afterward,
the first prize I received in school was a book of
animals, and I am become a zoologist and a nat-
uralist. My early voyage made me a traveller.
Thus, some accidents or early events have an in-
fluence on our fate through life, or unfold our
inclinations.” 1

Rafinesque read books of travel, those of Cap-
tain Cook, Le Vaillant, and Pallas especially;
and his soul was fired with the desire “to bea
great) traveller likeethem. . ... And I became
such,” he adds tersely. At the age of eleven he
had begun an herbarium, and had learned to read
the Latin in which scientific books of the last
century were written. ‘I never was in a regular
college,” he says, “nor lost my time on dead lan-
guages; but I spent it in reading alone, and by
reading ten times more than is read in the schools.
I have undertaken to read the Latin and Greek, as

1 This and most of the other verbal quotations in this paper
are taken from an “ Autobiography of Rafinesque,” of which a
copy exists in the Library of Congress. A few quotations have
been somewhat abridged.

AN ECCENTRIC NATURALIST. 145

well as the Hebrew, Sanskrit, Chinese, and fifty
other languages, as I felt the need or inclination to
study them.” At the age of twelve he published
his first scientific paper, “ Notes on the Apen-
nines,” as seen from the back of a mule on a jour-
ney from Leghorn to Genoa. Rafinesque was now
old enough to choose his calling in life. He de-
cided to become a merchant; for, said he, “com-
merce and travel are linked.” At this time came
the first outbreaks of the French Revolution, when
the peasants of Provence began to dream of “ cas-
tles on fire and castles combustible ;”’ so Rafinesque’s
prudent father sent his money out of France and
his two sons to America.

In Philadelphia, Constantine Rafinesque became
a merchant’s clerk, and his spare time was devoted
to the study of botany. He tried also to study
the birds; but he says, ‘The first bird I shot was a
poor chickadee, whose death appeared a cruelty,
and I never became much of a hunter.” During
his vacations Rafinesque travelled on foot over
parts of Pennsylvania and Virginia. He visited
President Jefferson, who, he tells us, asked him to
call again. In 1805, receiving an offer of business
in Sicily, Rafinesque returned to Europe. He
spent ten years in Sicily, —the land, as he sums it
up, “of fruitful soil, delightful climate, excellent
productions, perfidious men, and deceitful women.”
Here in Sicily he discovered the medicinal squill,
which, aided by the equally medicinal paregoric,
was once a great specific for all childish ailments.
He commenced gathering this in large quantities

for shipment to England and Russia. The Sici-
10

146 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

lians thought that he was using it as a dye-stuff;
“and this,” said he, ‘‘I let them believe.” Nearly
two hundred thousand pounds had been shipped
by him before the secret of the trade was discov-
ered, since which time the Sicilians have prose-
cuted the business on their own account. He
began to turn his attention to the animals of the
sea, and here arose his passion for ichthyology.
The red-shirted Sicilian fishermen used to bring
to him the strange creatures which came in their
nets. In 1810 he published two works on the
fishes of Sicily, and for our first knowledge of
very many of the Mediterranean fishes we are in-
debted to these Sicilian papers of Rafinesque. It
is unfortunately true, however, that very little real
gain to science has come through this knowledge.
Rafinesque’s descriptions in these works are so
brief, so hasty, and so often drawn from memory,
that later naturalists have been put to great trouble
in trying to make them out. A peculiar, restless,
impatient enthusiasm is characteristic of all his
writings,— the ardor of the explorer without the
patience of the investigator.!

In Sicily, Rafinesque was visited by the English
ornithologist, William Swainson. Swainson seems
to have been a great admirer of “the eccentric
naturalist,’ as he called him. Of him Rafinesque
says: ‘‘ Swainson often went with me to the moun-
tains. He carried a butterfly-net to catch insects

1 Dr. Elliott Coues has wittily suggested that as the words
“srotesgue,” “ picturesgue,” and the like, are used to designate cer-
tain literary styles, the adjective “ rafinesgwe” may be similarly em-
ployed for work like that of the author now under consideration.

AN ECCENTRIC NATURALIST. 147

with, and was taken for a crazy man or a wizard.
AAs he hardly spoke Italian, I had once to save
him from being stoned out of a field, where he was
thought to seek a treasure buried by the Greeks.”
Rafinesque now invented a new way of distilling
brandy. He established a brandy-distillery, where,
said he, “I made a very good brandy, equal to
any made in Spain, without ever tasting a drop of
it, since I hate all strong liquors. This prevented
me from relishing this new employment, and so I
gave it up after a time.”

Finally, disgust with the Sicilians and fear of
the French wars caused Rafinesque, who was, as
he says, “a peaceful man,” to look again toward
the United States. In 181s he sailed again for
America, with all his worldly goods, including his
_ reams of unpublished manuscripts, his bushels of
shells, and a multitude of drawings of objects in
natural history. According to his own account,
the extent of his collections at that time was enor-
mous, and from the great number of scattered
treatises on all manner of subjects which he pub-
lished in later years, whenever he could get them
printed, it is fair to suppose that his pile of manu-
scripts was equally great. A considerable number
of his note-books, and of papers for which, fortu-
nately for scientific nomenclature, he failed to find
a publisher, are now preserved in the United States
National Museum. These manuscripts are remark-
able for two things, — the beauty of the quaint
French penmanship, and the badness of the ac-
companying drawings. His numerous note-books,
written in French, represent each the observations

148 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

of a busy summer; and these observations, for
the most part unchecked by the comparison of
specimens, he prepared for the press during the
winter. To this manner of working, perhaps un-
avoidable in his case, many of Rafinesque’s errors
and blunders are certainly due. In one of these
note-books I find, among a series of notes in
French, the following remarkable observation in
English: “Zhe girls at Fort Edward eat clay!”
In another place I find a list of the new genera of
fishes in Cuvier’s “ Regne Animal” (1817) which
were known to him. Many of these are designated
as synonymous with genera proposed by Rafi-
nesque in his “Caratteri” in 1810. With this list
is the remark that these genera of Cuvier are iden-
tical with such and such genera “‘ proposed by me
in 1810, but don’t you tell it!”

Rafinesque was six months on the ocean in this
second voyage to America. Finally, just as the
ship was entering Long Island Sound, the pilot let
her drift against one of the rocks which lie outside
of the harbor of New London. The vessel filled
and sank, giving the passengers barely time to
escape with their lives. ‘I reached New London
at midnight,” says Rafinesque, “in a most deplora-
ble situation. I had lost everything, — my fortune,
my share in the cargo, my collections and labors
of twenty years past, my books, my manuscripts,
and even my clothes, — all I possessed, except
some scattered funds and some little insurance-
money. Some hearts of stone have since dared
to doubt of these facts, or rejoice at my losses.
Yes, I have found men vile enough to laugh with-

AN ECCENTRIC NATURALIST. 149

out shame at my misfortunes, instead of condoling
with me. But I have met also with friends who
have deplored my loss and helped me in need.”

I shall pass rapidly over Rafinesque’s career
until his settlement in Kentucky. He travelled
widely in America, in the summer, always on foot.
‘““Horses were offered to me,” he said, “but I
never liked riding them, and dismounting for
every flower. Horses do not suit botanists.” He
now came westward, following the course of the
Ohio, and exploring for the first time the botany
of the country. He came to Indiana, and for a
short time was associated with the community
then lately established by Owen and Maclure at
New Harmony on the Wabash. Though this
New Harmony experiment was a failure, as all
communities must be in which the drone and the
worker alike have access to the honey-cells, yet
the debt due it from American science is very
great. ‘Although far in the backwoods, and in
the long notorious county of Posey, New Harmony
was for a time fairly to be called the centre of
American science; and even after half'a century
has gone by its rolls bear few names brighter than
those of Thomas Say, David Dale Owen, and
Charles Albert Le Sueur.

Rafinesque soon left New Harmony, and became
Professor of Natural History and the Modern Lan-
guages in Transylvania University, at Lexington,
Kentucky. He was, I believe, the very first
teacher of natural history in the West, and _ his
experiences were not more cheerful than those
of most pioneers. They would not give him at

150 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

Lexington the degree of Master of Arts, he says,
“because I had not studied Greek in a college,
although I knew more languages than all the
American colleges united. But it was granted at
last; but that of Doctor of Medicine was not
sranted, because I would not superintend ana-
tomical dissections.” He continues: —

“Mr. Holley, the president of the university, despised
and hated the natural sciences, and he wished to drive
me out altogether. To evince his hatred against science
and its discoveries, he had broken open my rooms in my
absence, given one to the students, and thrown all my
effects, books, and collections into the other. He had
deprived me of my situation as librarian, and tried to turn
me out of the college. I took lodgings in town, and car-
ried there all my effects, leaving the college with curses
both on it and Holley, which reached them both soon
after ; for Holley died of the yellow fever in New Orleans
and the college was burned with all its contents.”

In one of his summer trips Rafinesque became
acquainted with Audubon, who was then painting
birds and keeping a little “ grocery-store” down
the river, at Henderson, Kentucky. Rafinesque
reached Henderson in a boat, carrying on his back
a bundle of plants which resembled dried clover.
He accidentally met Audubon, and asked him to
tell him where the naturalist. lived. The ornithol-
ogist introduced himself, and Rafinesque handed
him a letter from a friend in the East, commending
him to Audubon as an “odd fish, which might not
be described in the published treatises.” The story
of the interview is thus described by Audubon:

AN ECCENTRIC. NATURALIST. I5I

“Fis attire struck me as exceedingly remarkable. A
long, loose coat of yellow nankeen, much the worse for
the many rubs it had got in its time, hung about him
loosely, like a sack. A waistcoat of the same, with enor-
mous pockets and buttoned up to the chin, reached below
over a pair of tight pantaloons, the lower part of which
was buttoned down over his ankles. His beard was long,
and his lank black hair hung loosely over his shoulders.
His forehead was broad and prominent, indicating a mind
of strong power. His words impressed an assurance of
rigid truth ; and as he directed the conversation to the
natural sciences, I listened to him with great delight.

“That night, after we were all abed, I heard of a sudden
a great uproar in the naturalist’s room. I got up and
opened the door, when to my astonishment I saw my
guest running naked, holding the handle of my favorite
Cremona, the body of which he had battered to pieces in
attempting to kill the bats which had entered the open
window !. I stood amazed; but he continued jumping
and running around and around till he was fairly exhausted,
when he begged me to procure one of the animals for him,
as he felt convinced that they belonged to a new species.
Although I was convinced of the contrary, I took up the
bow of my demolished violin, and giving a smart tip to each
bat as it came up, we soon had specimens enough.”

A part of the story of this visit, which Audubon
does not tell, may be briefly related here: Audubon
was a great artist, and his paintings of birds and
flowers excited the wonder and admiration of Rafi-
nesque, as it has that of the generations since his
time. But Audubon was something of a wag
withal, and some spirit of mischief led him to
revenge the loss of his violin on the too ready
credulity of his guest. He showed him gravely

152 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

some ten grotesque drawings of impossible fishes
which he had observed “ down the river,’ with
notes on their habits, and a list of the names by
which they were known by the French and English
settlers. These Rafinesque duly copied into his
note-books, and later he published descriptions
of them as representatives of new genera, such as
Pogostoma, Aplocentrus, Litholepis, Pilodictis, Po-
macampsis, and the like.

These singular genera, so like and yet so unlike
to anything yet known, have been a standing puzzle
to students of fishes. Various attempts at identi-
fication of them have been made, but in no case
have satisfactory results been reached. Many of
the hard things which have been said of Rafi-
nesque’s work rest on these unlucky genera,' “ com-
municated to me by Mr. Audubon.” The true
story of this practical joke was told me by the
venerable Dr. Kirtland, who in turn received it
from Dr. Bachman, the brother-in-law and scientific
associate of Audubon. In the private note-books
of Rafinesque I have since found his copies of
these drawings, and a glance at these is sufficient
to show the extent to which science through him
has been victimized.

About this time Rafinesque turned his mind
again toward invention. He invented the present
arrangement of coupon bonds, or, as he called it,
“the divitial invention.” Savings-banks were pro-

i I am informed by Dr. J. A. Allen that there are also some
unidentified genera of herons, similarly described by Rafinesque
from drawings kindly shown him by Mr. Audubon. Apparently
these also date from the same unlucky practical joke.

AN ECCENTRIC NATURALIST. 153

jected by him, as well as “ steam ploughs,” “ aquatic
railroads,” fire-proof houses, and other contrivances
which he was unable to perfect. He took much
delight in the study of the customs and languages
of the Indians. In so doing, if the stories are
true, he became, in a way, associated with the ori-
gin of Mormonism; for it is said that his theory |
that the Indians came from Asia by way of Siberia,
and were perhaps the descendants of the ten lost —
tribes of Israel, gave the first suggestion to Solo-
mon Spaulding for his book of the prophet Mor-
mon. In‘any case, whether this be true or not,
it is certain that Rafinesque is still cited as high
authority by the Latter-Day Saints when the gen-
uineness of the book of Mormon is questioned.
Rafinesque now returned to Philadelphia, and
published ‘“‘The Atlantic Journal and Friend of
Knowledge,” “Annals of Nature,” and other seri-
als, of which he was editor, publisher, and usually
sole contributor. After a time he became sole sub-
scriber, also, —a condition of affairs which greatly
exasperated him against the Americans and their
want of appreciation of science. He published
several historical treatises, and contemplated a
“Complete History of the Globe,” with all its con-
tents. An elaborate poem of his, dreary enough,
is entitled ‘‘ The World; or, Instability.” He made
many enemies among the American botanists of
his time by his overbearing ways, his scorn of
their customs and traditions, and especially by his
advocacy of crude and undigested though neces-
sary reforms, so that at last most of them decided
to ignore his very existence. In those days, in

154 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

matters of classification, the rule of Linnzus was
supreme, and any effort to recast his artificial
groupings was looked at as heretical in the ex-
treme. The attempt at a natural classification of
plants, which has made the fame of Jussieu, had
the full sympathy of Rafinesque; but to his Ameri-
can contemporaries such work could lead only to
confusion. Then, again, in some few of its phases,
Rafinesque anticipated the modern doctrine of the
origin of species. That the related species of such
genera as Rosa, Quercus, Trifolium, have had a
common origin, —a view the correctness of which
no well-informed botanist of our day can possibly
doubt, — Rafinesque then maintained against the
combined indignation and disgust of all his fellow-
workers. His writings on these subjects read bet-
ter to-day than when, forty-five years ago, they
were sharply reviewed by one of our then young
and promising botanists, Dr. Asa Gray.

But the botanists had good reason to complain
of the application of Rafinesque’s theories of evo-
lution. To him, the production of a new species
was a rapid process,—a hundred years was time
enough, — and when he saw the tendency in di-
verging varieties toward the formation of new
species, he was eager to anticipate Nature (and
his fellow-botanists as well), and give it a new
name. He became a monomaniac on the subject
of new species. He was uncontrolled in this
matter by the influence of other writers, — that
incredulous conservatism as to another's discov-
eries which furnishes a salutary balance to enthu-
siastic workers. Before his death so much had

AN ECCANTRIC NATURALIST. 155

he seen, and so little had he compared, that he
had described certainly twice as many fishes, and
probably nearly twice as many plants and shells,
as really existed in the regions over which he trav- —
elled. He once sent for publication a paper seri-
ously describing, in regular natural history style,
twelve new species of thunder and lightning which
he had observed near the Falls of the Ohio.

Then, too, Rafinesque studied in the field, col-
lecting and observing in the summer, comparing
and writing in the winter. When one is chasing a
frog in a canebrake, or climbing a cliff in search of
a rare flower, he cannot have a library and a mu-
seum at his back. The exact work of our modern
museums and laboratories was almost unknown in
his day. Then, again, he depended too much
on his memory for facts and details; and, as Pro-
fessor Agassiz used to say, ‘“‘the memory must not
be kept too full, or it will spill over.”

Thus it came about that the name and work of
Rafinesque fell into utter neglect. His writings,
scattered here and there in small pamphlets, cheap
editions published at his own expense, had been
sold as paper-rags, or used to kindle fires by those
to whom they were sent, and later authors could
not find them. His ‘Ichthyologia Ohiensis,”
once sold for a dollar, is now quoted at fifty dol-
lars, and the present writer has seen but two copies
of it. In the absence of means to form a just
opinion of his work, it became the habit to pass
him by with a sneer, as the “inspired idiot .. .
whose fertile imagination has peopled the waters
of the Ohio.” Until lately, only Professor Agas-

156 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

siz! has said a word in mitigation of the harsh ver-
dict passed on Rafinesque by his fellow-workers
and their immediate successors. Agassiz says,
very justly: —

“T am satisfied that Rafinesque was a better man than
he appeared. His misfortune was his prurient desire for
novelties, and his rashness in publishing them. . . . Trac-
ing his course as a naturalist during his residence in this
country, it is plain that he alarmed those with whom he
had intercourse, by his innovations, and that they pre-
ferred to lean upon the authority of the great naturalist
of the age [Cuvier], who, however, knew little of the
special history of the country, rather than to trust a some-
what hasty man who was living among them, and who had
collected a vast amount of information from all parts of
the States upon a variety of subjects then entirely new to
Science, 9

In a sketch of “A Neglected Naturalist,” Pro-
fessor Herbert E. Copeland has said: —

“To many of our untiring naturalists, who sixty years
ago accepted the perils and privations of the far West, to
collect and describe its animals and plants, we have given
the only reward they sought, —a grateful remembrance of
their work. Audubon died full of riches and honor, with
the knowledge that his memory would be cherished as
long as birds should sing. Wilson is the ‘ father of Amer-
ican ornithology,’ and his mistakes and faults are forgotten

1 So eatly as 1844, Professor Agassiz wrote to Charles Lucien
Bonaparte: “I think that there is a justice due to Rafinesque.
However poor his descriptions, he first recognized the necessity
of multiplying genera in ichthyology, and this at a time when the
thing was far more difficult than now.”

2 Agassiz, American Journal of Science and Arts, 1854, p. 354.

AN ECCENTRIC NATURALIST. 157

in our admiration of his great achievements. Le Sueur is
remembered as the ‘first to explore the ichthyology of
the great American lakes. Laboring with these, and
greatest of them all in respect to the extent and range
of his accomplishments, is one whose name has been
nearly forgotten, and who is oftenest mentioned in the
field of his best labors with pity or contempt.” }

It is doubtless true that while, as Professor
Agassiz has said, Rafinesque ‘“‘was a better man
than he appeared,” and while he was undoubtedly
a man of great learning and of greater energy, his
work does not deserve a high place in the records
of science. And his failure seems due to two
things: first, his lack of attention to details, a
defect which has vitiated all of his work; and,
second, his versatility, which led him to attempt
work in every field of learning. As to this, he
says himself: —

“It is a positive fact that in knowledge I have been a
botanist, naturalist, geologist, geographer, historian, poet,
philosopher, philologist, economist, philanthropist. By
profession a traveller, merchant, manufacturer, brewer,
collector, improver, teacher, surveyor, draughtsman, archi-
tect, engineer, pulmist, author, editor, bookseller, libra-
rian, secretary, and I hardly know what I may not
become as yet, since, whenever I apply myself to any-
thing which I like, I never fail to succeed, if depending
on myself alone, unless impeded or prevented by the lack
of means, or the hostility of the foes of mankind.”’

But a traveller Rafinesque chiefly considered
himself; and to him all his pursuits, scientific, lin-
guistic, historical, were but episodes in a life of

1 American Naturalist, 1876.

158 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

travel. Two lines of doggerel French were his
motto: —
“Un voyageur des le berceau,

Je le serai jusqu’au tombeau ”

“ A traveller from the cradle,
I’m a traveller to the tomb.”

Long. before the invention of railroads and
steamboats he had travelled over most of south-
ern Europe and eastern North America, With-
out money except as he earned it, he had gathered
shells and plants and fishes on every shore from
the Hellespont to the Wabash.

Concerning one element of Rafinesque’s charac-
ter I am able to find no record. If he ever loved
any man or woman, except as a possible patron
and therefore aid to his schemes of travel, he him-
self gives no record of it. He speaks kindly of
Audubon; but Audubon had furnished him with
specimens and paintings of flowers and _ fishes.
He speaks generously of Clifford, at Lexington;
but Clifford had given him an asylum when he
was turned out of Transylvania University. No
woman is mentioned in his Autobiography except
his mother and sister, and these but briefly. His
own travels, discoveries, and publications filled
his whole mind and soul.

Rafinesque died in Philadelphia, in 1840, at the
age of fifty-six. He had been living obscurely in
miserable lodgings; for his dried plants, and his
books published at his own expense, brought him
but a scanty income. His scientific reputation
had not reached his fellow-lodgers, and his land-
lord thought him “a crazy herb-doctor.” He died

AN ECCENTRIC NATURALIST. 159

alone, and left no salable assets; and his landlord
refused to allow his friends —such friends as he
had —to enter the house to give him a decent
burial. He wished to make good the unpaid
rent by selling the body to a medical college;
but at night, so the story goes, a physician who
had studied botany with Rafinesque got a few
friends together, and broke into the garret and
carried away the body, which they buried in a
little churchyard outside the city limits, now oblit-
erated by the growth of Philadelphia.

American naturalists have greater honor now
than forty years ago. Rafinesque died unnoticed,
and was buried only by stealth. A whole nation
‘wept for Agassiz. But a difference was in the
men as well as in the times. Both were great
naturalists and learned men. Both had left high
reputations in Europe to cast their lot with Amer-
ica. Agassiz’s great heart went out toward every
one with whom he came in contact; but Rafi-
nesque loved no man or woman, and died, as he
had lived, alone. Ifsome one who loved him had
followed him to the last, it might have been with
Rafinesque as with Albrecht Diirer: “ ‘ Ezuzgravit’
is the inscription on the headstone where he lies.”
But there was no one; and there is neither head-
stone nor inscription, and we know not even the
place where he rests after his long journey.

160 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

A CUBAN FISHERMAN.

tf H, but you must see Don Felipe, — he knows

all about fishes!” is the first advice which
the naturalist receives when he begins to make col-
lections of fishes in the markets of Havana. The
writer once had occasion to make such a collec-
tion, and he soon found that among fishermen
and fishmongers the phrase “amigo de Don
Felipe” was ever a passport to honest dealing and
to a real desire to aid him in his work. For every
fisherman in Havana knows Don Felipe, and
looks upon him as a personal friend. Each one
regards the fame which Don Felipe’s studies of the
fishes is vaguely understood to have brought him
in that little-known world outside of Havana as in
some sort reflected on himself. The writer was
told, by a dealer in the Pescaderia Grande, that
for twenty years Don Felipe Poey was there in the
markets every day, when at noon the fishes came
in from the boats, and that he knew more about the
fishes of Cuba than even the fishermen themselves.
And now that Don Felipe no longer visits the
markets, he is not forgotten there, and many a
rare specimen still finds its way from the Pesca-
deria to Don Felipe’s: study in the) Calle’ San
Nicolas.

A CUBAN FISHERMAN. 161

Felipe Poey y Aloy was born in Havana, May 26,
1799. His father was French, his mother Spanish;
but Poey early renounced his French citizenship
for that of Cuba. His education was received in
Havana, and after studying law he became, in
1823, an advocate in that city. But his tastes lay
in the direction of natural history, and for this
he gradually abandoned his practice as a lawyer.
Very early he had made discoveries of mollusks,
insects, and especially of fishes, which were new
to science. In 1825 he was married to Maria de
Jésus Aguirre, a very intelligent lady who is still
the companion of his studies. In 1826 he sailed
for Paris, taking with him eighty-five drawings of
Cuban fishes and a collection of thirty-five species,
preserved in a barrel of brandy. ‘These drawings
and specimens he placed at the service of Cuvier
and Valenciennes, who were then beginning the
publication of their work on the ‘‘ Natural History
of the Fishes.” The notes and drawings of Poey
proved of much service to the great ichthyologists.
A few new species were based on them, and Poey
had the satisfaction of finding his own name and
observations cited by Cuvier and Valenciennes
even more frequently than those of his famous
predecessor, Don Antonio Parra,! who had pub-
lished, in 1787, the first account of the Fishes of
Cuba.2— A set of duplicates of these notes and
drawings is still retained by Professor Poey. While

1 Y tuve el honor de ser citado por él (Cuvier) y por su co-
laborador Valenciennes, mas frecuentemente que D. Antonio
Parra. — PoEy.

2 Diferentes Piezas de Historia Natural de la Isla de Cuba.

II

162 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

in Paris, Poey was one of the original members who
founded the Entomological Society of France.

On returning to Havana in 1833, Poey gave.
himself still more fully to the study of natural his-
tory, and greater practice gave to his drawings
and notes more exactness and value. With the
appearance of the successive volumes of the “ His-
toire Naturelle des Poissons,” he attempted to iden-
tify the fishes of his market, as well as to study
their osteology and general anatomy. Animals
other than fishes he also tried to study, but in
most groups he found the literature in so scattered
and unsatisfactory a condition that he rarely ven-
tured to publish the results of his observations.
Among the fishes, however, thanks to the general
work of Cuvier and Valenciennes, and later to that
of Dr. Giinther, he felt comparatively sure of his
results, and ventured to name as new those which
he could not identify. The land-snails of Cuba,
too, Poey and his associate, Dr. Juan Gundlach,
were able to identify and describe with certainty,
as all the species then known were included in the
“Monographium Heliceorum Viventium” of Dr.
Ludwig Pfeiffer.

In the year 1842 Poey was appointed to the pro-
fessorship of Comparative Anatomy and Zodlogy
in the Royal University of Havana, which chair he
still holds, after forty-five years. The University
of Havana occupies an ancient monastery building
in the heart of the city. Like most such edifices
in Cuba and Spain, it is a low building around
a paved court, and its whitewashed, time-stained
walls have an air of great antiquity. The univer-

A CUBAN FISHERMAN. 163

sity has now some twelve hundred students, the
great majority of whom are in those departments
which lead toward wealth, or social or political pre-
ferment, as law, medicine, and pharmacy. Com-
paratively few pursue literary or philosophical
studies, and still fewer are interested in the bio-
logical sciences. In the department of botany
there are now but two students, and the number
in zodlogy is probably not much greater.

Although Professor Poey is evidently held in
very high respect in the university, in which he
has long been dean of the faculty of science, I can-
not imagine that he ever received much help or
sympathy in his scientific work from that quarter,
or indeed from any other in Cuba. His friends
and countrymen are doubtless glad to be of assist-
ance to so amiable a gentleman as the Sefior Don
Felipe, but they have very little intelligent sym-
pathy for the claims of science. The university
library contains but little which could be of help
in Professor Poey’s zodlogical studies. He has
therefore been compelled to gather a private library
of ichthyology. This library has with time become
very rich and valuable, many of his co-workers in
the study of fishes, notably Dr. Bleeker, having
presented him with complete series of their pub-
lished works. Two of Poey’s daughters who still
reside with him in Havana have been of much
help to him in the preparation of drawings and
manuscripts.

The museum of the university occupies two little
rooms, — the one devoted chiefly to Cuban minerals ;
the other containing mostly mammals, birds, and

104 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

fishes mounted by Poey himself in the earlier days
of his professorship. The number of these is not
great, nor have many additions been made during
the last twenty years. Most of the types of the
new species described by Professor Poey have
been, after being fully studied by him and repre-
sented in life-size drawings, sent to the United
States National Museum, to the Museum of Com-
parative Zodlogy, or to the Museum at Madrid.
_Duplicates have been rarely retained in Havana,
the cost of keeping up a permanent collection be-
ing too great. Asa result, Professor Poey’s work
has suffered from lack of means of comparing
specimens taken at different times. There is no
zoological laboratory in Cuba except the private
study of Professor Poey; and here, for want of
room and for other reasons, drawings have, to a
great extent, taken the place of specimens.

The publication of the observations of Professor
Poey on the animals of Cuba was begun in 1851,
in a series of papers entitled ‘‘ Memorias sobre la
Flistoria Natural. de la’ Isla de. Cuba.” \These
papers were issued at intervals from 1851 to 1860,
and together form two octavo volumes of about
450 pages each. The first volume contains chiefly
descriptions of mollusks and insects. The second
volume is devoted mainly to the fishes. As is natu-
ral in the exploration of a new field, these volumes
are largely occupied with the description of new
species. They give evidence of the disadvantages
arising from solitary work, without the aid of the
association and criticism of others, and without the
broader knowledge of the relations of groups which

A CUBAN FISHERMAN. 165

comes from the study of more than one fauna.
On the other hand, Professor Poey enjoyed the
great advantage of having an almost exhaustless
supply of material; for there are few ports where
fishes are brought in in such quantities, or in such
variety, as in the markets of Havana.

It is the fashion in some quarters to decry the
work of the describer of new forms. This is unjust
as well as absurd. All honest study has its place;
and till the pioneer work of exact determination of
species is performed, there is little opportunity for
fruitful work on the part of the embryologist or
the anatomist. It is of little use to record the
structure or the development of an animal, while
the animal itself is unknown.

The ‘‘Memorias” were at once recognized as
the most important work on the fishes of Cuba;
and as was said long ago by Professor Cope, this
work is a szze gua non in the study of the ichthy-
ology of tropical America.

The nomenclature and grouping of the species
in the ‘Conspectus Piscium Cubensium,” contained
in the ‘‘ Memorias,’ was in 1862 the subject of a
critical paper by Mr, Fheodore Gill This article,
and subsequent ones by the same author, exerted
much influence on Poey’s work. He was always
ready to profit by the suggestions and advice of
other writers, especially of those more favorably
situated than he in regard to libraries and muse-
ums; from Professor Gill’s papers he gained clearer

1 “ Remarks on the Genera and other Groups of Cuban Fishes,”

Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia,
1862, pp. 235 e¢ seq.

166 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

views of the relations of forms, and of the connec-
tion of the Cuban fauna with that of other regions.
On the other hand, he was led to adopt, against
his own judgment in many instances, that minute
subdivision of genera which has been a fashion in
American ichthyology, and which has been in
some quarters a reproach to American science.

In 1868 the results of the revision of his classi-
fication were embodied in a second catalogue of
the Cuban fishes, entitled “ Synopsis Piscium Cu-
bensium.” This forms the concluding chapter of
a series of papers, entitled “ Repertorio Fisico-
natural de la Isla de Cuba,” which embody the
results of a general scientific survey of the island.
Of this survey Professor Poey was director. In
1875 the entire list of species was again revised,
and the third and best catalogue of Cuban fishes
was published under the title of ‘‘ Enumeratio Pis-
cium Cubensium.” Besides these larger works,
many shorter papers by Poey occur in the “ Pro-
ceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences” of
Philadelphia, the “Annals of the New York Ly-
ceum,’ and the “‘ Anales de la Sociedad de Historia
Natural de Madrid.” MHe is also the author ofa
Geography of Cuba, and of a treatise on Mineral-
ogy, used in the Havana schools. A number of
poems from his pen have likewise been published,
but these I have not seen.

The great work of Poey’s life is the still unpub-
lished ‘“‘Ictiologia Cubana.” This is to contain
a detailed account of each of the fishes of Cuba.
It is to be composed, according to a published
statement of Poey, which I here translate, —

A CUBAN FISHERMAN. 167

“of a thick volume of text, Spanish folio, and of an
atlas of ten volumes larger folio (eighteen by thirteen
inches). The plates are made with a light indication
of the colors, which are described in the text. All are
original, drawn from nature by the author. . . . The text
contains the scientific name of each species, the common
name, the complete synonymy, a description of the colors,
distinctive peculiarities, relations of the varieties, compari-
sons, critical observations, and the history of the fish. It
contains, moreover, the characters of classes, sub-classes,
orders, families, genera, and species. The total number
of plates in the Atlas is 1,040. These show 758 species
of Cuban fishes, represented by 1,300 individuals in all
stages of growth. All except the sharks are drawn of
life-size. These 758 species, together with 24 mentioned
at the end of the work, make up 782 species of Cuban
fishes. Of these, 105 are doubtful, and therefore are left
without specific names. I hold them in suspense till I
can receive further data from the study of other speci-.
mens. ‘There are, therefore, 677 species well determined,.
of which more than half have been first made known by
me. Not more than a dozen species in the list have not
been examined by me. These are inserted on the au-
thority of writers who claim to have received their
specimens from Cuba, and who appear to be worthy
of confidence. The preparation of the text has cost me
an immense amount of time and labor, by the preparatory
studies which it has required. In the determination of
the species it is rarely that a single one has not occupied
me for an entire week. I have wished to make known
the certain as certain, and the doubtful as doubtful, so
that I shall declare nothing to be new unless it is so in
reality.”

The manuscripts of this great work are now in
duplicate. Professor Poey retains one copy; the

168 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

other has been purchased by the Spanish Govern-
ment for $4,000. It is earnestly hoped by Pro-
fessor Poey and his friends that the Government
will soon order its publication; but, unfortunately,
there seems to be no certainty of this. The manu-
scripts and drawings of the ‘“Ictiologia Cubana”
were placed on exhibition by the Spanish Govern-
ment in the Exposition of Amsterdam in 1883.
In testimonial of their worth, Professor Poey has
received from King William III. the decoration of
the order of the ‘“‘ Lion Néerlandais.” Before this,
as the most distinguished of Spanish naturalists,
he had received from the King of Spain the title
of “Encomendador de la Orden de Isabella la
Catolica.”

Among the manuscripts of Poey is one bearing
the title of ‘Corona Poeyana.” This isa list of
the species of animals and plants which other natu-
ralists have named for him as “ Poeyi” or “ Poeya-
nus,” in friendly recognition of the value of his
work. This list is a long one, but the kindly trib-
utes which it implies have not been undeserved.

There is no characteristic of Poey’s work more
striking than its entire lack of prejudice, or, in other
words, the teachableness of the man himself. A
certain zodlogist was once described to me by Dr.
Kirtland as ‘“‘a little man who couldn’t be told
anything.” His character was in this regard just
the reverse of that of Professor Poey. Among all
the naturalists of our time, I know of none more
willing to learn, whatever the source from which
information may come. He has no theories which
he is not ready to set aside when a better suggestion

A CUBAN FISHERMAN. 169

appears. Unlike some other systematic writers,
he exhibits no preference for his own names or
subdivisions, but is as ready, if the evidence seems
to require it, to smother one of his own species or
genera as those of another. His work shows little
sion of falling off in quality. The clearness of his
judgment and the accuracy of his memory seem
unimpaired. It is difficult in conversing with him
to realize that he was born in the last century, and
that in his earlier studies he was a contemporary
of Lamarck, Cuvier, and of Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire.
Many men are older at fifty than Poey at eighty-five.

Old age and its accompanying infirmities are
now narrowing the circle of Professor's Poey’s
life. His walks seldom extend themselves beyond
the confines of his study and the little courtyard,
shaded by tropical trees, into which his door opens.
Some two hours each day he still devotes to the
study of fishes. He eagerly reads every new work
on his favorite science, and is as anxious as ever
to obtain the freshest ideas on classification, or the
latest points in synonymy. As an evidence of his
freedom of mind and lack of prejudice I may cite
his acceptance of the various scientific theories
and conclusions embraced in the name “ Darwin-
ism,” and his general acceptance of the philosophy
of evolution as developed by Herbert Spencer, an
author for whom he has expressed to me a special
admiration. This is the more remarkable when
we remember that almost his whole life has been
passed in Cuba, —a condition where all tendencies
of society and of Church are away from such stud-
ies and speculations.

170 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

Like most men who have studied Nature for love
of her, Poey possesses a deeply religious spirit.
Everything to him proclaims the presence of Di-
vinity. ‘I believe with Lamarck,” he has said,
“that there is nothing but God in the Universe,
and that by the word /Vature we ought to under-
stand an order of things . ... Him whose true
name we cannot decipher; who in the burning
bush, questioned by Moses, said, ‘lam that lam,’
who on Mount Sinai called himself Jehovah, and
whom in our mortal tongue, with filial tenderness,
we call God.” !

Poey is rather above the medium height, heavily
built, and in his younger days he possessed un-
usual physical activity and vigor. In appearance
he offers a marked contrast to most of his country-
men, the Cubans. His complexion is fair, his hair
—now white — was never dark, and his gray eyes
suggest the Saxon rather than the Spaniard. As
he once said to me, ‘‘Comme naturaliste, je ne
suis pas espagnol: je suis cosmopolite.” His full
forehead, strong features, and handsome, smooth-
shaven face are not misleading evidences of a pure
and benevolent life. He has a most happy tem-
perament, and his smile is peculiarly genial and
cheery.|’ “Simple, ‘direct, unaffected, he is;one sor
the most delightful of men. Of all men whom I
have known, none has better than he learned the
art of growing old.

1 Memorias de Cuba, vol. ij. p. 414.

DARWIN. 171

DARWIN.

N each field of human thought there stand some
few great names which mark the epochs in its
history. In the study of the living things upon the
earth these names are three, —Linnzus, Cuvier,
and Darwin. Old as the world was when Linnzus
was born, before him scarcely any one had thought
of flowers and birds and butterflies as objects of
serious study.- Phe “Christian Era” of biolosy
begins with the year 1758;1! and the death of the
great Swede who rocked the cradle of the infant
science took place little more than a century ago.
Linneus has taught us to name and describe
the objects of Nature, that knowledge once gained
may be communicated to others. Cuvier has
taught us to see unity of structure underlying the
greatest diversity of appearance, and to group these
objects together in accordance with this unity.
Darwin has given us the clew as to the meaning of
this unity, —that unity in structure is brotherhood
in fact.
Charles Robert Darwin was born in the town of
Shrewsbury, Feb. 12, 1809, and died at his country

1 The date of the tenth edition of Linnzus’ “ Systema Naturz.”
Botanists usually begin farther back, at 1737, the date of the
“Genera Plantarum.”

172 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

home at Down, in Kent, on the 19th day of April,
[eo2, at the age of seventy-three years) “Av iife
more calm and peaceful than his, the world does not
often see. At home, in the country, surrounded
by his family, far away from the noise of politics
and undisturbed by clashing systems of philosophy,
he worked on in patience. For years, almost an
invalid, still feeling the effects of his long seasick-
ness while on the voyage of the “ Beagle; ” averse to
display or controversy; sure of the strength of truth,
—which some generation would hear, if his own
did not, — he sat and watched his flowers and vines
and trees and pigeons, reporting from time to time
the things he saw and their underlying meanings.
“For years,’ said one of Darwin's servants to
me, “Mr. Darwin used to spend his days in the
greenhouse with his plants, tying strings to them
and trying to make them do things.” Neverthe-
less, this age is the age of Darwin! No life in this
bustling nineteenth century has left so deep an
impress on our thought. And this impress must
deepen as the years roll on, until, if ever, the time
shall come when what we now know of the laws of
God shall have faded away, and our successors shall
begin again to learn like little children their A B C
from, Mother Nature. ‘‘ Mother Nature,” says
Huxley, “is singularly obdurate to honeyed words.
Only those who understand the ways of things, and
can silently and effectively use them, get much
good out of her.”

In 1831 Darwin was sent out as naturalist on
board of Her Majesty’s Ship ‘ Beagle,” which was
to take five years for a cruise around the world.

DARWIN. 173

' These five years of minute, detailed observation
formed the best of Darwin’s scientific training, and
they have been the basis of all his later work. The
primary results of this voyage were a number of
papers and treatises on matters connected with his
observations on the geological structure and the
fauna and flora of the regions visited, — works
which brought their author at once to the front
rank among the scientific men of England. Then
for a long time Darwin published nothing; and it
was not until after twenty-five years of elaboration
and verification that the main results of the voy-
age of the ‘‘ Beagle,” his own observations on the
changes of animals and plants under varying condi-
tions, came to light in the volume on the ‘ Origin
of Species.” This was in 1859.

That Darwin had not been idle during these
twenty-five years is shown by his own words, —
words which may be read with profit by any young
man who is anxious for sudden greatness, who
wishes to gather his strawberries before they are
ripe. He says: —

“When on board H. M. S. ‘ Beagle’ as naturalist, I
was much struck with certain facts in the distribution of
the organic beings inhabiting South America, and in the
geological relations of the present to the past inhabitants
of the continent. These facts seemed to throw some light
on the origin of species, —that mystery of mysteries, as it
has been called by one of our greatest philosophers. On
my return home it occurred to me (in 1837) that some-
thing might perhaps be made out on this question by
patiently accumulating and reflecting on all sorts of facts
which could possibly have any bearing on it. After five

174 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

years I allowed myself to speculate on the subject, and
drew up some short notes. These I enlarged, in 1844,
into a sketch of the conclusions which then seemed to me
probable. From that period to the present day I have
steadily pursued the same object. I hope that I may be
excused for entering on these personal details, as I give
them to show that I have not been hasty in coming to a
conclusion.”

Let me speak of certain traits of this work, the
“Origin of Species,” which give it a position al-
most alone among books of science. ‘There is in it
no statement of fact of any importance which, dur-
ing the twenty-five years since it was first published,
has been shown to be false. In its theoretical part
there is no argument which has been shown to be
unfair or fallacious. In these twenty-five years no
serious objection has been raised to any important
conclusion of his which was not at the time fully
anticipated and frankly met by him. Indeed, there
are but few of these objections which with our
present knowledge are not much less weighty than
Darwin then admitted. The progress of science
has bridged over many chasms in the evidence.

There is in this work nowhere a suggestion of
special pleading or of over-statement. The writer
is a judge and not an advocate, and from his deci-
sions there has been no successful appeal. There
is in this or any other of Darwin’s works scarcely
a line of controversial writing. He has been the
faithful mirror of Nature. The relations of Nature
to metaphysics he has left to others. The tor-
nadoes which have blown about the ‘ Origin of
Species” have left him undisturbed. The word

DARWIN. 175

“evolution” is not his word. He felt, perhaps,
that most systems of philosophy are like air-plants
which thrive equally well in any soil. With just
facts enough for their roots to cling to, they may
crow and bloom perennially, without other food
than the air.

From the standpoint of the naturalist the great
work of Darwin has been the total change in our
conception of the meaning of species. It was de-
clared by Linnzus, and repeated by his successors,
that ‘“‘there are as many different species now as
there were different forms created in the beginning
by the Infinite Being.” In accordance with this
statement we have been taught to look upon a spe-
cies in biology as a fixed entity, a perennial suc-
cession of individuals, similar to one another, from
the creation at one end of the series to the extinc-
tion at the other. We have been told over and
over again that the variations of a species are kept
within fixed limits by definite laws, and that one
species can never encroach on the traits of any
other species, nor ever permanently assume any
characters other than those with which it was cre-
ated. Darwin maintained that the form under
which any species is known to us is simply a phase
in the history of the succession of living forms
which constitute that species. He has shown that,
in fact, species are not thus held in check, — that
with the line of descent goes gradual modification.
Thus the living representatives of no species to-
day are quite like their ancestry of centuries ago.

The two things which most impress the mind of
the student of Nature are these: First, the enor-

176 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

mous diversity among living things; and second,
their even more surprising unity. The half million
known forms of animals and plants may be readily
reduced to less than a dozen special forms or types.
The problem is to account for the origin of this
diversity in life in some way which shall not leave
the essential unity out of sight.

The number of different forms of life on the
earth, now recognized as different species, is far
beyond the usual conception of those who have
not made such matters a special object of study.
This old book which I hold in my hand is a copy
of the half of the tenth edition of the “Systema
Nature,” which treats of all the known species of
animals. In its eight hundred and twenty-three
pages, some four thousand different kinds of ani-
mals are named and briefly described. These four
thousand species were all that were known in the
world by civilized man a little more than a century
ago. But for every one .of these enumerated by
Linnzus, more than fifty kinds are known to the
naturalists of to-day, and the number of species
still unknown doubtless far exceeds the list of those
already recorded. Every year, for the last quarter
of a century, there has been published in London
a plump octavo volume known as the “ Zoological
Record.” Each of these volumes is larger than the
whole “Systema Nature.’ Each volume is filled
with the names of the animals new to science
which have been added to our lists during the year
of which it treats. Every one of these volumes
contains the names of two or three times as many
animals as are mentioned in the whole “ Systema

DARWIN. i777

Nature.” Yet the field shows no signs of exhaus-
tion. As these volumes stand on the shelf together
side by side, it is easy to see that the later volumes
are the thickest ; and the “Record” for the present
year is the largest of all. And what is true of
the increase of knowledge in Systematic Zodlogy,
is even more marked in the case of Botany. Such
then is the variety in the life of the globe,—a
variety of which Linnzus and his successors had
never dared to dream.

And yet great as this variety is, there are only
a few types of structure among animals and plants,
after all,—some eight or ten general modes of
development — and all the rest are minor varia-
tions from these few types. The law which tends
to keep the species uniform is the law (or the fact,
which we cannot wholly explain) that living beings
resemble their ancestors. And as each living
being has twice as many ancestors behind it as
either its father or its mother had, so does the
influence of remote ancestry diminish with each
succeeding generation. With this law or fact of
unity through heredity goes another law (or fact)
that no two living beings are ever exactly alike,
small variations of all sorts are constantly appear-
ing; and of the multitude of these variations some
few will be preserved, and favorable circumstances
will cause them to be repeated and augmented.

Life then is changing on the earth, in spite of
the action of heredity. Past life must differ from
present life, and so in the life of past ages we may
trace the ancestry of the life of to-day. The agen-

cies which thus gradually modify species are
I2

178 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

numerous, and some of them are imperfectly un-
derstood. One of these—and in Mr. Darwin’s
view, the predominant one — has been the survi-
val of the fittest in the struggle for existence.

I cannot in the limits of this address illustrate in
detail what is implied in that which has been called
“natural selection” by Mr. Darwin, and by. Mr.
Spencer the “survival of the fittest.” In Mr.
Darwin’s words, —

“A struggle for existence inevitably follows from the high
rate at which all organic beings tend to increase. Every
being which during its lifetime produces several eggs or
seeds must suffer destruction during some period of its life
and during some season or occasional year ; otherwise, on
the principle of geometrical increase, its numbers would
quickly become so inordinately great that no country could
support the product. Hence, as more individuals are pro-
duced than can possibly survive, there must in every case
be a struggle for existence, either one individual with others
of the same species, or with the individuals of different
species, or with the physical conditions of life. Although
some species may be increasing in numbers, all cannot do
so, for the world would not hold them.”

A calculation has been lately made that at the
normal rate of increase from a pair of English
sparrows, if none were to die except of old age,
it would take but twenty years to give one sparrow
to every square inch of the State of Indiana. But
such increase is actually impossible; for more than
a hundred other species of resident birds are dis-
puting the same territory, and there cannot be place
or food for all. With such conditions, the struggle
for existence between sparrow and sparrow, and

DARWIN. 179

between sparrows and other birds, grows yearly
more severe. Each year now the sparrow gains a
little and the other birds lose correspondingly; but
sooner or later with each species a point will be
reached when the loss exactly balances the in-
crease. This produces a condition of apparent
equilibrium, — the equilibrium of Nature; asort of
armed neutrality which a superficial observer mis-
takes for real peace and permanence. But this
equilibrium is broken as soon as any individual
or group of individuals appears that can do some-
thing more than merely hold their own ina struggle
forexistence. Slight deviations from the ancestral
type, for better or worse, are constantly appear-
ing in Nature. Of the infinite number of these
small variations which may affect the individual,
some will be found to be of advantage to him in
thissstremele for existence. Be it ever so slicht,
this help in time will count. The individuals thus
aided will live and multiply, and their type is the
type of the species preserved. Those individuals
who do not share this advantage, or who may be
handicapped by disadvantageous variation, die and
leave no descendants. Thus the advantage of the
individual becomes the gain of the species, and
thus in the character of the species does the fitness
of the individual survive.

It is this progress through competition, this sur-
vival of the fittest to live in the struggle for exist-
ence, to which the term “natural selection” has
been applied. Different estimates of the relative
importance of the action of natural selection and
of other agencies modifying the history of a species

180 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

will be made by different minds. That this, how-
ever, is one of the great controlling factors in the
production of diversity in the life of the earth,
cannot be questioned.

Darwin’s work was addressed at first only to
naturalists, with no expectation that the public
would pay any attention to it. He had confidence
that the younger and more observant of his fellow-
workers would find in their own work confirmation
of his conclusions. The times were riper than he
had dreamed. He has outlived nearly all of his
scientific opponents, the greatest and perhaps the
last of whom was Agassiz. To-day there is not one
whose scientific studies have been such as to give
him a right to speak, whose views are not in sub-
stantial accord with those of the “ Origin of Spe-
cies.’! Darwin’s work has destroyed forever the
closet-formed idea of a “species” in biology as
something fundamentally different from a variety
or a race.

Let me take an illustration. Camille Dareste,
writing of the hundred or more alleged species of
the True Eel (Azguzlla) says: —

“There are at least four distinct types, resulting from
the combination of a certain number of characters ; but

1 T say this advisedly. I know that some half dozen geologists
and biologists of high repute still hold to the dogma of the immu-
tability of species. Not one of these, so far as I know, has ever
made any serious special study of species in any group, — of their
relations to each other, their variations, their embryology or their
geographical distribution. 1 cannot see how one who has not done
this has any right to believe that species are practically unchange-
able in face of the almost unanimous testimony of all who have
made such matters a life-study.

DARWIN. 18I

the study of a very large number of specimens belonging
to these four specific types has convinced me that each of
these characters may vary independently, and that, con-
sequently, certain individuals exhibit a combination of
characters belonging to two distinct types. It is there-
fore impossible to establish clearly defined barriers sep-
arating these two types. The genus Anguilla exhibits,
then, a phenomenon which is found in many other genera,
and even in the genus Homo itself, and which can be
explained in only two ways: Either these four forms have
had a common origin and are races merely, and not spe-
cies ; or else they are distinct in origin and are true species,
but have been more or less commingled, and have pro-
duced by their mingling intermediate forms, which co-
exist with those which were primitive. Science is not in
the position to decide between these two alternatives.”

It is on idle problems like this as to the reality
of species that the strength of naturalists of the
past century has been largely wasted. Which of
the forms we study are species, and therefore
represent separate acts of the Creator, and which
are mere varieties, chance products of varying
surroundings, and therefore to be despised and
ignored? Scarcely ever did two earnest students
of any group reach an agreement in this respect,
for agreement is only possible when material is lack-
ing. A single additional specimen often unsettles
every conclusion, and the contents of all museums
are but the slightest fragment of the life of the
globe. ‘We can only predicate and define spe-
cies at all,” says Dr. Coues, “from the mere cir-
cumstance of missing links. Our species are the
twigs of a tree separated from the parent stem.

182 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

We name and arrange them arbitrarily in default
of means of reconstructing the whole tree in ac-
cordance with Nature’s ramifications.” Among
Dareste’s eels we may have one species, or four, or
forty, as our collection may be deficient in con-
necting forms, or as we may choose to magnify or
to disregard slight differences. There are just as
many kinds of eels as there are races of men or of
dogs. Future naturalists will again describe those
eels; but they will know them for what they are, —
the varying descendants of some one degenerated
type of fishes crawling in the weeds and ooze of
many seas and rivers, and thus variously modified
by their surroundings.

The old notion of a species has passed away for-
ever. We can no more return to it than astronomers
can return to the Ptolemaic notion of the solar sys-
tem. The same lesson comes up from every hand.
It is the common experience of all students of
species in every field. We have learned it from
Gray and Engelmann and Coulter, and each of
the many students of American botany. We have
learned it from Baird and Allen and Coues and
Ridgway and Stejneger, and from all who have
made life studies of American birds. We have
learned it from Cope and Marsh and Leidy, and
from all who have rummaged in the tombs where
our ancestors lie buried. I do not know of a
naturalist in the world who has made a thoughtful
study of the relations of species in any group, who
entertains the old notion as to their distinct origin.
There is not one who could hold this view and
look an animal in the face. |

DARWIN. 183

And for this change we have to thank Darwin.
“Tt is easy to plough when the field is cleared ;”
and what he first saw clearly, we cannot fail to see
now. The fact is, that every student of species and
of the facts of geographical distribution before or
after Darwin, has reached willingly or unwillingly
the conclusion that species are not immutable;
that those differences by which he tried to discrim-
inate the groups of organisms which he called spe-
cies were not differences originating in the act of
creation, but produced in some way by outside
influences, or by the reaction in the organism from
adjustment to these influences. One might safely
pledge himself to convert to some phase of the
development theory any honest and intelligent man,
whatever his preconceived opinions, who would
spend a month in the careful study of a large
collection. of specimens in any group of Natural
History, in which the existing species are found
over wide areas on the surface of the earth. The
study of squirrels, eels, cat-fishes, cray-fishes, pine-
trees, asters, butterflies, clams, snails, ~horses, or
men, — any of these will serve perfectly to accom-
plish this purpose.

The general acceptance of the Darwinian theory
by naturalists is not due exclusively to the influence
of the “Origin of Species,” or to any of the nu-
merous commentaries and expositions which have
come from other hands. It arises from the results
of the studies themselves. The idea of develop-
ment gives the only clew by which the naturalist
can be guided in his work. If the affinities of
species are not related to the law of heredity, they

184 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

are unintelligible. If the variation of species is
really immutability in disguise, we cannot trust
our senses. It is said —I know not on what
authority — that the distinguished ichthyologist
Albert Gunther was converted to Darwinism by a
study of the British salmon. Whether this is true
or not, such a study could have no other effect.
If a personal reference be permitted, I may say
that I was brought to my present beliefs by a
study of the minnows and darters of the Missis-
sippi Valley. In the study of species one has
no choice except that between some form of a
development theory and a hopeless, unscientific
agnosticism; and in all forms of biological inves-
tigation — the study of Comparative Anatomy,
Morphology, Embryology — similar results are
invariably reached.

I have purposely avoided the use of the word
“evolution” in connection with Darwin’s work.
“Evolution” is a term belonging to metaphysics
rather than to biology. The theory of evolution
is that there is in all things a tendency to become
specialized and differentiated, —that, in accord-
ance with this tendency, nebulous masses have
become concentrated into planets, and that all
forms of life have changed from the simple to the
complex, from the low to the high, from homoge-
neity to variety. From the study of the history of
the globe and its life we find that many changes
such as this theory contemplates have indeed taken
place; that progress has been the rule and retro-
gression the exception. Degraded forms exist in
all groups, as degraded races among men; but

DARWIN. 185

advancing forms are far more common. Degra-
dation of type is merely the result of withdrawal
from the stress of the struggle for existence.
Evolution, in a general way, is certainly a fact,
whether it be a law of Nature or not, if indeed the
two ideas be not identical. A law, as defined by
Darwin, is simply the ‘ascertained sequence of
events,” and in that sense we can certainly speak
of evolution as a law of Nature. But the develop-
ment of the theory of evolution belongs rather to
the domain of metaphysics, and with the meta-
paysicians I. may leave it. There is such an
amount and variety of arrant nonsense now afloat
under the name of “evolution” that one may
well hesitate before accepting the designation of
“evolutionist.” The name now needs a special
definition every time that it is used. The popular
mind seems to have reduced it to this: ‘“ Evolu-
tion is something about man and monkeys which
contradicts the Bible,” and many of our self-con-
stituted champions of evolution are scarcely more
fortunate in their interpretations of the term.
Darwin’s work might have gone on, as I have
already said, with scarcely a notice from the world
outside, had not the question of the origin of man-
kind become concerned in the controversy. For
the human race is likewise a species, and from its
physical side it must be discussed with other spe-
cies. The study of these relations gave us in 187!
the volumes on the’ Descent of Man.” If we
suppose, as we must, that the various forms of
lower animals and plants had their origin in pre-
existing forms, more or less unlike them, we may

186 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

conceive it to be true of man also. That it isin
fact true of man, we know; for not many thousands
of years ago our ancestors in Europe were bar-
barians, cave-dwellers, lake-dwellers, and dwellers
in hollow trees, with only the rude implements
they shaped from metal and flint. Surprisingly
like us in form and structure, though far below us
in skill and intelligence, are the many races of
apes and monkeys. And among these, or rather
behind these, for these too are changing with the
changing conditions of life, must our ancestry be
traced.

If anything is certain in science, it is this. What
we call homology represents something real, some
law of Nature, something other than the results
of mere chance. When I compare my arm with
that of my neighbor, I find some differences, —
differences in size, in proportions. But these are
superficial, and there is the underlying corre-
spondence of each bone and muscle, each nerve-
fibre, artery, and vein. When I compare my arm
with the foreleg of a dog, I find more striking
differences, for the dog’s station in life is quite
unlike my own, and his arm he uses for quite dif-
ferent purposes. When I compare my arm with
the wing of a bird, or the pectoral fin of a fish,
the results are still similar. Though the differ-
ences in each case become more and more strik-
ing, and the resemblances less easy to trace, yet
the same resemblances exist, and a closer study
shows that these resemblances far outweigh the
differences.

We say, then, that homology is real, and what-

DARWIN. 187

ever power or influence or cause has acted on
fishes to provide them with pectoral fins has given
to birds wings, to the dog forelegs, and to me and
my neighbor arms. The arms are appendages
more highly finished and suited to more purposes;
but all are formed of the same pieces, arranged in
the same way, and all bear the stamp of the same
maker. But when I compare my arm with the
claw of a lobster, the limb of a tree, the arm ofa
Starish,; Of an: arm of -a sea, all resemblances: in
structure disappear, and we have only chance
analogies.

‘This then is certain: In Nature homology exists,
and among us back-boned animals all structures,
all functions, and at least some of the mental
operations show distinct homology. The essence
of the development theory is this: Homology is
the stamp of heredity. Homology means blood
relationship. No other meaning has ever been
shown, nor is there the slightest evidence that any
other interpretation is possible. Blood relationship
implies a common action of heredity, and heredity
is the only known source of the likenesses we call
homology. “Owing to the imperfection of lan-
guage,” said Dr. Erasmus Darwin, a century ago,
“the offspring is termed a new animal; but it is in
truth a branch or elongation of the parent, since a
part of the embryon-animal is or was a part of the
parent, and therefore may retain some of the habits
of the parent system.”

I resemble my neighbor so closely that people
say that we look like brothers. My little boy shows
similar exactness of homology to me, and people

188 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

say that he is the very image of his father. My
neighbor on the left shows a wider divergence, but
then he too is evidently an Anglo-Saxon. Angle
or Saxon, we are all of one blood, not many gen-
erations back. A little farther away the whole
Aryan race becomes one; and in Adam we are all
one, even with our poor relations, the negro and
the Chinaman. If we knew them all, the chain of
ancestors would be as unbroken as the chain which
connects the boy and the man, or the chain which
joins the American of to-day with his Angle and
Saxon and Aryan ancestors. Where homologies
exist there is somewhere the elements of a genea-
logical tree. ;

But still poorer relations we have in numbers,
and they too carry on their faces the unmistak-
able evidence of kinship by blood. In every bone
and muscle my dog shows his likeness to me, and
even in every function of his feeble little brain the
resemblance is apparent. Let me say again, we
have no explanation of homology other than that
of kinship by blood. This is Darwinism, and this
is a lesson of all biological science. There is sub-
stantially the same evidence —the same in kind
and not much less in degree — for believing that
my dog and myself are related by blood in some
form of distant cousinship as there is to show a
similar relationship between myself and any one
of my neighbors about me to-day. History, as de-
duced from the registers in our family-Bibles, shows
no trace of relationship in either the one case or the
other. Our records go back for a few generations
only, and the great past is lost. In either case our

DARWIN. 189

acknowledged kinship is only an inference based
on known facts in homology.

No two groups of animals can show homologies
with each other more clearly than does the man
with the monkey. Either these homologies show
kinship or else they are mere mockeries, like the
face we see in the pansy flower. If homologies
are mockeries, then indeed our science has made
no progress, for that was the belief of the Middle
Ages.

So much for what we know. Our objections to
sharing our ancestry with monkeys and other
mammals, if we have any, rest on considerations
outside the domain of knowledge. Nor do they
rest on religious grounds. Those who think so,
deceive themselves. Could it be proved by abso-
lute demonstration, such as science can seldom
give, that an unbroken line of descent connects the
barbarous man of the past with his back-boned
brethren of the farther past, how could that affect
Christianity? The Darwinian theory concerns only
the question of the methods of creation, — the
‘““secondary causes” in the providence of God. It
can in no way come in conflict with the teachings
of Christ. The mission of religion is spiritual, not
physical. Christianity gives no answer to our
questions of science. It does not rise or fall with
any steps in the growth of knowledge. It rests on
the eternal needs of the human soul. It is anchored
to no floating hypothesis. It builds on the ‘‘ Rock
of Ages.” Over the door of Linnzus’ cottage at
Hammarby stood this motto, /znocue vivito: numen
adest, — ‘“‘ Live blameless: God is near!” ‘ This,”

I9O0 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

said Linnzus, “is the wisdom of my life.” And
between such wisdom and scientific knowledge there
can never be any real conflict.

But if man’s ancestry is joined to that of other
animals by a chain in which our knowledge can
find no break, how about the origin of his soul?
When did man begin to have a soul, if, as most of
us think, the lower animals have none? What is
the line between animal and man?

Perhaps we cannot answer this. Perhaps we can
never know. Problems as difficult. as this come
nearer to our lives. Each of us and of all men has
grown from the form of a helpless child, the child
by degrees from an embryo smaller at first than
the head of a pin. All the changes it undergoes
are gradual. ‘“ Nature,” says Linnzus, ‘‘ makes no
leaps.” At what age does this embryo become
the man? At what age does man become “a liv-
ing soul”? We cannot tell; we do not know, un-
less, with the author of Genesis, we conceive the
essential character of manhood to be the acquisi-
tion of the knowledge of good and evil. As it is
with the individual, so with the species. EEmbryol-
ogists tell us that the physical life of the individual
is an epitome of the history of the whole group to
which it belongs. The embryonic life of man cor-
responds, so far as we can trace it, to the history of
that branch of the group of vertebrates which has
culminated in man. Unter jedem Grab liegt eine
Weltgeschichte, says a German proverb, — “ Under
every grave lies a world-history.” This sentence is
true in a physical as well as in a spiritual sense,
and it contains a philosophy deeper than its author

DARWIN. 19I

dreamed. When we speak of the “infancy of the
race,’ we use language as true in science as appro-
priate in poetry.

The question of the origin of man, though per-
haps the most interesting problem in science, offers
to the student of Nature peculiar difficulties. Ma-
terials for exact knowledge are few, and prejudices
are strong, and all tendencies favor an immediate
decision on doubtful points, though the evidence
be far from sufficient. Of not one man, nor mon-
key, nor bird, nor beast in half a million does a
trace remain after a thousand years, — not a bone,
not a relic, nota thought. Living on the surface,
we crumble into dust; and the current phases of
our life, a few centuries out of hundreds, are all of
man’s history we can surely know. Many links are
missing still, and most of these we can never find.
Our early. ancestry we can only infer from our
knowledge of our contemporaries.

Whatever the final outcome of the study of the
origin of man, Christianity cannot suffer. It has not
suffered in the past from other discussions of this
sort. [Theologians and philosophers have suffered,
but not religion. ‘“ Extinguished theologians,”
says Huxley, “lie about the cradle of every sci-
ence, as the strangled snakes beside that of the
infant Hercules.’ Looking over the history of
human thought, we see the attempt to fasten to
Christianity each decaying belief in science. That
the earth is round, that it moves about the sun, that
it is old, that granite ever was melted, —all these
beliefs, now part of our common knowledge, have
been declared contrary to religion, and Christian

192 SCIENCE SAATCHES.

men who knew these things to be true have suffered
all manner of evil for their sake. We see God’s
hand in Nature everywhere; but everywhere he
works with Law and Order. We have found that
even comets have orbits; that valleys were dug
out by water, and hills worn down by ice; and that
all we have ever known to be done on the earth
has been done in accordance with law.

What, indeed, do we mean by special creation
as opposed to natural selection? What knowledge
or idea have we of it? We no longer picture the
Creator as fashioning men and dogs and horses of
clay, and then breathing into them the breath of
life. If each of the half million species which we
now know, and each of the millions of species now
extinct, has been the subject of a special creation,
then special creation is but another name for the
law by which species are produced. We under-
stand in some measure the method of birth, the
method by which individuals are created. Why
should we think, in fact, that species are created in
any other way ? Why is not the method of crea-
tion of species, as of individuals, the method of
birth? We have, in fact, abundant evidence that
the method of creation is the method of birth; and
among all the mysteries that surround us there is
none more wonderful than this. God made us as
God made all things, but He made us in God’s way.
God may be great enough, in the words of Kings-
ley, not only to “make all things, but to make all
things make themselves.” Omune vivum ex vivo,
“* All life from life,’ is a maxim of the older natural-
ists ; and neither the materialist, to whom all life is

DARWIN. 193

but the attribute of the carbon compounds, nor the
dogmatist, to whom the advent of a species is an
interruption of the laws of the universe, has yet set
it aside. Says Mr. Darwin: —

“To my mind it accords better with what we know of
the laws impressed on matter by the Creator, that the
production and extinction of the past and present inhab-
itants of the world should have been due to secondary
causes, like those determining the birth and death of an in-
dividual. When I view all beings, not as special creations,
but as the lineal descendants of some few beings who
lived before the first bed of the Silurian was deposited,
they seem to me to become ennobled. There is a gran-
deur in this view of life, with its several powers having
been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms
or into one, and that while this planet has gone cycling
on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a
beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonder-
ful have been and are being evolved.”

With the growth of the race has steadily grown
our conception of the omnipotence of God. Our
ancestors felt, as many races of men still feel, that
they were forsaken unless each household had a god
of its own. For numerous as the greater gods
were, they could care for nothing lower than kings.
They could hardly believe that the god of their
tribe could be God of the Gentiles also. That he
should dwell in temples not made with hands, re-
moved him far from human sight. That there
could be two continents, was deemed impossible,
for one God could not watch them both. That the
earth was the central and sole inhabited planet,
rested on the same limited conception of the

13

194 SCIZNCE SKATCHES.

power of God. That the beginning of all things
was a little while ago, is another phase of the same
idea, as is the idea of a Special Creation for every
form of animals and plants. A Chinese sage,
whose words remain, but whose name has been lost
in the ages between him and us, has said: “ He
cannot be concealed; he will appear without show-
ing himself, effect renovation without moving, and
create perfection without acting. It is the law of
heaven and earth, whose way is solid, substantial,
vast, and unchanging.”

Not long ago I walked across the Kentish
pastures to the little village of Down. I visited
Darwin’s home, a stately old-fashioned country
mansion surrounded by trees and shut in by an
ivy-covered wall. I talked with the villagers, who
had been his neighbors all their lives, and to
whom he was not the world-renowned naturalist,
but the good gray man whom everybody knew and
loved. I learned some things which the books do
not tell us of his simple, kindly ways, his warm
friendships, and his quiet but wide-reaching chari-
ties. I have from this a clearer picture of Darwin
as he really was. His love for his wife and chil-
dren, his love for birds and flowers and trees, his
love for simplicity and truth, — all these stand as
the clear background before which rises the noblest
work in science. _

Twenty-five years ago, obloquy, ridicule, and
abuse were heaped on the name of Darwin from all
sides, sometimes even from his scientific associates.
He has outlived it all, and two years ago his mother
country paid him the highest tribute in her power.

DARWIN. 195

He lies in Westminster Abbey by the side of Isaac
Newton, one of the many noble predecessors who
have made his own life possible. Among all who
have written or spoken since then, whatever their
religious or scientific faith, by none has an unkind
word been said. His was a gentle, patient, and
reverent spirit, and by his life not only science,
but our conception of Christianity, has been ad-
vanced and ennobled.

196 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

THE STORY (OF “A STONE.

NCE on a time, a great many years ago, so
many many years that one grows very

tired in trying to think how long ago it was; in
those old days when the great Northwest consisted
of a few ragged and treeless hills, full of copper
and quartz, bordered by a dreary waste of sand-
flats, over which the Gulf of Mexico rolled its
warm and turbid waters as far north as Escanaba
and Eau Claire; in the days when Marquette Har-
bor opened out towards Baffin’s Bay, and the
Northern Ocean washed the crest of Mount Wash-
ington and wrote its name upon the Pictured
Rocks; when the tide of the Pacific, hemmed in
by no snow-capped Sierras, came rushing through
the Golden Gate between the Ozarks and the
north peninsula of Michigan, and swept over
Plymouth Rock, and surged up against Bunker
Hill; in the days when it would have been fun to
study geography, for there were no capitals, nor
any products, and all the towns were seaports ; — in
fact, an immensely long time ago there lived some-
where in the northeastern part of the State of
Wisconsin, not far from the city of Oconto, a little
jelly-fish. It was a curious little fellow, about the
shape of half an apple, and the size of a pin’s head;
and it floated around in the water, and ate little

THE STORY IOP A STONE. 197

things, and opened and shut its umbrella pretty
much as the jelly-fishes do now on a sunny day off
Nahant Beach when the tide is coming in. It hada
great many little feelers that hung down all around
like so many little snakes; so it was named Me-
dusa, after a queer woman who lived a long while
ago, when all sorts of stories were true. She
wore snakes instead of hair, and used to turn peo-
ple into stone images if they dared to make faces
at her. So this little Medusa floated around, and
opened and shut her umbrella for a good while, —
a month or two, perhaps, we don’t know how long.
Then one morning, down among the sea-weeds, she
laid a whole lot of tiny eggs, transparent as crab-
apple jelly, and smaller than the dew-drop on the
end. of a pine leaf. That was the last thing she
did; so she died, and our story henceforth concerns
only one of those little eggs.

One day the sun shone down into the water,—
the same sun that shines over the Oconto saw-mills
now, — and touched these eggs with life; and a lit-
tle fellow whom we will call Favosites, because that
was his name, woke up inside of the egg, and came
out into the world. He was only a little piece of
floating jelly, shaped like a cartridge pointed at
both ends, or like a grain of barley, although very
much smaller. He had a great number of little
paddles on his sides. These kept flapping all the
time, so that he was constantly in motion. And
at night all these little paddles shone with a rich
green light, to show him the way through the
water. It would have done you good to see them
some night when all the little fellows had their

198 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

lamps burning at once, and every wave as it rose
and fell was all aglow with Nature’s fireworks,
which do not burn the fingers, and leave no smell
of sulphur.

So the little Favosites kept scudding along in
the water, dodging from one side to the other to
avoid the ugly creatures that tried to eat him.
There were crabs and clams of a fashion neither
you nor I shall ever see alive. There were huge
animals with great eyes, savage jaws like the beak
of a snapping turtle and surrounded by long
feelers. They sat in the end of a long round shell,
shaped like a length of stove-pipe, and glowered
like an owl in a hollow log; and there were smaller
ones that looked like lobsters in a dinner-horn.
But none of these caught the little fellow, else I
should not have had this story to tell.

At last, having paddled about long enough,
Favosites thought of settling in life. So he looked
around till he found a flat bit of shell that just
suited him. Then he sat down upon it and grew
fast, like old Holger Danske in the Danish myth,
or Frederic Barbarossa in the German one. He
did not go to sleep, however, but proceeded to
make himself a home. He had no head, but be-
tween his shoulders he made an opening which
would serve him for mouth and stomach. Then
he put a whole row of feelers out, and commenced
catching little worms and floating eggs and bits of
jelly and bits of lime, — everything he could get, —
and cramming them into his mouth. He had a
great many curious ways, but the funniest of them
all was what he did with the bits of lime. He kept

THE STOKY OF A STONE. I99

taking them in, and tried to wall himself up inside
with them, as a person would “stone a well,” or as
though a man should swallow pebbles, and stow
them away in his feet and all around under the
skin, till he had filled himself all full with them, as
the man filled Jim Smiley’s frog.

Little Favosites became lonesome all alone in
the bottom of that old ocean among so many
outlandish neighbors. So one night when he was
fast asleep, and dreaming as only a coral animal
can dream, there sprouted out from his side, some-
where near where his sixth rib might have been
if he had had any ribs, another little Favosites;
and this one very soon began to eat worms and to
wall himself up as if for dear life. Then from
these two another and another little bud came out,
and other little Favosites were formed. They all
kept growing up higher and cramming themselves
fuller and fuller of stone, till at last there were so
many and they were so crowded together that
there was not room for them to grow round, and
so they had to become six-sided like the cells of a
honeycomb. Once in a while some one in the
company would feel jealous because the others
got more of the worms, or would feel uneasy at
sitting still so long and swallowing lime. Such
a one would secede from the little union with-
out even saying ‘ good-by,” and would put on
the airs of the grandmother Medusa, and would
sail around in the water, opening and shutting
its umbrella, at last laying more eggs, which for
all we know may have hatched out into more
Favosites.

200 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

So the old Favosites died, or ran away, or were
walled up by the younger ones, and new ones
filled their places, and the colony thrived for a
long while, until it had accumulated a large stock
of lime.

But one day there came a freshet in the Meno-
monee River, or in some other river, and piles of
dirt and sand and mud were brought down, and all
the little Favosites’ mouths were filled with it. This
they did not like, and so they died; but we know
that the rock-house they were building was not
spoiled, for we have it here. But it was tumbled
about a good deal in the dirt, and the rolling peb-
bles knocked the corners off, and the mud worked
into the cracks, and its beautiful color was de-
stroyed. There it lay in the mud for ages, till the
earth gavea great long heave that raised Wisconsin
out of the ocean, and the mud around our little
Favosites packed and dried into hard rock and
closed it in. <So it became part, of the dry land,
and lay embedded in the rocks for centuries and
centuries, while the old-fashioned ferns grew above
it, and whispered to it strange stories of what was
going on above ground in the land where things
were living.

Then the time of the first fishes came, and the
other animals looked in wonder at them, as the
Indians looked on Columbus. Some of them were
like the little gar-pike of our river here, only
much larger, —big as a stove-pipe, and with a crust
as hard as a turtle’s. Then there were sharks, of
strange forms, and some of them had teeth like
bowie-knives, with tempers to match. And the

THE STORY. OF & STONE. 201

time of the old fishes came and went, and many
more times came and went, but still Favosites lay
in the ground at Oconto. |

Then came the long, hot, wet summer, when the
mists hung over the earth so thick that you might
have had to cut your way through them with a
knife; and great ferns and rushes, big as an oak
and tall as a steeple, grew in the swamps of Indi-
ana and Illinois. Their green plumes were so long
and so densely interwoven that the Man of the
Moon might have fancied that the earth was feath-
ering out. Then all about, huge reptiles, with jaws
like the gates of doom and teeth like cross-cut
saws, and little reptiles with wings like bats,
crawled, and swam, and flew.

But the ferns died, and the reptiles died, and
the rush-trees fell in the swamps, and the Illinois
and the Sangamon and the Wabash and all the
other rivers covered them up. They stewed away
under layers of clay and sand, till at last they
turned into coal and wept bitter tears of petro-
leum. But all this while Favosites lay in the rocks
in Wisconsin.

Then the mists cleared away, and the sun shone,
and the grass began to grow, and strange animals
came from somewhere or nowhere to feed upon it.
There were queer little striped horses, with three
or four hoofs on each foot, and no bigger than a
Newfoundland dog, but as smart as ever you saw.
There were great hairy elephants with teeth like
sticks of wood. There were hogs with noses so
long that they could sit on their hind legs and root.
And there were many still stranger creatures which

202 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

no man ever saw alive. But still Favosites lay in
the ground and waited.

And the long, long summer passed by, and the
autumn and the Indian summer. At last the win-
ter came, and it snowed and snowed, and it was so
cold that the snow did not go off till the Fourth of
July. Then it snowed and snowed till the snow did
not go off at all. And then it became so cold that
it snowed all the time, till the snow covered the
animals, and then the trees, and then the mountains.
Then it would thaw a little, and streams of water
would run over the snow. Then it would freeze
again, and the snow would pack into solid ice. So
it went on snowing and thawing and freezing, till
nothing but snow-banks could be seen in Wisconsin,
and most of Indiana was fit only for a skating-rink.
And the animals and plants which could get away,
all went south to live, and the others died and were
frozen into the snow.

So it went on for a great many years. I dare
not tell you how long, for you might not believe
me. Then the spring came, the south winds blew,
and the snow began to thaw. Then the ice came
sliding down from the mountains and hills, and
from the north toward the south. It went on,
tearing up rocks, little and big, from the size of a
chip to the size of a house, crushing forests as you
would crush an egg-shell, and wiping out rivers as
you would wipe outa chalk-mark. So it came push-
ing, grinding, thundering along, — not very fast,
you understand, but with tremendous force, like a
plough drawn by a million oxen, for a thousand feet
of ice is very heavy. And the ice-plough scraped

THE STORY OF A STONE. 203

over Oconto, and little Favosites was torn from
the place where he had lain so long; but by good
fortune he happened to fall into a crevice of the ice
where he was not much crowded, else he would
have been ground to powder and I should not have
had this story to tell. And the ice melted as it slid
along, and it made great torrents of water, which,
as they swept onward, covered the land with clay
aude pebbles.) At last. the>ice came to a great
swamp overgrown with tamarack and balsam. It
melted here; and all the rocks and stones and dirt
it had carried, — little Favosites and all, — were
dumped into one great heap.

It was a very long time after, and man had been
created, and America had been discovered, and
the War of the Revolution and the War of the
Rebellion had all been fought to the end, and a
creat many things had happened, when one day
a farmer living near Grand Chiite, in Outagamie
County, Wisconsin, was ploughing up his clover-
field to sow to winter wheat. He picked up in the
furrow a curious little bit of ‘ petrified honeycomb,”
a good deal worn and dirty, but still showing plainly
the honey-cells and the bee-bread. Then he put it
into his pocket and carried it home, and gave it to
his boy Charley to take to the teacher and hear
what he would say about it. And this is what he
said.

204. SCIENCE SKETCHES.

AN ASCENT OF THE MATTERHORN.

N old miner of ’49 whom I once met in
California said to me, as we came in sight
of the snowy crests of Tuolumne and Calaveras:
“These mountains are not appreciated in Cali-
fornia. We used to dig and dig in them, and that
was the end of it. The fact is, stranger, a man
ought to have two lives,—one to get a living in,
the other to look at the mountains.”

But there are some on whom the mountains
have the first claim; and so there has arisen the
Alpenclub, —the guild of mountain-lovers whose
“feet are beautiful upon the mountains,” and to
which such men as De Saussure and Agassiz and
Tyndall and Balfour have been proud to belong.

And thus it happened that on the tenth day of
August, 1881, a party of young people from In-
diana, mountain-lovers of varying degrees, walked
over the snowy pass called the Matterjoch, which
leads from Italy across the Pennine Alps into
Switzerland. And ever before us and above us as
we came up the green valley of Tournanche, ever
before us as we toiled up the pass, — above us every-
where, dark, majestic, inaccessible, rose the huge
pyramid of the grandest of the Alps. No one
who has ever seen it can ever forget its form: It
burns itself into the memory as nothing else in all

AN ASCENT OF THE MATTERHORN. 205

Europe does. Shut your eyes for a moment, you
who have been at Zermatt, and straight before you
and above you, its long hand clutching at the sky,
you will see the Matterhorn! It is not the highest
mountain of the Alps. Its gigantic neighbors —
Monte Rosa, the Mischabelhorn, the Weisshorn, as
well as Mont Blanc —are all higher,—a little; but
no other mountain in the world makes such use of
its height as the Matterhorn. Other high moun-
tains have great rounded heads, white with the
snows of eternity. Their harsher angles are worn
away by the long action of the glaciers. But the
Matterhorn is a creature of the sun and _ frost.
No glacier has worn its angles into curves. Its
slopes are too steep for snow to cling to, and all
the snow which winter or summer falls upon it
rolls down its sides and lies in three great ice-
heaps at the bottom. These are the Furggen
glacier, the Matterhorn glacier, and the glacier of
Tiefenmatten.

We had wandered about Zermatt for a day or
two, seeing the sights in the usual way, and all the
while the Matterhorn hung above our heads and
dared us to come. At last we could stand it no
longer; and one evening when the “ stalwarts”
were gathered together on the stone-wall in front
of the Hétel Monte Rosa, Gilbert said unto Beach,
““We must do something big before we leave this
place. Let us go up the Matterhorn!” And
Beach said, ‘“ We must indeed. I will go if Jordan
will.”

But Jordan felt doubtful. He knew that a moun-
tain which eclipsed the full moon would be a hard

206 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

road for a heavy man to toil up. Besides, the
story of the first climbers was fresh in his mind.
But the boys were persistent, and they said, “ You
have talked and talked about mountains, and you
have never done a single big thing among them;
and it is time you did!” And so they kept it up.
And I remembered that Tyndall had thought it
worth his while to try again and again to go up
this mountain, and so had my Italian namesake,
the geologist Giordano. Then why not I?

At last we three shook hands upon it, and went
back to the hotel to make arrangements. After-
wards three others joined us, making six in all.
And we sought out “ John the Baptist,” and made
him our chief guide, and directed him to provide
food and ropes for eleven, and we were “in for”
the Matterhorn.

Meanwhile the boys wrote letters home, — letters
full of descriptions of the Matterhorn, which kept
their mothers and sisters awake o’ nights for a
week. And the sketches of the mountain with
which they embellished them were wonderful to
behold. In the evening some of them strolled out
to the little graveyard at Zermatt, —to the tombs
of Hadow, Hudson, and Michel Croz, the first vic-
tims of the Matterhorn, — “ for inspiration,” they
said; and some of them composed epitaphs, which
they have not yet needed.

At one o’clock the next morning the porter of
the Hétel Monte Rosa knocked at our doors, and

1 Professor Charles H. Gilbert, Professor Melville B. Anderson,
Mr. William W. Spangler, Mr. William E. Beach, Mr. Walter O.
Williams, and the writer.

AN ASCENT OF THE MATTERHORN. 207

announced that breakfast was ready. We rose ina
hurry, ate everything on the table, — our invariable
custom in Switzerland, — and by half-past one our
alpenstocks were rattling loudly on the stone pave-
ments of the narrow streets of Zermatt. Our five
guides were ready, each laden with ropes, ice-axe,
and provisions, and we were on the road up the
mountain.

Let me say a word about the guides. Most of
the able-bodied men in the Swiss valleys are in the
summer guides or porters in the mountains. The
average guide isa rather heavy, slow-spoken fellow,
who buys a good deal of food for you and eats it
himself, who drinks great quantities of villanous
sour red wine at your expense, hauls you around
like a bundle of meal, and finally, as he leaves
you, waxes eloquent on the subject of Trinkgeld.
But there are guides and guides, and some of them
are men of force and intelligence, who have, and
who deserve to have, a wide reputation. Among
those, known all over Europe for strength and
courage, was Michel Croz of Chamouny, who fell
from the Matterhorn in 1865. Among those des-
tined to be thus known is the young man whom
we fortunately selected as our chief guide, — Jean
Baptiste Aymonod of Val Tournanche.

‘John the Baptist,” as we called him, is a very
robust and muscular young man of medium height,
with a smooth face, light hair, gentle, blue eyes, and
a firm, expressive mouth. He is soft-voiced and
slow-spoken, —as are most of the Swiss guides, —
and he is endowed with a graciousness of manner
and purity of speech hardly to be looked for in a

208 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

herdsman’s boy, risking his life on the rocks and
ice for two hundred dollarsa year. His face shows
the effects of mountaineering, for his nose has
sometime been broken by a falling stone.

Our next guide, Victor Maquignaz, is older than
John, and larger, —a big burly mountaineer, brave
and trusty, who speaks French with variations, a
surprising dialect born of the mountains, in a high,
uncertain falsetto, like the voice of a wheelbarrow
that needs oiling. Next came Frangois Bic, —a tall,
intelligent, positive fellow, a good mountaineer, but
who would be better liked if his eye were less
closely fixed on the 7vinkgeld. Next came his
brother, Daniel Bic, — a muscular man in full beard
and spectacles, looking like a German Doktor, who
had never been up the Matterhorn before, and
evidently wished never to go again. Finally, there
was Elie Pession, whom we surnamed “the Invalid,”
—a strong-looking fellow with a heavy black beard,
whose heart sank into his boots when he stood in
the presence of danger.

All these guides were French, and all belonged
to the valley of Tournanche,—the deep valley
which extends to the southward from the Matter-
horn on the Italian side, corresponding to the val-
ley of Zermatt, which extends on the Swiss side
toward the northward.

As we started out that night, it seemed that we
had never seen the world look so beautiful. The
moon was full, and hung gracefully over the left
shoulder of the Matterhorn, and the sky was without
acloud. Through dark fir-forests we went, by the
side of a foaming torrent, then over flower-carpeted

AN ASCENT OF THE MATTERHORN. 209

pastures and steep grassy slopes, the great moun-
tain ever in front and the glistening snows of the
Dent Blanche and the Breithorn flanking it on
either side.

At sunrise we came to the first cabin, at the foot
of the upper pyramid of the Matterhorn, on a nar-
row crest of rocks which separates the Furggen
glacier from the Matterhorn glacier. This cabin,
built by the Swiss Alpenclub, is quite a comforta-
ble place, with plenty of straw, blankets, and fuel.
Many who climb the mountain spend the night
here, setting out at sunrise for the summit. The
walls of the cabin are covered with lead-pencil in-
scriptions in every tongue. One of these, in par-
ticular, is noteworthy as being higher above the
sea-level than any other poetry in the English
language.

“Little Matt Horner
Sat in the corner,
And vowed he would not be climbed:
We tried it, you know,

But found so much snow
We very politely declined.”

This is not much as poetry; but it is worthy of
notice that in a climate and at an altitude in
which ordinary spring poetry is frozen through
and through in a minute, this little blossom has
survived.

For a few moments we watched the sun rising
over the glaciers of the Weissthor pass, and then
John the Baptist had us again under way. We
stood right at the foot of the mountain; but the
nearer we came the steeper it looked, and there

14

210 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

was no sign of a possible path. Precipices of bare,
loose rocks, with gullies filled with snow and slip-
pery ice, were before us, and nothing else. We went
on a little way until we came to a snowy ridge, on
which was a heap of large stones. ‘ This,” said
John the Baptist, “was the chalet of Monsieur
Whymper.” Then the path began to grow narrow,
and abysses opened below us. John called a halt,
and said that we must now be very careful; we
must watch nothing but our feet; we must talk as
little as possible; we must keep our mouths shut
and breathe through our noses; and finally, we
must chew chocolate or caramels all the time, —
for this, he said, would keep our throats from being
parched. This began to look like serious work;
so we left off looking at the sunrise and the glaciers,
watched our shoes, chewed our chocolate, and
moved on.

The path started out along a shelf of rock about
a foot wide, the surface of which, in accordance
with the southward dip of the strata, slanted toward
the mountain. Above the path was a wall of rock
some ten feet high, and at the top of this was a
similar shelf, but somewhat broader than the one
on which we were walking. Below us was a slip-
pery wall of rock, perhaps a hundred feet high, at
the foot of which lay the ice of the Furggen
glacier. In summer the glacier slides away from
the mountain, the supply of snow not being great
enough to balance its loss by melting. Between
the mountain and the glacier is therefore a deep
chasm, or Lergschrund,—a damp, chilly, un-
inviting looking place, bordered on one side by

AN ASCENT OF THE MATTERHORN. 211

rocks, on the other by blue ice, from the edge of
which often hang long icicles. We walked on in
silence above this Lergschrund, thinking that our
way would be easier by-and-by, when suddenly
our path ceased. At this point John the Baptist
left us, and climbing fly-like up the side of the
rock, he showed us our path about ten feet higher
up on another shelf formed by a projecting stra-
tum. He threw the end of his rope to the guide
Victor, who put it around his waist. Then John
stood in the attitude of the Colossus on the edge
of the precipice, and hauled him up. Next came
my turn, and I dangled serenely over the edge of
the mountain, while John and Victor pulled on the
rope. This mode of mountain climbing gives a
view that you can get in no other way of the
mountains on the other side. And so one by one
came up the rest.

But our path did not improve as we went on.
From this point to the top, about six hours’ climb,
there was not a single yard of level walking or,
indeed, of any walking at all. One could not any-
where take three steps without watching each step
and making a mental calculation as to whether his
feet would hold. There was hardly a place where
a stumble ora slip of the foot would not, except
for the help of others, send the person who slipped
to the foot of the mountain. Every step was on
the edge of a precipice, and every step made the
precipice higher, — though there is little real
choice between falling a hundred feet and falling a
mile. The boys appreciated this, and fell not at
all. They clung with fingers and toes to every

212 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

projecting point, and nothing short of an earth-
quake could have gotten that mountain away from
them.

I have called the Matterhorn a creature of the
sun and frost. It is now but a wreck, — the core
of a far greater mountain whose rocks have been
hurled down into the valleys by the “ strong gods”
of the sun and air, and have thence been scattered
over Switzerland and Italy by the glaciers of the
Great Ice Age. It stands in the altitude of perpet-
ual frost, but bathed by the warm sunshine of Italy.
On every clear day its rock sides become warm in
the sun. All ordinary clouds are below its summit,
and each cloud that touches it in summer covers
its surface with light snow. Then this snow melts
again in the sunshine, and causes water to trickle
in all the joints and clefts of the rocks. Then at
night the mountain grows cold, —#in clear nights
intensely cold, — the water freezes in these fissures,
and expanding widens them, thus pushing the
outermost blocks of rock nearer and nearer the
edge of the precipice. At last a gust of wind ora
careless foot may cause one of these loose rocks to
topple over. Down it falls, loosening many more
on its way, the whole series plunging with an ever-
increasing roar till it reaches the ice of the Furggen
elacier. Into the glacier the falling rocks dive,
scattering the ice masses, as a stone thrown into a
pond causes the water to spatter. Once in the ice
the stones move on more leisurely, until after years
they reach the point where the glacier melts and
gives up its dead, when they pass into the universal
rubbish-heap, — the moraine, atthe bottom. These

AN ASCENT OF THE MATTERHORN. 213

are the pzerres gut roulent, — “ the stones that roll,”
the dread of the mountaineer. Most high moun-
tains are fashioned by the glaciers themselves; but
the glacier has no hold on the Matterhorn. Gla-
ciers make white domes of mountains; frost makes
black pinnacles and spires.

The guides had now tied us together, and the
value of the rope in mountaineering soon became
very evident to us. In all difficult or dangerous ex-
cursions in the high Alps, the persons making the
excursion are tied together by ropes. Usually four
or five are joined to one rope, the rope being tied
around the waist of each. It is the duty of each
one to see that the rope below him is kept drawn
tight, so that if any person happens to stumble or
slip, the aid of the others will keep him on his
feet. In very difficult excursions, like the one here
described, usually but one person moves at a time,
the other three on the rope each holding his po-
sition as well as possible until the fourth one has
reached a position of safety.

The way we went was in most cases like this.
First John the Baptist would scramble up some
ledge of rocks, clinging by fingers and toes to pro-
jecting points, or reaching some higher crag by
means of his ice-axe. When he found a suitable
foothold he would shout to me, and I would crawl
up to his position, while the next man would edge
up to where I was, — and so on. When we came
to a specially bad place, a mauvais pas, where the
rocks were unusually loose and the hold precari-
ous, I would shout up to him before following
him, “Etes-vous bien placé?” (“Are you well

214 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

placed?”) If John was “well placed” he would
shout, “En avancel<ing'Gome on!”) “1 would
then call) out, ““Direzgt” 2(* Pull! ’”’) » dtesweuld
then draw up on the rope, which action made it
much easier for me to scramble up than it would
have been without this assistance. Then it became
my turn to help up the next man; but he usually
crawled up unaided, — having an aversion to being
helped, which I did not share, but for which I was
duly thankful.

After working along in this way for about three
hours, John the Baptist told me to look up and I
would see the upper hut and the ropes which came
down from it. High above us we could see a little
stone shanty under the shelter of a huge pinnacle of
rock on the edge of a sharp precipice some fifty
feet high. Down this precipice hung a rope, fast
to an iron staple above, swinging loosely below.
We had read in the guide-books that “ropes have
been placed in the more difficult places on the
Matterhorn.” We had imagined something such as
we had seen in other mountains,—a rope railing
alongside of a steep and narrow path. We were
hardly expecting to go up hand over hand ona
rope swinging loosely over infinity.

John the Baptist started up on the rope, resting
his toes on the projecting points of the rocks, where
opportunity offered, until he reached a little shelf,
an inch or two wide, where he could stand on one
foot. It was growing very cold; the rope was
white with frost. I put on my gloves and climbed
up for a little distance; but when I came to rest
my full weight of two hundred and ten pounds on

AN ASCENT OF THE MATTERHORN. 215

the rope, my gloves would not cling to it. I felt
myself slowly sliding downward. It was not a
pleasant sensation. I thought that I should prob-
ably stop on reaching the knot on the end of the
rope; but 1 mzght go too fast, and, jerking John
the Baptist from his narrow perch, we would form
the nucleus of a small avalanche moving towards
Zermatt. But I stopped, and taking off my gloves
I tried it again, —this time with better success.

At last, after a long and toilsome scramble we all
reached the upper hut, where we lay down on the
hay for a little rest and another round of tough
bread, sour wine, and chocolate. This hut I shall
have occasion to describe farther on.

As we went on, clouds had begun to gather
about us, and after a little the wind rose and it
began to snow. We lost sight of the earth alto-
gether, and everything below us became a bottom-
less abyss. Soon we came to the narrow ridge
on the shoulder of the Matterhorn where for a
short distance the northeast angle of the mountain
which we were ascending is no wider than the
back of a very lean horse. It is too narrow for one
to stand on or even to sit on with comfort. On
either side as we crawled along we could look
downward seemingly to the very bottom of things.
Above this point the first climbers fell from the
mountain. I asked John about it, but he would
not talk. “I was not here then,” he said.

After this we came around to the eastern face
again. Here we could see the summit, some five
hundred feet above us,—a ragged wall of rock,
steeper than any slope we had yet ascended and its

216 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

top still seeming to hang over our heads. How to
get up was evident from the long lines of hanging
ropes. We went up these slowly, one after another;
and at last we came to prefer these ledges with
their ropes to the lower slopes, which, although
less steep, offer nothing but rocks and snow to cling
to. One of these ropes had had one of its strands
cut by the sharp edge of some rock, and the other
two strands were partly untwisted. This rope may
break for somebody, but it did not break for us.

It is hard enough to climb this part of the
mountain with the aid of the ropes. Itseems next
to impossible without it; yet some one carried
up these ropes and the iron staples by which they
are hung, and fastened them all there. The man
who did this was John the Baptist. At last the
ropes ceased, and ‘crossing over to the north side
of the mountain, we found there an easier slope
by which we soon reached the summit. It was
now a little after noon. ;

The top of the mountain is a narrow crest, lying
nearly east and west and rising toward a point on
the Swiss side. This crest is about twenty feet
long and from one to three feet wide. Its north
side is a rocky slope, while the south side is nearly
perpendicular, and at the time of our visit it was
covered with a long overhanging snow-bank or
“cornice.” It was as cold as midwinter. The
north wind whistled and howled, so that we dared
not rise to our feet, and the snow fell thick and
fast. I should hardly say that the snow fell; it
is made up there, and every cloud which touches
the mountain is a snow-storm. Most of the time

AN ASCENT OF THE MATTERHORN. 217

we could see nothing; the whole earth was repre-
sented by the little summit-ridge, which was all
that we could see of the Matterhorn. Once ina
while a little eddy in the clouds on the south side
of the mountain would give us a glimpse of Le
Breuil and the valley of Tournanche two miles
below us; and occasionally our nearest mountain
neighbor, the Dent Blanche, disclosed her snow-
crowned head.

We did not stay long on the summit. It was
not very warm, and we wished to give the others
a chance. We wrote our names on a card, and
placed it in an empty bottle which the mountain
keeps as a register for visitors. Victor broke off
with his ice-axe the uppermost point of the moun-
tain, a piece of dark green hornblende. I put
this in my pocket as a trophy, and we were ready
to descend.

In going downward, our motion was much like
that of one of the caterpillars or ‘‘ measuring-worms ”’
which come upon the maple-trees in the spring.
The strongest guide in each section was placed last
in the series, so as to be “ well placed,” and to hold
the others back in case any one should slip. This
guide starts first in each series, and goes down to
the niche of the next man below him. When he is
again “well placed,” the next man advances, and
in turn the third and the fourth,—the one stand-
ing lowest moving where it is possible the length of
one section of the connecting rope, after which the
others again edge downward to him. The progress
is of course very slow, and three fourths of the
time each man is engaged in resting, with his

218 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

heels “well placed” on some projecting shelf of
rock.

At times in our descent we felt the force of
the ¢ourvment, a wind peculiar to the high moun-
tains, —a sort of snow-laden whirlwind, or “ wind
made visible.” This wind goes furiously over the
mountain-side, tearing off loose rocks, starting
avalanches, and tossing about the banks of snow.
Whenever one of these struck us, we lay flat and
clung to the rocks, lest we should be literally blown
off the mountain. One of our company, I remem-
ber, wore a narrow brimmed hat drawn down tight-
ly over his ears; the tourment took it and whirled
it high into the air. The learned professor fell flat
on the ground, while every hair of his head caught
the rotary motion and stood straight out.

As we went farther, we noticed more and more
the treacherous character of the stones on the
mountain side. The whole outer coat of the
mountain is loose, scarcely a rock anywhere on
the Swiss side being firmly attached. Into all
the joints of the strata the water from the melting
snow finds its way, and by the freezing of this
water the joints are widened and the blocks of
hornblende are daily pushed nearer and nearer to
the edge. Thus nothing is firm; nothing is stable,
and each year the mountain offers a new face to
the weather.

Going down the mountain is more difficult than
going up. This is not only on account of the men-
tal strain of constantly looking over precipices, but
because of the looseness of the rocks. Stepping
down on a stone, one is more apt to detach it than

AN ASCENT OF THE MATTERHORN. 219

when he cautiously clings to it from below. How-
ever careful we may be, some stones will fall; and
while this may not hurt us, it may hurt some one ©
below us. Then occasionally some stone would
detach itself naturally, and go rattling down to the
bottom of the mountain, followed by a host of
smaller ones, leaving as they pass a strong ‘ smell
of sulphur,’ which, as Whymper says, “tells us
who sent them.”

The Matterhorn, as I have said, is one of the
steepest and slipperiest of mountains, and every-
where it offers but scanty hold to the climber.
There is, however, in all this little real danger to
men strong of limb and steady of head, accom-
panied by good guides. But there is one danger
which is real, one which is almost constantly pres-
ent and against which no skill nor strength can
wholly guard, — and that is the danger from falling
stones. This risk would be slight with a small
party, but our company of eleven, probably the
largest ever onthe Matterhorn, made so long a line
that a stone loosened by the uppermost would ac-
quire a fearful velocity before reaching the last.
Not more than five persons should be on the
Matterhorn at once.

The head of our column had reached the foot of
one of the last ropes which come down from the
summit, and was waiting for the others to descend.
One of the very last in the company was labori-
ously crawling over a large projecting rock, when it
suddenly became loosened. I remember hearing
some one scream “LOOK oUT!” and then sud-
denly it seemed to me that all sunshine and hope

220 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

had gone out of the mountain. The great rock fell
about thirty feet. Striking a lower shelf, it broke
into three or four pieces. One of these, weighing
about a hundred pounds, flew over my head and
over the heads of John and Victor. The man be-
low us had turned to look back when he heard the
noise; the rock struck him in the face, knocked
him instantly off the ledge and out of our sight,
and then plunged down the side of the mountain.
We were all paralyzed for an instant, — the
guides as well as the rest. I remember calling to
John to give me rope, so that I could go down to
Victor, and let him go down to Gilbert. By the
time we got down, Gilbert was struggling to his
feet. He had fallen as far as the rope would let
him. His face and clothes were covered with blood
which flowed from a deep cut like a sabre gash
across his nose and forehead. A stiff-brimmed hat
which he wore had been cut fairly in two, and its
resistance had helped to weaken the force of the
blow. We decided that no bone was broken, al-
though the wound was a most serious one. Once
at the bottom, we could take care of him perhaps;
but should he faint, or be unable or unwilling to
walk, we should have a difficult task to carry him
down. We tied up the cuts with all the silk hand-
kerchiefs in the party, covered them with snow, and
put over them all a thick woollen hood, which John
the Baptist carried for use in time of need. In five
minutes we were moving again. We were unable
wholly to stop the flow of blood, and our course
was marked by a red trail. Gilbert’s face was soon
entirely covered by a red clot; his eyelids swelled

AN ASCENT OF THE MATTERHORN. 221

so that he could not see, and after a little he lapsed
into a half-unconscious state, in which he seemed
to realize only that he had fallen from the moun-
tain, that it was very cold, and that he must always
walk. And at times he would give up and lie down
in the snow, when we would use every argument in
our power to induce him to rise and go on again.
It took us four hours to reach the upper cabin, a
distance perhaps equal to two “squares” in a city
street.

Had our wounded man been otherwise than light
of weight, strong of limb, and immensely resolute,
we might not have gotten down at all; and a night
on the bare side of the mountain meant simply
freezing to death. It is hard enough for a well man
to go safely down the Matterhorn, far harder than
to go up; but for a man blind and faint, it became
tertible: >**C’est un homme fort et brave” (“He is
aman brave and strong’), said John the Baptist.
If Gilbert had been as heavy as I, we should have
had a task indeed. I remember thinking at the
time that it was fortunate that I was n’t hit.

At one time I saw Gilbert slip, and with Victor,
who half led, half carried him, fall like a shot.
But John the Baptist was always “well placed”
and held them. At another time we heard a terri-
ble uproar, and three or four rods away we saw an
immense avalanche of stones coming down. This
was made of a dozen large rocks of the size of a
wagon, with hundreds of little ones yelping in the
rear. It was a grand sight; but we were little in
the mood for it. ‘“ C’est une montagne terrible”
(“It is a terrible mountain”), said John the Baptist.

222 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

The guide Pession had been in a shiver of mortal
terror ever since the accident, and for the rest of
the day was worse than useless. “ You must par-
don him,” said John the Baptist, “ for he has a wife
and children in Val Tournanche.”

At seven o'clock we reached the upper hut.
We put Gilbert on the hay; after which he refused
to move, and soon went to sleep. John decided to
remain there over night, with Victor, Spangler, and
myself, and to send the others down to Zermatt. Af-
ter many adventures, which I need not here relate,
the others reached the bottom in safety. Mean-
while, we five arranged for lodgings in the upper
hut, some thirteen thousand feet above the sea, —
one of the highest ‘‘ houses” in Christendom.

This hut is simply a pile of stones more like the
den of some beast than acabin. It is built between
a pinnacle of rock and a precipice, its stone roof
rising in a slope from the edge of the latter to the
former. The height of the room within is perhaps
five feet on the highest or upper side. Its length
is some ten feet, and its width about six. On
the south end is a little door or hole for entrance,
and on the floor on the north end are three coarse
blankets and a few armfuls of hay. A little bench,
a small table, a tin-pail, and a basket of shavings
complete the equipment.

John the Baptist sent us to bed at once, — one
on each side of Gilbert, to keep him warm. But
nobody kept us warm. Our clothes were wet, and
my off side was against a frosty rock, which carried
away heat faster than I could generate it. The
young man in one of Grimm’s fairy-tales, who

AN ASCENT OF THE MATTERHORN. 223

“did not know how to shiver,’ would certainly
have found the coveted experience there. We did
little else all night long. Moreover, the floor was
very uneven, and the tin wine-flask which did duty
as a pillow was far from being “soft as downy
pillows are.’ There was not much encouragement
for sleeping. All night long our patient kept on
ascending mountains, and recalling his experiences
of the day. At about the first watch of the night,
he shouted out, “ Attention! Attention toujours! ”
At another time he called us all up with this
remark, ‘‘Here we will stop walking and take
wheelbarrows.” When everything else was quiet,
the snow thawed on the roof and kept little streams
of sooty water trickling over our faces. John and
Victor lay on the bare ground; and at intervals,
when they could stand it no longer, they would
kindle a fire of shavings, and wake us up to take a
drink around of chocolate.

I have seen cold nights elsewhere, but nothing
to compare with this. The storm ceased early in
the night, the clouds blew over, and a sharp, crys-
talline midwinter coldness penetrated everywhere.
We could every few minutes hear the mountain
snap, as the water froze in the fissures of its rocks.
I sometimes spend the night now-a-days waiting
for a belated train in the little hotel of some prairie
“railroad junction” in Indiana or Illinois, at the
time of the January blizzards. The single window
in the little bedroom will fit loosely in its place.
One pane of glass may be replaced by an old hat,
the second by a newspaper, and a third be wanting
altogether. The bed may have but one sheet,.a

224 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

hard husk mattress, and an insufficient equipment
of comfortless quilts, as heavy and as warm as
though made of sheet-lead. With all these condi-
tions and worse as I have sometimes found them,
I have now only to lie still and think back to that
night on the Matterhorn, and the whole atmosphere
becomes fairly tropical.

In the morning we rose early and went out to
look at the sunrise. The air was intensely clear.
The whole Matterhorn was white with new-fallen
snow and glistening with frost. Far below us the
clouds hung white and heavy over the valley of
Zermatt, their thick folds hiding all of the land-
scape which was not snow-covered, their upper out-
lines seemingly continuous with the white surface
of the great glaciers. Far beyond the valley of
Zermatt rose the giants of the Oberland. Nearer
to us were the Dent Blanche, the Weisshorn, the
Rothhorn, the three peaks of the Mischabel, and
to the right of these the Allalin, the Strahlhorn,
the Rympfischhorn, and a host of other “‘ horns,”
named and unnamed, rose before us. To the east
was the long crescent of Monte Rosa, the Cima di
Jazzi, the Lyskamm, Zwillinge, and Breithorn, with
the great Gorner glacier winding about their feet.
It was the sight of a life-time, which can never fade
from the memory.

“With drifts of snow, fantastic wreath on wreath ;
And peak on peak against the turquoise blue,
The Alps like towering campanili stand,
Wondrous with pinnacies of frozen rain,
Silvery, crystal, like the prism in hue.
Oh, tell me, love, if this be Switzerland, ~
Or is it but the frostwork on the pane?” — ALDRICH.

AN ASCENT OF THE MATTERAORN. 225

Our invalid was better in the morning, but cold,
disgusted, and impatient. His swollen eyelids each
looked like a ripe plum. He said that he could
not open his eyes. I told him to lie still and keep
them shut then,—a remark which he thought
peculiarly unfeeling. We decided to send this
Knight of the Sorrowful Figure with John and Vic-
tor down to Zermatt, while Spangler and I would
wait and play “‘ mumble-the-peg ” until their return,
which might be next day and might be — never!
Not a cheerful prospect; but, as the jester said
in the woods of Arden, ‘“ Travellers must be
contented.” |

Before they had fairly started, however, we
heard shouting from below; and soon the two
guides Bic reached us from the lower cabin, in
which they had spent the night. We therefore
again moved on, but very slowly. The new-fallen
snow made the walking very difficult, and much
sitting down in slippery places reduced our cloth-
ing to a total wreck, concerning which the less
said the better. There were many “mauvais pas ;”
but we passed them all at last, and towards noon
we reached the lower cabin. The doctor from
Zermatt was there, and also four able-bodied ruf-
fians bearing a sedan-chair. We were now safe
at last; and after another drink around of choco-
late, —there was nothing else left, — we started
for Zermatt.

Our welcome in the village was most enthusi-
astic. Everybody — English, German, French —
was delighted to see us, and the ‘ Matterhorn-
besteiger” were the heroes of the hour. In the

15

226 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

chapel at Zermatt prayers were offered for the
Queen of England and on our account for Pres-
ident Garfield, and thanks were given for our safe
return.

As for our own party, an Englishman who was
there afterwards said: ‘I never saw anything like
it. Every one of those Americans rushed right
out into the street and crowded around, and I
actually thought that every one of those ladies was
going to kiss the Professor!”

But not one of them did!

I afterwards received from ‘John the Baptist”
the following letter, which will be of interest as
the composition of an illiterate but very intelligent
man. I give it /ézervatzm. It will be noticed that
while the construction of the sentences is generally
correct, the words are mostly spelled by ear, —
not an easy thing to do in the French language.

VALTOURNENCHE, le 16 Decbre, 1881.
MONSIEUR JORDAN.

CHER MownsIEuR, — J’ai recus votres lettres le 15 cou-
rent, laquelle a été pour moi un grand plaisir, premiére-
ment en aprenant que M* Gilbert était parfaitement géri.
Je regretais toujours de ne pa vous avoir prié de me
donner de ses nouvelles en arivents dans votres_ patrie.
Je vous prier de le saluer bien de ma part, et en meme
tempts le remercier du cadou que vous m/’avez remis
en son nom a Saas. En second lieu je vois avec plaisir
que vous ne vous étes pas contenter de me payer large-
ment mes servisses de l’été passé. Vous voulez encore
travailler pour me donner une renomée parmi les Améri-
cains, s’est plus que je ne merite. Je vous en remercie
infiniment. Je regréte beaucoup d’étre dans |’impossi-
bilité de pouvour vous en rendre le reciproque. Je ne

AN ASCENT OF THE MATTERHORN. 227

peut faire autre chose que de vous souéter des jours
heureux plain de Santées et d’Amour pour les Alpes
Pennines. . . . Je vous prie de saluer toutes l’honorables
compagnie que vous aviez avec vous l’été passé. Ma-
quignaz et les Bics vous font ses salutations.

Recevez une bonne poigné de main de celui qui vou-

droit étre longtents
V6tre serviteur,
AYMONOD Baptiste. !

1 The following is a translation of this letter : —

Vat TouURNANCHE, Dec. 16, 1881.
Mr. JorDAN :
DEAR Sir,—I have received your letter of the fifth current,

which has been for me a great pleasure, firstly in learning that Mr.
Gilbert was perfectly cured. I regretted always not to have asked
you to give me news from him in arriving in your own country. I
pray you to salute him well for my part, and at the same time to
thank him for the present which you gave me in his name at Saas.
In the second place, I see with pleasure that you have not con-
tented yourself with paying me liberally for my services of last
summer. You wish still to work to give me a fame among Ameri-
cans. It is more than I merit. I thank you for it infinitely. I
regret much being in the impossibility of being able to render you
a reciprocal service. I can do nothing more than to wish you
happy days full of health and of love for the Pennine Alps.
. . . I pray you to salute all the honorable company which you
had with you last year. Maquignaz and the Bics send you their
salutations.
Receive a good shake of the hand from him who would long be

Your servant,
AYMONOD BAPTISTE.

228 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

THE EVOLUTION OF ;} THE COLLEGE
CURRICULUM.

RECENT writer on the German system of
education, turning from his subject for a
moment’s contemplation of the American system,
is moved to say that the most striking charac-
teristic of the latter is simply its want of system.
Instead of being part of a definite whole, well
ordered or ill ordered as the case may be, each
feature of the American system has been devel-
oped with little regard to its relation to the oth-
ers; and this confusion in development has been
made worse by our characteristic misapplication of
names, an example of which is seen in our indis-
criminate use of the terms “ college” and “ univer-
sity.’ In many a so-called college in America the
chief work done is the teaching of the elements of
grammar and arithmetic. The “university idea”
is often regarded as fully met by the addition to
such a college of a Normal School, a professor
or two in Law or Theology, and a self-supporting
“College of Music.”

Yet in spite of all eccentricities in name or form,
we can recognize the existence of a certain definite
type of school which we may call the American
college. There are many variations in this type of
school, — variations due to geographical position,

EVOLUTION OF THE COLLEGE CURRICULUM. 229

to the excess or deficiency in denominational zeal,
or to the exigencies of the struggle for existence.
For the fiercest conflicts of the average American
college have not been with the black giant Igno-
rance, but with the traditional wolf at the door.
In other words, this new country has not been lib-
eral in its support of higher education; and more-
over the funds available for this purpose have been
used to found a multitude of weak schools rather
than to make a few schools strong. There have
been several reasons why this is so, and there are
some reasons why it has been well that it is so;
but these questions I do not care to discuss now.
The law of the survival of the fittest can be de-
pended on to rectify sooner or later all mistakes
of this kind. Suffice it to say that we recognize
the existence of the American college, and that
this college. possesses a more or less definite col-
lege curriculum. Of the changes in this curricu-
lum I wish now to speak.

I shall not try to follow out in detail its history
prior to the time when its germs were brought to
us from England in the landing of the Pilgrims.
We can go back in England to the time when the
philosophy of Aristotle constituted the college
course. Then the entire curriculum was taught by
a single teacher, the man of universal knowledge.
This teacher for the most part gave his instruction
by dictation. The students noted down the con-
tents of old books, which the master himself had
copied before; the place of the teacher was simply
that of a medium of communication between the
ancient manuscripts and their later duplicates.

230 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

With the revival of learning came the advent
of the study of Latin as a language having a litera-
ture, and later the study of Greek; both Latin and
Greek, as literary studies, being considered ex-
tremely dangerous as well as heretical at the time of
their introduction into the curriculum. Both were
then resisted by the full force of the conservative
party of the day. After the revival of learning came
about with time the English college curriculum,
with its Z7zpos, or three pedestals of Greek, Latin,
and Mathematics. Of this the American curricu-
lum has been a lineal descendant.

The American college curriculum at the time
when most of us became acquainted with it was a
very definite thing, time-honored, and commanding
a certain respect from its correspondence with the
theory on which it is based. Its fundamental idea
was discipline of the mind. Its mode of effecting
this was, in large part, by shutting the student’s
eyes to the distracting and inconsequential present,
and fixing his gaze on that which was great and
good and hard to understand in the past. The
main work of the course consisted of drill in gram-
mar and mathematics, and the results of this train-
ing were bound together by a final exposition at
the hands of the President of such of the specula-
tions of philosophers as seemed to him safe and
substantial. This work lasted — for reasons so
old as to be long since forgotten — just four years,
and it was preceded by a certain very definite
amount of drill, of much the same kind which was
regarded as a necessary preliminary to the other
work.

EVOLUTION OF THE COLLEGE CURRICULUM. 231

Whatever may be our opinion as to the desira-
bility of such a course for ourselves or for our sons
or daughters, it is impossible not to regard the
old-time classical course with a feeling of respect.
It was based on a theory of education, and its
promoters were loyal to this theory. If only the
boys for whom its pigeon-holes were arranged
could have been of uniform size and quality, the
system would have been perfect. That it was not
quite perfect was clearly the fault of human
nature, which furnished a very variable article of
boy for the educators to work upon, and caused
them to reach by uniform processes widely differ-
ent results. What these variations were, is well
known to us and needs no explanation. We know
that there are some boys whose natural food is the
Greek root. There are others whose dreams ex-
pand in conic ‘sections, and whose longings for the
finite or the infinite always follow certain parabo-
loid or ellipsoid curves. There are some to whom
the turgid sentences of Cicero are the poetry of
utterance; and there are others who with none
of these tastes grow and blossom in the sunlight
of comradery, undisturbed by the harassing influ-
ences of books and bookish men. To all these
kinds of students this old-time classical course
brought satisfaction, and the days they spent in
Princeton or Harvard or Amherst were the brightest
of their lives. Such have rarely failed to try to
provide for their children the same training which
they found so satisfying to themselves.

But there were other students, not less fond of
study, who were restless under these conditions.

232 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

There were some to whom the structure of the
oriole’s nest was more marvellous as well as more
poetical than the structure of an ode of Horace.
There were others who found in modern history
or literature or philosophy an inspiration which
they did not draw from that which is old. By the
side of this inspiration the grammatical drill of the
schools seemed a lifeless thing. And so it has
happened that many whom we now regard as
great in our literature or our science were held in
low esteem in the colleges in which they graduated,
—if indeed they ever graduated at all. For the
scale of marks connected with the college curric-
ulum took little account of the soul of man, but
only of the docility and regularity (virtues of them-
selves of no mean order) with which the college
discipline was taken. And as these qualities are
not alone the qualities which win success, either
real or spurious, in after life, it came to be believed
that college honors meant future failure, — that the
college valedictorian was the man who was never
to be heard of again; and in this popular error,
easily disproved by statistics, there was just enough
of truth to keep it from being forgotten.

No doubt the ancient classical course was a pow-
erful agency for culture to many,—to most stu-
dents perhaps who came within its influence. But
it was not so to all. Culture is an elusive thing,
and the machinery which will secure it for you
may have no such effect on me. So that, among
the students of the old régzme, some never found
culture, and some found it only in a surreptitious
study of the world outside. Complaints were not

dl

EVOLUTION OF THE COLLEGE CURRICULUM. 233

wanting, that in this curriculum of Latin, Greek,
Mathematics, and a varnish of Philosophy, not all
the studies pursued were useful studies. Much of
this complaint was unjust, for a college is not a
school of technology. Higher education is not
learning a trade, nor is its purpose to enable its
possessor to get a living. Lowell's definition of a
university as “a place where nothing useful is
taught,” is, I think, one by which we as college
teachers must loyally stand. But some of this
complaint has been just. No part of a man’s
education is of much value to him, unless it is
in some way concerned with his future growth
Thousands of students never look at a Latin book
after leaving college. This matters nothing, if the
skill they have acquired in reading Latin gives
them greater mastery over their future study ora
deeper insight into the problems of life. This
matters much, if this knowledge has in no wise
given either insight or mastery. For in such case
a knowledge of Horace and Homer would be as
useless as the learning by heart of the laws of the
Medes and the Persians or an enumeration in order
of all the kings of Shanghai or Yvetét. The tree of
knowledge is known by its fruits. ‘“ Culture,” says
the younger Holmes, “in the form of fruitless
knowledge, I utterly abhor!”

Now, to those who found culture, the college
course had served its end; to others, it had not.
It was good or bad, not in itself, but in its results.
It is idle for us to say, “It is sufficient for all; ”
“Tt is sufficient for none.” The discussion of
these rival theses has not helped much in the

234 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

solution of the educational problem. Emerson
says: —

“The Ancient Languages, with great beauty of struc-
ture, contain wonderful remains of genius, which draw, and
always will draw, certain like-minded men, Greek men
and Roman men, in all countries to their study; but by
a wonderful drowsiness of usage they had exacted the
study of all men. Once (say two centuries ago) Latin
and Greek had a strict relation to all the science and
culture there was in Europe, and mathematics had a
momentary importance at some era of physical science.
These things became stereotyped as education, as the
manner of men is. But the good spirit never cared for
the colleges, and though all men and boys were now
drilled in Latin, Greek, and Mathematics, it had quite
left these shells high and dry on the beach, and was now
creating and feeding other matters at other ends of the
~ world.”

Thus, as the years went on, other sources of
culture became more and more emphatic in their
claims. The workers in the various fields of
science, each year becoming more numerous and
more active, opened out great vistas of the works
of God, and he who had seen nothing of these
might well have his claims to culture doubted.
Philology, History, Philosophy, other than that
stamped with the approval of the safe old mas-
ters, each put in its claims, as also the vast wealth
of the literatures of modern Europe. A citizen of
the Republic must know something of the laws
which govern national prosperity, and a teacher
of the people should know something of the theory
according to which people are taught. When

EVOLUTION OF THE COLLEGE CURRICULUM. 235

these subjects are left out of the college curricu-
lum, the clamor for their admittance becomes un-
bearably loud. If all are admitted, the same
curriculum becomes like an American horse-car,
with standing room only and no space to turn
around.

What shall the colleges do? Shut out these
subjects they cannot; for to exclude all modern
‘ studies and modern ideas, to step out of the cur-
rent of modern life, is practically to exclude all
students. Rightly or wrongly, the students want
these things, and sooner or later the American
college must give what the students want. The
supply must meet the demand or there will be no
demand. No doubt we as professors know better
what is good for the student than the student does
himself; but unless we can convince him of that
we must let him have, to a great extent, his own
way as to what his studies shall be. We can see
that he does his work well, and we can help him
in many ways; but the direction of his efforts must
in the end rest with him.

The colleges of America stand in a different
position in this regard from similar schools in
England or Germany. These last are parts of a
definite system. Their financial support is such
that there is no need of paying any special atten-
tion to popular demands, if these demands are
deemed theoretically undesirable. Moreover, the
college degree in England and its equivalent in
Germany forms a passport of admission to social,
educational, or political privileges inaccessible to
the man without this degree. Hence entrance

236 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

to the college or gymnasium or the university is,
among the educated classes in these countries, a
matter of course to a much greater extent than
can be the case in America. The Bachelor’s degree
in America, or even the Doctor’s degree, carries no
privileges of any sort worth the name. Very few
of our students would work for a degree if it were
believed that the title were all they got. Thus it
comes about that in America the average student
goes to college or is sent to college for the help to
be gotten from study rather than for the sake of
graduation. And he must be convinced, or his
parents must be convinced, that this good is a
real good, or he will not seek it. Thus the differ-
ence in the conditions under which our colleges
work has tended to modify and modernize the
curriculum more rapidly than has been the case
in the corresponding schools in Europe. - .

Many devices have been adopted for dealing
with the modern studies. Some have admitted
them as extras, or, in the expressive language of
a New York College President, as “ side-fixings,”
reserving the old-time Z7zpos as the solid part of
the scholastic meal. But no matter how little a
hold these modern studies had, their presence has
weakened the force of the old-time discipline. It
is a law of physics that two bodies cannot occupy
the same space, not even though one of them
be badly squeezed. And these subjects will sub-
mit to squeezing no better than the others. So
part of the old course must be crowded out and
part of the new must be admitted on terms of
more or less perfect equality with the former; or

EVOLUTION OF THE COLLEGE CURRICULUM. 237

else some degree of selection must be permitted,
that students may choose between new and new or
between new and old.

Another conceivable arrangement would be to
omit none of the old work, but to lengthen the
course, with each study added to the curriculum,
until each could receive a proper share of the
student’s attention. But this cannot well be done.
Four years is the fixed length of the American
college course; and this being an arbitrary thing,
with no sort of reason for it, there can be no suc-
cessful argument against it. Besides, we live in
hurrying times; and to our students time is money,
and the only money some of the best of them have.
To the majority of those reached by our colleges,
even the traditional four years seems a long time
to spend in school after reaching manhood.

In various ways it was sought to harmonize the
new education with the old. But the average
American college has finally adjusted itself to a
second phase in the history of the curriculum,
which for convenience I may call the patchwork
stage. In this arrangement most of the higher
mathematics has been crowded out, the Greek
has been shortened and the Latin also; while other
subjects, in greater or less amounts, have been
more or less grudgingly admitted. The amount
and kind of these subjects is rarely determined
by any prearranged plan or in accordance with
any sort of definite theory of education. As a
matter of fact, each college has a certain number
of professors, this determined by the Board of
Trustees, in accordance with real or imaginary

238 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

needs of the college, or with the real or imaginary
claims of candidates for recognition. Then in the
Faculty meetings each one of these professors
claims what he wants and receives what he can
get, in accordance with the law of the survival of
the fittest and the rule of the majority. Thus the
curriculum in each college becomes the resultant
of many forces, in a condition of unstable equi-
librium. It is altered, not in accordance with the
educational needs of the students, but when one
professor gives place in the Faculty to another
more or less energetic or clamorous than he.
Occasionally in these patchwork courses of
study, the traces of some master-hand is visible, —
some method in its madness which shows that
somebody has tried to work out an idea. But this
is rarely so, I think; and in the arrangement of
most courses of study, nothing higher has been
thought of than expediency and the exigencies
of compromise. From the struggle between the
representatives of rival subjects in an overloaded
course, has come about, by way of compromise,
the establishment of different courses of study, in
each of which it is assumed that some scholastic
faction will have the ascendency. In some col-
leges these various courses have been put on an
exact equality, but in most cases a more or less
positive pressure has been brought to bear in
favor of the classical course, and especially away
from the sciences. This is well, I think; for in
most of our colleges the instruction in science is
still absurdly inadequate, and wholly valueless for
the main end of scientific instruction, — the training

EVOLUTION OF THE COLLEGE CURRICULUM. 239

of the judgment through its exercise on first-hand
knowledge. Wherever science is yet in the meshes
of bookishness, it is best that students should be
turned away from it. Wherever its limbs are free,
it will hold its own, whatever the pressure from
those who do not value it as a factor in education.
In other words, a competent teacher of science
need never complain of obstacles in his way, for
the odds are all on his side. The same thing is
true, I believe, of a competent teacher in any other
department. A growing man incites growth; but
even mould will not grow on a fossil. Some ten
years ago I heard a College President boast that
although his college had two other courses, yet
three fourths of his students had been kept in the
classical course. My question was, What sort of
teaching have you in science? There was nothing
worth speaking of; only husks which the swine
would not eat, and the most hungry student could
not.

As I have said, I do not think that the average
college curriculum, as we have known it in this
second stage, is the result of any sort of theory of
education, of any appreciation of the relative value
of studies, or of any thought as to the best order in
which such subjects could be arranged. I have
myself taken part in the preparation of too many
such courses to have much respect for them.
They are simply the results of an attempt to put a
maximum of topics into a minimum of terms, — to
squeeze ten years of subjects into four years of
time. The predominance of one group of subjects
in a course reflects the predominance of some pro-

240 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

fessor in that line of work. The idea of discipline,
more or less prominent in the lower years, is usually
forgotten entirely in the Junior and Senior years.
The idea of the German schools that the source of
all power is concentration, — or, as Emerson ex-
presses it, “ The one prudence in life is concen-
tration, the one evil dissipation,” — was wholly
abandoned. The theory arose that a college is
not a place for thorough work of any sort. Its
purpose is to give a broad and well-rounded cul-
ture, to train men to “stand foursquare to every
wind that blows,’ — such a culture as comes from
a slight knowledge of many things, accompanied
by thoroughness in nothing. Indeed, the desire of
the student to know some one thing well was char-
acterized as “undue specialization,” and every effort
was made to induce the student to turn with equal
eagerness from study to study, -—to Physic, Logic,
Greek, or History; equally interested, equally su-
perficial, in each. The study of the text-book was
exalted, and a subject was said to be completed
when its alphabet and a few preliminary definitions
were more or less perfectly memorized. Thus it
came about that the average student regarded all
studies with equal indifference. If a momentary
spark of interest was evoked, it must fade out in a
few days, as the subject in question gave place to
some other. The procession moved in haste, and
the student could not loiter if he was to keep his
place in the line.

It was said in justification of this course of study
that the function of the college is to offer a taste
of all sorts of knowledge. The student could try

EVOLUTION OF THE COLLEGE CURRICULUM. 241

all, and select that which he liked best as the future
work of his life. Thoroughness is for men, not
boys, and it is a part of life-work rather than of
school discipline. But every influence of the col-
lege was away from this end. The value of per-
sistent study, as the Germans know it, was never
made known to the student. His professors were
not specialists. They knew nothing from first-
hand, and they undervalued in all ways the power
which comes from knowing what one knows. So
they taught only definitions and classifications and
names and dates and scrap-work generally. There
was little temptation to study; for the business of
the professor was repetition, not investigation. It
was in reference to such work as this that Agassiz
said of Harvard College, some twenty years ago,
that it was no university, — “only a respectable
high-school, where they taught the dregs of learn-
ing.” A candidate for a chair in an Illinois college
demanded of the Board of Trustees that he must
~ be allowed some time for study. He was not
elected; for the Board said that they wanted no
man who had to study his lessons. They wanted
a professor who knew already all that he had to
teach. Men of second-hand ‘scholarship are, of
necessity, men of low ideals, however carefully
this fact may be disguised; a man of high ideals
of scholarship must be an investigator. He must
know and think for himself; and only such as do
this can be really great as teachers.

One vice of this system is its constant implica-
tion that when after a few weeks astudy is dropped,

it is thereby completed, —as though any subject
16

Dad SCIENCE SKETCHES.

could be completed in a college course! For the
first term or the first year spent in the study of
any subject whatever, cannot give that subject. It
gives only the elements of it, the dregs of it, the
juiceless skeleton, on which future work must add
the flesh and blood. Culture does not consist in
the knowledge of any particular subject or set of
subjects, nor is it the result of any order or method
by which such studies are taken. Its essential
feature is in the attitude which its possessor holds
towards the world and towards the best that has
been or can be thought or done init. Its central
quality is growth. The student gets nutriment
from what he digests. ‘A cultivated woman,”
Says a wise teacher of women, “ can afford to be
ignorant of a great many things, but she must
never stop growing.” Just so with the cultivated
man. And to the young man or young woman
who would grow, there is no agency so effective as

the influence of a great teacher. ‘‘ Have a univer-
sity in shanties, — nay, in tents,’ says Cardinal
Newman, “ but have great teachers in it.” “Under

and around and above all mere acquirements,” says
the writer whom I have just quoted, “is this subtle
infection of character, making the essence of the
higher education as different from mere erudition as
the fresh smell of the tender grape is from sheep-
skin.” The school of all schools in America which
has had the greatest influence on American scien-
tific teaching was held in an old barn on an unin-
habited island some eighteen miles from the shore.
It lasted barely three months, and in effect it had
but one teacher. The school at Penikese existed

EVOLUTION OF THE COLLEGE CURRICULUM. 243

in the personal presence of Agassiz; and when he
died, it vanished.

The final theory of the patchwork stage of the
eurticulum. Nas been, as’ I have said,’ that’ of
breadth of culture. The student should possess
the elements of everything, that no part of the
world should be a sealed book, that no part of his
mind should be developed at the expense of any
other. But the result was, ina general way, oftener
confusion than culture. The bed-rock of the mind
was never reached. So far as mental training was
concerned, almost every result of this curriculum
was distinctly inferior to that secured by the old
classical course. In broadening and modernizing
the curriculum, its sharpness as an implement was
lost. The only real gain in the change, according
to Professor Bain, has been “ the relaxation of the
grip of Classicism.” Another was perhaps that
many who got nothing from the old course could
with the right kind of teachers get something from
this. But a criticism I once heard at one of our
college exhibitions was still pertinent as to most of
the work done by either professor or student under
this régime: “What the boys want is to plough a
little deeper. There is nothing like subsoiling! ”

From the second to the third stage in its his-
tory the curriculum of the American college is
now passing. This is marked by the advent of
the elective system. It is impossible to study
everything or even many things in four years.
Thoroughness of any sort is incompatible with
the so-called breadth of culture characteristic of
the patchwork era. True breadth of culture comes

244 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

from breadth of life, and four years in college can-
not give it. The elective system, when carried out
in its entirety, involves the following elements:
(1) A substantial and thorough course preparatory
to the college course, — this course including much
that is now taught in the Freshman and Sopho- .
more years in most of our Western colleges;
(2) The placing of all subjects taught in the col-
lege course on an equality so far as the degree is
concerned.

The theory on which this system is based may
be briefly stated as this: No two students require
exactly the same line of work in order that their
time in college may be spent to the best advantage.
The college student is the best judge of his own
needs, or at any rate he can arrange his work for
himself better than it can be done beforehand by
any committee or by any consensus of educational
philosophers. The student may make mistakes in
this, as he may elsewhere in much more impor-
tant things in life; but here, as elsewhere, he must
bear the responsibility of these mistakes. The
development of this sense of responsibility is one
of the most effective agencies the college has to
promote the moral culture of the student. It is
better for the student himself that he should some-
times make mistakes than that he should through-
out his work be arbitrarily directed by others.
Freedom is an essential to scholarship as to man-
hood. In Emerson’s words, ‘Free should the
scholar be,— free and brave.’ Not long since I
met a young German scholar, a graduate of a
Prussian gymnasium, who has enrolled himself as

EVOLUTION OF THE COLLEGE CURRICULUM. 245

a student of English in an American college. To
him the free air of the American school was its
one good thing. It develops a self-reliant man-
hood in the youth at an age at which the student
of the gymnasium is yet in leading strings. In
furnishing the best of mental training in certain
fixed and narrow lines, the German student is
deprived of that strength which comes from self-
help and individual responsibility. It is no mere
accident that the need of severe college discipline
to guard against the various forms of traditional
college mischief has steadily declined with the
advent of freedom of choice in study.

The elective system, too, enables the student to
bring himself into contact with the best teachers, —
a matter vastly more important than that he should
select the best studies. And this system, there-
fore, involves a not unhealthy competition among
the instructors themselves. Incompetent, super-
ficial, or fossilized men will be crowded out or
frozen out, and the law of the survival of the fittest
will rule in the college faculties as elsewhere in
Nature.

The elective system has been adopted in greater
or less degree by most of our leading colleges;
while there are now very few schools, large or
small, which do not make some provision for
elective studies. That some degree of freedom
of choice in higher education is desirable, no one
now questions. The main differences of opinion
relate to the proportion which these elective stud-
ies ought to bear to those which are absolutely
required, and to the age or degree of advance-

246 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

ment at which election is safe; for no one advo-
cates freedom of choice'from infancy. There is
no such thing as a perfect curriculum, and all
college courses must represent in some degree a
compromise among varying influences, or else an
adaption to the needs of a certain class of students
to the exclusion of others. All systems are liable
to abuse; and as there have been many students
who made a farce of the classical course, or who
made it a mere excuse for four years spent in
boating or billiards or in social pleasures, so in the
same way can a farce be made of the freedom
allowed under the elective system.

Some of the chief deficiencies of the elective
system may be summed up under the following
heads: —

1. There are some students who from pure lazi-
ness select only the easiest studies, and go through
college with the very least work which is possible.
But this is no new thing, and it is not for such
students that the colleges exist. The college
should not obstruct the work of its earnest men
to keep its idlers and sneaks from wasting their
useless time. As Dr. Angell has said: “No plan
will make the college career of lazy men brilliant.
. . . The work of the college should be organized
to meet the needs of the earnest and aspiring
students rather than the infirmities and defects of
the indolent.” That most students as a matter of
fact do select the easiest studies is not true, as
statistics certainly show. It*is, in fact, simple non-
sense to call any study easy, if pursued in a serious
manner for a serious purpose. If any subject

EVOLUTION OF THE COLLEGE CURRICULUM. 247

draws to itself the idlers solely because it is easy,
the fault lies with the teacher. The success of
the elective system, as of any system, demands
the removal of inefficient teachers. The elective
system can never wholly succeed unless each
teacher has the power and the will to enforce
good work, to remove from his classes all idle or
inefficient students.

2. It is again objected that students having free-
dom of choice are likely to select erratic courses
in accordance with temporary whims, rather than
with any theory of educational development. This
again is true; but it is likewise true that the course
apparently the most erratic may be the one which
brings the student in contact with the strongest
men. Ifa Harvard student of a few years ago could
have made his college course exclusively of Botany,
Embryology, Greek, Anatomy, and Early English,
it would seem a singular combination. It would
sound differently if it were said that his teachers
in college were chiefly Asa Gray, Goodwin, Holmes,
Lowell, and Agassiz. It is also true, I think, that
the average course as chosen by the students
themselves is as capable of serious defence as
the average established course, evolved from the
pulling and hauling and patching and fitting of the
average college Faculty.

3. Another criticism is that the elective system
offers special temptation to undue or premature
specialization. This is true; and premature spe-
cialization, like other forms of precocious virtue, is
much to be deprecated. But experience does not
lead me to think that the danger of “undue spe-

248 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

cialization ” is at all a serious one. The current, in
college and out, is all setting the other way. The
fact that any man dares to specialize at all, shows
that he has a certain independence of character,
for the odds are against it. Specialization implies
thoroughness, and I believe that thorough knowl-
edge of something is the backbone of culture.
Special knowledge of any sort gives to each man
the base line by which other attainments may
be measured; and this unit of measurement in
scholarship can be acquired in no other way.
There can be, I think, no scholarship worthy of
the name, without some form of special knowledge
or special training as its central axis. The self-
respect of the scholar comes from thorough work.
The man who feels sure that he can know or can
do something is assured at once from the danger
of turgid conceit as from that of limp humility.
He can hold up his head among men with a cer-
tainty as to his proper place among them.

I have often heard college graduates complain,
“Oh, if I had only studied something in particu-
lar!” “Oh, if I had only learned how to study!”
“Oh, if the time I have wasted in Latin had been
spent in something else!” “Oh, if the time I
have wasted in something else had been spent in
Latin!’ There are few college men’ of jthe: pres;
ent generation who would not be better scholars
to-day if half their curriculum had been omitted
(not much matter what half) and the time had
been spent on the remaining subjects. But you
may say, ‘“ Would you let a man graduate igno-
rant of Chemistry, of Latin, of Logic, of Botany?”

ZVOLUTION OF THE COLLEGE CURRICULUM. 249

Well, yes, if superficiality in everything is the
alternative. It is well for a scholar to know some-
thing of each of these and of each of the subjects
in the most extended curriculum. But he purchases
this knowledge too dearly if he buys it at the ex-
pense of thoroughness in some line of study in
which a real interest has been awakened. “A
mistake is made,” says a recent writer, “in treat-
ing studies like boarders. They are taken in and
housed at so much a term, and at its end hostess
and guest part with mutual good-will.” Some
closer relation than this is essential to scholarship.

Then, again, with certain men in college the
alternative is either a close specialization or no
college life at all. Sometimes:a man may wish in
college to devote his entire time to a single subject,
as Physics or History, making himself an authority
on that subject, but without any effort for broad
eulture’at all; | This*is’) not often a wise course;
but wise or not, no one will deny that a college
career spent in this way is better than none at all,
and in after years such men are rarely a source
of shame to their Alma Mater. There is a certain
well-known naturalist whom I could name, who
was some ten years ago excluded from the Indiana
University, not because he was idle or vicious or
weak, but because he wanted to spend most of his
time in the study of Natural History. The college
had then no place for such a man as that, though
the same college is proud of him now. Who is to
say that it was better for him to leave college
than that he should be allowed to follow his own
bent? No knowledge comes amiss to an investi-

250 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

gator, but no investigator can afford to sacrifice
his specialty for the sake of breadth of culture.
Thoroughness is the main point, after all, and
should take precedence over versatility. I do not
mean to be understood as advocating narrowness
of sympathy or narrowness of culture of any sort.
The broadest education is none too broad for him
who aspires to lead in any part of the world of
thought. But the forces of the mind, to continue
the figure, should not be scattered in guerilla-bands,
but marshalled toward leadership.

4. Still another criticism of the elective system
is just the reverse of this. The elective system
permits undue scattering. It allows a student to
flit from one subject to another, thus acquiring
versatility without real training. This seems to
me a more serious fault than any of the others.
It can be remedied in part by a system of major
and minor studies, or a division of the work into
specialties to be pursued for a considerable length
of time, and electives which may be dropped after
a simple mastery of their elements. Some such
arrangement as this seems to me a desirable check
upon the elective plan, as it tends to insure per-
sistence in something, while retaining most of the
flexibility of the latter system.

There is still much to be said in favor of the
college in which discipline pure and simple is made
the chief aim of all the work. In such a school
those subjects — Languages, Sciences, and Phi-
losophy — which serve the ends of training best
should be taught, and such subjects only. Whether
anything more suitable for this purpose than the

EVOLUTION OF THE COLLEGE CURRICULUM. 251,

Ancient Classics and Mathematics has yet been
found, I shall not try to say; but the aims of such
a course should be the same in kind as that of the
classical curriculum. It may perhaps be possible
to teach better things and in a better way than
was done in the classical schools ; but all attempts
at combining in a prescribed curriculum mental
discipline and a wide range of subjects must result
in failure, so far as training the mind is concerned.
You cannot teach everything to every student.
Either the college or the student must choose.

Some of the weakest features of our college sys-
tem centre, it seems to me, about the conventional
term of four years, and the conventional Bachelor's
degree. Students are encouraged to work for the
degree rather than for culture; all work of the stu-
dent is estimated by the bulk rather than by the
quality. In an ideal condition of things the stu-
dent’s work ought not to be estimated at all.
Marks and terms are clumsy devices, more suitable
for measuring cord-wood than culture. The degree
is the official seal of completion set on something
which in the nature of things can never be com-
pleted. For the college is not a machine for filling
the student on the sausage-stuffer plan. It is, at
best, a place for self-culture. All culture is self-
culture, or it is no culture at all. Libraries, appa-
ratus, museums, teachers even, are useless to the
student, unless the student use them. Teachers
give inspiration and criticism; fellow-students do
the same; but the road to wisdom is a solitary
road to be traversed in Indian file.

We may lay on the Bachelor's degree at once

252 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

too much stress or too little. Too much; for the
degree is treated as if it were an end in itself.
Too little; for every college in our land gives this
degree to men whose sole claim to higher edu-
cation consists in a four years’ residence in a
college town, a four years’ ‘‘ exposure to scholas-
tic influences.” They make their count of marks
on the college books; and if by hook or crook
they can keep “regular,” the march of time will
carry them through. Then again the competi-
tion for numbers among our would-be “ populous
schools” often leads to discrepancies between the.
actual requirements and those laid down in the
published catalogues. Thus low standards are
adopted for mere numbers’ sake. And _ besides
the reputable institutions, all sorts of mushroom
establishments in private hands have in the West-
ern States been authorized by law to grant the
Bachelor’s degree, with practically no scholastic
requirements at all.

When the colleges in the patchwork era at-
tempted to teach in four years a little of every-
thing, it was found that by the same process a
little of everything could likewise be given in two
years, or even in one year, by carrying the process
of condensation a little farther. I received a letter
not long ago from the President of an alleged col-
lege in Kansas, —a school which gives the Bach-
elor’s degree on a course a year or two long,
begun at any time, and with no special preparation.
He said that he had exactly one year of daily reci-
tations to devote to all the sciences, each completed
in turn. He was especially anxious to make no

EVOLUTION OF THE COLLEGE CURRICULUM. 253

mistake in the logical order of arrangement of
these sciences, — whether it should be Chemistry,
Physics, Geology, Physiology, Zodlogy, and Bot-
any, or whether the order would be better if re-
versed. Of course, the only answer I could make
was that the order was of little importance, and
that if a year was all the time he had for all of
them, it would be better to omit any five or at least
any four, and to spend his time on the rest. But
my advice was not followed, and I have no doubt
that he found room at last to work all of them in,
and a term of Astronomy and one of Political
Economy besides. |

I quote, from the catalogue of an alleged “ col-
lege” in Indiana, a statement in regard to its
“Scientific Course” of one year’s duration, which
leads to a degree called ‘‘ Bachelor of Science: ”
“The graduates [of this course] are polished
speakers as well as accurate mathematicians, thor-
ough scientists, and accomplished Latin scholars.
Graduates from this department fill good positions,
and are everywhere known as leaders, because of
their energy, perseverance, enthusiasm, and never-
ceasing activity,’—and so on. ‘The so-called
“insurmountable barrier” to a degree ‘“‘ formed by
the long courses of the colleges and State Normal
Schools,” is at once blown away, and all obstacles
which debar indolence and ignorance from the
privileges of scholarship once for all removed.

I have a friend in this town (Indianapolis), a
most estimable gentleman in the real estate and
rental business, who some forty years ago received
from the legislature of the State of Indiana a char-

254 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

ter which constituted him a “ University,” entitled
to hold $200,000 in property free from all taxes,
‘to confer all academic degrees, and to enjoy all
the rights and privileges of the most favored insti-
tutions.” This gentleman has been merciful to his
fellow-citizens. He has gone about his business
and has conferred no degrees, not even on himself.
But he has the legal right to do it, and this incident
shows with what laxness the laws of our own
and other States view the granting of collegiate
degrees. Such is the degradation of the Bachelor's
degree, which has already brought the name of
American graduate into contempt.

Still, at the best, the Bachelor's degree is an
empty name. It is not in America, as in Europe,
a key to any sort of personal advancement. And
it is better that it should be so. It is better for
each man to stand on his own merits as shown by
his own work, not as attested by any college faculty.
‘The student may flourish his college diploma,”
says Dr. J. P. Lesley, “ but the world cares little for
that baby badge.” In certain educational circles,
perhaps, a college degree is a help, or rather it may
represent a certain minimum of culture which is
expected of all its members. We suppose that a
college professor must hold a college degree. But
this is not always the case. I can count on my fin-
gers, taking every one, a list of some of the ablest of
Indiana’s college teachers to-day, who have never
been graduated from any college. Most of these
hold honorary degrees, it is true; but such degrees
are empty tributes of the college to success of one
sort or another, won without the college’s help.

EVOLUTION OF THE COLLEGE CURRICULUM. 255

It is true, no doubt, that the hope of a degree
coaxes some men to stay in college longer than
they otherwise would. This seems a good thing,
but is it? Higher education is not working for a
degree. It may be incompatible with it. It is
putting a cheap price on culture to induce the stu-
dent to take it, not because he wants it, but be-
cause he wants something else. If a student’s
work is purely perfunctory, the sooner he leaves it
for something real the better. If the degree is
merely a bait to lure him on, it is unworthy alike
of the college and of the student.

Shall we then abandon the Bachelor’s degree,
and give to each student merely the certificates of
the professors under whom he has studied ? Some
day, perhaps, but certainly not yet. It was a French
writer, Joubert, who said, “ All ¢ruzh it is not well
to tell; but all ¢vuthks it will be well to tell when
we can all tell them together.” There is the wis-
dom of the serpent in this saying. Degrees are
childish things, and it would be well to lay them
aside; but this we cannot do till we can all do it
together. Some ten years ago, Chancellor Gregory
of the State University of Illinois held the opinion
that the college degrees were undesirable adjuncts of
college training. It was decided that by the Uni-
versity of Illinois no degrees should be granted.
But this decision worked adversely to the interests
of the college. Many students came there to study,
who went elsewhere to complete their work. The
degree might be useless, but the students wanted it,
and went to other colleges where degrees were still
given. The times were not ready for this change,

256 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

and the giving of degrees has been resumed —
wisely, I .think—by the institution in question.

_ The same end is being reached in another way
by the University of Virginia and some others
which are following its lead. In these schools
the Bachelor’s degree receives little or no atten-
tion, being practically merged in the higher re-
quirements for the degree of Master of Arts. By
merging both these in the still higher degree of
Doctor of Philosophy, we have a condition similar
to that in the German Universities, where only the
Doctor’s degree is now given. Towards this condi-
tion our universities are tending; and through the
change of the college into the university the Bach-
elor’s degree may in time disappear. But this re-
form — if reform it be — can be the work of no one
man or one school. It must come as a natural
result of the development of the college. |

So much for the phases, past and present, of
the college curriculum in America. What of the
future? Will there be a fourth, a fifth, a sixth
stage in its development; or is the system now
full-grown, and the elective plan, as we know it, its
full fruition?

We can be sure that the world is still moving.
Nothing is stable, nothing is perpetual, nothing is
sufficient. With the new needs and the new men
of the future will come new departments, new
methods, and new ideas. The curriculum in its
original sense of a little race-course, with thirty-six
hurdles to be leaped in thirty-six months, with a
crown of laurel berries at the end, will very soon
be no more. Special courses of study in as many

EVOLUTION OF THE COLLEGE CURRICULUM. 257

special departments are already taking its place.
The traditional four years of college training will
disappear; and with it the sharp lines which have
so long set apart the Freshmen, Sophomores, Jun-
iors, and Seniors. Later on, but not far in the
next century, the Bachelor’s degree will cease to be
regarded; and its kindred, the degree of the Mas-
ter and the Doctor, may perhaps not survive it long.
All these things are forms, and forms only, — not
substance; and the substance of our higher edu-
cation is fast outgrowing them. College marks,
college honors, college courses, college degrees, —
all these things belong, with the college cap and
gown and the wreath of laurel berries, to the baby-
hood of culture. They are part of our inheritance
from the past, — from the time when scholarship
was not manhood, when the life of the student had
no relation to the life of the world.

The American college of the future will be a
place for self-culture. In the words of Emerson:
“Colleges can only serve us when they aim not to
drill, but to create; when they gather from far
every ray of various genius to their hospitable
halls, and by the concentrated fires set the hearts
of their youth on flame.”

The chief need of a college organization is to
bring great teachers together, that their combined
influence may effect results which cannot be
reached in isolation. In other words, the use of a
college is to produce a college atmosphere, — such
an atmosphere as formed itself around Arnold at
Rugby, around Doéllinger at Munich, around Wer-
ner at Freiberg, around Agassiz at Cambridge,

17

258 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

around Mark Hopkins at Williamstown, — around
all great teachers everywhere. The various so-
called colleges and universities in America will grad-
ually differentiate into universities and preparatory
schools, and the ultimate line of division will be
one of money as well as one of management. To
do university work requires better-trained profes-
sors, and many more of them, than to teach the
elements of Latin, Greek, and Mathematics. This
means more salaries and larger salaries than are
now paid. Schools ill endowed or not endowed at »
all cannot attempt this. Those who can do it will
do it, and the success of Johns Hopkins University
shows how this is to be done. The ideas of
Lehrfrethett and Lernfretheit, — freedom of teach-
ing and freedom of study, — on which the German
university is based, will become a central feature
of the American college system.

The college as a separate factor in our educa-
tional system may in time disappear by its mer-
gence into the preparatory school on the one
hand and into the university on the other. We
should then reach a condition of things not unlike
that seen in Germany, where nothing intervenes
between the public high school or gymnasium, in
which all work is prescribed, and the university
itself, in which all work is free. The position of
the preparatory school in this connection is by
no means one to be despised. A strong prepara-
tory school is far more valuable to the community
than a weak college. The work of the secondary
schools is the foundation of everything higher.
It should be broadened and deepened so as to

EVOLUTION OF THE COLLEGE CURRICULUM. 259

include all subjects which experience shows to
belong to the necessary groundwork of higher
education. I need not go over a list of these sub-
jects. The future will make its own list, and the
efforts of the colleges will not change it.

But here, it seems to me, is one of the chief diffi-
culties in the way of our colleges, east and west.
No school in Indiana seems content to be a pre-
paratory school. Each one aims to give a general
education; to be a university in a small way, a
“university for the poor,” —a poor university. In
the words of Lowell: ‘‘ The public schools teach
too little or too much: too little, if education is
to go no further; too many things, if what is
taught is to be taught thoroughly. And the more
they seem to teach, the less likely is education to
go further; for it is one of the weaknesses of
democracy to be satisfied with the second best
if it appear to answer the purpose tolerably well,
and to be cheaper, as it never is in the long run.”
In other words, the high schools, too, are in the
patchwork era, and popular feeling tends to keep
them there, to satisfy by a show of education the
vast majority of their students who are likely to
go no farther. The growth in educational systems
is from above downwards, and the right kind of
preparatory schools will arise only in response to
the demands of real universities. In historical
sequence Oxford must precede Rugby, and the
German university must come before the gymna-
sium. The American high school will not reach,
I think, the standard of the German gymnasium,
which gives training not inferior in amount or kind

260 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

to that of our best classical colleges; for in the

American system the university methods of work
will begin lower down than in Germany. This is
associated with our qualities as a people as com-
pared with the Germans. The American youth of
twenty-one is more independent, more self-reliant,
and so far as his relation to the world is concerned,
more mature than the average German student is
at twenty-five. America is, of all lands, the land of
protestantism; and in education, as in other things,
every American is a law unto himself. This fact
has its bad side as well as its good side, but is a
fact nevertheless; and as educators of Americans
we must take it into account.

The old forms in education are passing away;
the old barriers are being taken down; the old
restraints are being removed or relegated to the
days of boyhood and girlhood. All this we can
see, for it takes place before our eyes; it is taking
place under our hands, and this whether we wish
it or not. The college boy is becoming a man, and
the college woman now stands beside him. Not all
are ready for freedom, perhaps, who have freedom
thrust upon them. There are not a few students
to whom an enforced discipline is the only road
to scholarship. But with all imaginable drawbacks
our college work in America yields every year
better results than it has ever yielded before. We
may be sure that in the future, even more than
in the past, the American college, the American
university, will stand in the front rank of civilizing
influences.

AD PEND) Xx.

| os) a
+) ANd

a ae Kale:

=
) .1o

eo) mi vee A

Pepe tN DEX:

LIST OF THE SCIENTIFIC PAPERS OF
DAVID S. JORDAN.

1873 TO 1887.

1873.
. THE Cotors oF VEGETATION. American Naturalist, February,

1873; Pp. 65-70.
. Hoogr-rRot IN SHEEP. Prairie Farmer, 1873.

1874.

. A PoputarR Key TO THE BIRDS, REPTILES, BATRACHIANS, AND
FISHES OF THE NORTHERN UNITED STATES EAST OF THE MIs-
sIssipPI River. Appleton, Wis., May, 1874; pp. too. (Jordan
and Van Vleck. Balfour H. Van Vleck, Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist.,
Boston, Mass.)

. THE FLORA OF PENIKESE ISLAND. Amer. Nat., April; pp. 193-
197.

. A Kgy TO THE HIGHER ALGH OF THE ATLANTIC COAST BE-
TWEEN NEWFOUNDLAND AND FLoripaA. Amer. Nat., July and
August, 1874.

1875.

. Tue Sisco oF LAKE TIPPECANOE. Amer. Nat., March, 1875; pp.
135-138.

. THE Sisco oF LAKE TIPPECANOE AND ITS RELATIVES. Rept.
Geol. Surv., Indiana, for 1875.

. A SYNOPSIS OF THE FISHES TO BE LOOKED FOR IN INDIANA.

. Rept. Geol. Surv., Indiana, for 1875.

1876.
. THE GENUS Pomoxys RAFINESQUE. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci., Phila-
delphia, 1876; pp. 68-71. (Jordan and Copeland. Herbert Edson
Copeland, Indianapolis, Ind.)

264 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

10.

II.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.
20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

CONCERNING THE FISHES OF THE ICHTHYOLOGIA OHIENSIS,
Bull. Buffalo Soc. Nat. Hist., 1876; pp. 91-97.

MANUAL OF THE VERTEBRATES OF THE NORTHERN UNITED
STATES, including the District east of the Mississippi River and
north of North Carolina and Tennessee, exclusive of Marine Spe-
cies. Chicago, 1876; June.

Jounny Darters. Amer. Nat., June, 1876; pp. 335-341. (Jordan
and Copeland.)

1877.

THE SAND DARTER. Amer. Nat., February, 1877; pp. 86-88.
(Jordan and Copeland.)

List oF FisHES OF INDIANA. Indiana Farmer, Jan. 17, 1877.
(Jordan and Gilbert. Charles Henry Gilbert, Ph.D., University
of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio.)

A Story OF A STONE. St. Nicholas, February, 1877; (reprinted in
Indiana School Journal, Sheldon’s Fourth Reader, and elsewhere.)
CHECK LIST OF THE FISHES OF THE FRESH WATERS OF NORTH
AMERICA. Bull. Buffalo Soc. Nat. Hist., I., 1876; pp. 133-164;

February, 1877. (Jordan and Copeland.)

ON THE FISHES OF NORTHERN INDIANA. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci.,
Philadelphia, June, 1877; pp. 42-82.

ON THE GENERA OF NoRTH AMERICAN FRESH-WATER FISHES.
Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci., Philadelphia, 1877; pp. 83-104. (Jordan
and Gilbert.)

A PARTIAL SYNOPSIS OF THE FISHES OF UPPER GEORGIA. Ann.
Lyc. Nat. Hist., New York, vol. xi., 1876; pp. 307-377. June,
1877.

CONTRIBUTIONS TO NORTH AMERICAN ICHTHYOLOGY, I. Review
of Rafinesque’s Memoirs on North American Fishes. Bull. U.S.
Nat. Mus., IX., 1877; p. 53.

CONTRIBUTIONS TO NORTH AMERICAN ICHTHYOLOGY, II. A.
Notes on Cottide, Etheostomatide, Percide, Centrarchide, etc.,
with Revisions of Genera and Descriptions of new or little known
Species. B. Synopsis of the Si/uride of the United States. Bull.
Ue iS.Nat. Nlus,, X., 18775 pp. 216.

On LAGOCHILA, A NEW GENUS OF CATOSTOMOID FISHES. Proc.
Acad. Nat. Sci., Philadelphia, 1877; pp. 280-283. (Jordan and
Brayton. Alembert Winthrop Brayton, M.D., Indianapolis, Ind.)

ON THE DISTRIBUTION OF FRESH-WATER FISHES. Amer. Nat.,
October, 1877; pp. 607-613.

1878.

ON THE DISTRIBUTION OF FRESH-WATER FISHES OF THE UNITED
States. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci., L, 1877; pp. 92-120; 1878.

A CATALOGUE OF THE FISHES OF ILLINOIS. Bull. Illinois Lab.
Nat. Hist., II., Bloomington, Ill., June, 1878.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

3.

32.

33-

34

35°

37:

APPENDIX. 265

CATALOGUE OF THE FISHES OF INDIANA. In Twenty-seventh
Annual Report Indiana State Board of Agriculture, 1877, vol. xix.
Indianapolis, 1878.

MANUAL OF THE VERTEBRATES OF THE NORTHERN UNITED
STATES, including the District east of the Mississippi River and
north of North Carolina and Tennessee, exclusive of Marine Spe-
cies. Second edition, revised and enlarged. Chicago, June, 1878;
PP: 407.

CONTRIBUTIONS TO NoRTH AMERICAN ICHTHYOLOGY, based, pri-
marily, on the Collections of the United States National Museum.
IlI. A. On the Distribution of the Fishes of the Alleghany Region
of South Carolina, Georgia, and Tennessee, with Descriptions of new
or little known Species. (Jordan and Brayton.) B. A Synopsis
of the Family Catostomide. Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus., XII., 1878;
Pp. 237-

NOTES ON A COLLECTION OF FISHES FROM CLACKAMAS RIVER,
OREGON. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 1878; p. 691.

NOTES ON A COLLECTION OF FISHES FROM THE RIO GRANDE,
AT BROWNSVILLE, TEXAS, Bull. U.S. Geol. Surv. Terr., IV.,
1878; pp. 397-406.

A CATALOGUE OF THE FISHES OF THE FRESH WATERS OF NoRTH
AMERICA, Bull. U.S. Geol. Surv. Terr., IV., 1878; pp. 407-442.

NOTES ON A COLLECTION OF FISHES FROM THE RIO GRANDE,
AT BROWNSVILLE, TEXAS, continued. Bull. U.S. Geol. Surv.
Terr., IV., 1878; pp. 663-667.

REPORT ON THE COLLECTION OF FISHES MADE BY Dr. ELLI-
oTT Cours, U.S.A., IN DAKOTA AND MONTANA, DURING
THE SEASONS OF 1873 AND 1874. Bull. U.S. Geol. Surv., IV.,
1878 ; pp. 777-799-

NOTES ON THE FISHES OF BEAUFORT HARBOR, NORTH CARO-
LINA. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 1878; pp. 365-388. (Jordan and
Gilbert.)

REPORT ON THE FISHES COLLECTED DURING THE YEARS 1875,
1876, AND 1877, IN CALIFORNIA AND NEVADA. Rept. Geol.
Surv. W. tooth Mer. for 1878. Appendix K.; pp 187-200. (Jor-
dan and Henshaw. H. W. Henshaw, U.S. Geol. Survey, Wash-
ington, D. C.)

1880.

. MANUAL OF THE VERTEBRATES OF THE NORTHERN UNITED

STATES, including the District east of the Mississippi River and

orth of North Carolina and Tennessee, exclusive of Marine
Species. Third edition, revised and enlarged. Chicago, 1880;
pp. 406.

NOTES ON CERTAIN TYPICAL SPECIMENS OF AMERICAN FISHES
IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM AND IN THE MUSEUM D’HISTOIRE
NATURELLE AT PARIs. Proc, U.S. Nat. Mus., 1879; pp. 218-
226. January, 1880.

266 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

38.

oo:

40.

41.

42,

43.

44.

45.

46.

47.

48.

49.
50.

Bs

52.

53°

54.

DESCRIPTIONS OF NEW SPECIES OF NORTH AMERICAN FISHES,
Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., 1879; p. 235. January, 1880.

NOTES ON A COLLECTION OF FISHES OBTAINED IN THE STREAMS
OF GUANAJUATO, AND IN CHAPALA LAKE, MEXICO, BY PROF.
A. DuGeEs. Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., 1879; p. 298. March,
1880.

NOTES ON A COLLECTION OF FISHES FROM EAST FLORIDA, OB-
TAINED BY DR. J. A. HENSHALL. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 1880;
pp- 17-21.

NOTES ON A COLLECTION OF FISHES FROM ST. JOHN’S RIVER,
FLORIDA, OBTAINED BY Mr. A. H. Curtiss. Proc. U.S. Nat.
Mus., 1880; p. 22.

NOTES ON A COLLECTION OF FISHES FROM SAN DIEGO, CALI-
FORNIA. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 1880; pp. 23-34. (Jordan and
Gilbert.)

DESCRIPTION OF A NEW FLOUNDER (Xystreurys liolepis) FROM
SANTA CATALINA ISLAND, CALIFORNIA. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus.,
1880; pp. 34-36. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

DESCRIPTION OF A NEW RaAy (Platyrhina triseriata) FROM THE
CoaAsT OF CALIFORNIA. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 1880; pp. 36-38.
(Jordan and Gilbert.) ;

DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SPECIES OF ‘‘ ROCK Cop” (Sebastich-
thys serriceps) FROM THE COAST OF CALIFORNIA. Proc. Nat.
Mus., 1880; pp. 38-40. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

ON THE OCCURRENCE OF CEPHALOSCYLLIUM LATICEPS (Dumeril)
Gill ON THE COAST OF CALIFORNIA. Proc. Nat. Mus., 1880;
pp. 40-42. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

ON THE OIL SHARK OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA (Galeorhinus
galeus). Proc. Nat. Mus., 1880; p. 42. (Jordan and Gilbert.)
DESCRIPTION OF A NEW FLOUNDER (Pleuronichthys verticalis)
FROM THE COAST OF CALIFORNIA, with Notes on other Species.

Proc. Nat. Mus., 1880; pp. 49-51. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

NoTES ON SHARKS FROM THE COAST OF CALIFORNIA. Proc.
Nat. Mus., 1880; pp. 51-52. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

ON THE GENERIC RELATIONS OF PLATYRHINA EXASPERATA.
Proc. Nat. Mus., 1880; p. 53. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SPECIES OF SEBASTICHTHYS (Scbastich-
thys miniatus) FROM MONTEREY BAY, CALIFORNIA. Proc. Nat.
Mus., 1880; pp. 70-73. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SPECIES OF ROCK-FIsH (Sebastichthys
carnatus) FROM THE COAST OF CALIFORNIA. Proc. Nat. Mus.,
1880; pp. 73-75. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SPECIES OF RAY (aia stellulata) FROM
MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA. Proc. Nat. Mus., 1880; pp. 133-135.
(Jordan and Gilbert.)

DESCRIPTIONS OF NEW SPECIES OF XIPHISTER AND APODICHTHYS
FROM MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA. Proc. Nat. Mus., 1880; pp.
135-140. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

55°

56.

57°

58.

59-

60.

61.

62.

66.

67.

68.

69.

APPENDIX. 267

DESCRIPTION OF TWO NEW SPECIES OF SEBASTICHTHYS (Sedas-
tichthys entomelas AND Sebastichthys rhodochloris) ¥ROM MON-
TEREY BAY, CALIFORNIA. Proc. Nat. Mus., 1880; pp. 142-146.
(Jordan and Gilbert.)

DESCRIPTION OF A NEW AGONOID FIsH (Srachyopsis xyosternus)
FROM MONTEREY BAY, CALIFORNIA. Proc. Nat. Mus., 1880;
pp- 152-154. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

DESCRIPTION OF A NEW FLOUNDER (//ipfoglossoides exilis) FROM
THE COAST OF CALIFORNIA. Proc. Nat. Mus., 1880; pp. 154-
156. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SPECIES OF RAY (aia rhina) FROM THE
Coast OF CALIFORNIA. Proc. Nat. Mus., 1880; pp. 251-253.
(Jordan and Gilbert.)

DESCRIPTION OF TWO NEW SPECIES OF FISHES (Ascelichthys
rhodorus AND Scytalina cerdale) FROM NEAH BAy, WASHING-
TON TERRITORY. Proc. Nat. Mus., 1880; pp. 264-268. (Jordan
and Gilbert.)

DESCRIPTION OF TWO NEW SPECIES OF SCOPELOID FISHES
(Sudis ringens AND Myctophum crenulare) FROM SANTA BAR-
BARA CHANNEL, CALIFORNIA. Proc. Nat. Mus., 1880; pp. 273-
276. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

DESCRIPTION OF TWO NEW SPECIES OF FLOUNDERS (Parophrys
ischyrus AND Hippoglossoides elassodon) FROM PUGET SOUND.
Proc. Nat. Mus., 1880; pp. 276-280. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

DESCRIPTION OF SEVEN NEW SPECIES OF SEBASTOID FISHES
FROM THE COAST OF CALIFORNIA. Proc. Nat. Mus., 1880; pp.
287-298. (Jordan and Gilbert. )

. DESCRIPTION OF A NEW EMBIOTOCOID (Adeona aurora) FROM

MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA, with Notes on a related Species. Proc.
Nat. Mus., 1880; pp. 299-301. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

. DESCRIPTION OF A NEW FLOUNDER (Platysomatichthys stomtias)

FROM THE COAST OF CALIFORNIA. Proc. Nat. Mus., 1880}; pp.
301-303. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

. DESCRIPTION OF A NEW EMBIOTOCOID FISH (Cymatogaster rosa-

ceus) FROM THE COAST OF CALIFORNIA. Proc. Nat. Mus., 1880;
Pp- 303-305. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SPECIES OF DEEP-WATER FISH (Jcich-
thys lockingtoni) FROM THE COAST OF CALIFORNIA. Proc. Nat.
Mus., 1880; pp. 305-308. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

DESCRIPTION OF A NEW EmpBiorocoip Fisu (Détrema atripes)
FROM THE COAST OF CALIFORNIA. Proc. Nat. Mus., 1880; pp.
320-322. (Jordan and Gilbert. )

DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SCORPANOID FISH (Sebastichthys mali-
ger) FROM THE COAST OF CALIFORNIA. Proc. Nat. Mus., 1880;
Pp- 322-324. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

NOTE ON A FORGOTTEN PAPER OF DR. AYRES, AND ITS BEARING
ON THE NOMENCLATURE OF THE CYPRINOID FISHES OF THE
SAN FRANCISCO MARKETS. Proc. Nat. Mus., 1880; pp. 325-327.

268 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

70.

NOTE ON SEMA AND DACENTRUS. Proc. Nat. Mus., 1880; p. 327.

71. DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SCORPANOID FIsuH (Sedastichthys pro-

72.

73:

74-

75:

76.

77°

78.

79:

80.
$1.

82.

83.
84.

85.

86.

viger) FROM MONTEREY Bay, CALIFORNIA. Proc. Nat. Mus.,
1880; pp. 327-329. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

DESCRIPTION OF A NEW AGONOID (Agonus vulsus) FROM THE
CoASsT OF CALIFORNIA. Proc. Nat. Mus., 1880; pp. 330-332.
(Jordan and Gilbert.)

DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SPECIES OF HEMIRHAMPHUS (Hemi-
rhamphus rosé) FROM THE COAST OF CALIFORNIA. Proc. Nat.
Mus., 1880; pp. 335-336. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SPECIES OF NOTIDANOID SHARK (Hex-
anchus corinus) FROM THE PACIFIC COAST OF THE UNITED
STATES. Proc. Nat. Mus., 18803; pp. 352-355. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SPECIES OF NEMICHTHYS (emichthys
avocetta) FROM PUGET SOUND. Proc. Nat. Mus., 1880; pp.
409-410. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SPECIES OF PARALEPIS (Paralefis co-
ruscans) FROM THE STRAITS OF JUAN DE Fuca. Proc. Nat.
Mus., 1880; pp. 411-413. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

LIsT OF THE FISHES OF THE PACIFIC COAST OF THE UNITED
STATES, with a Table showing the Distribution of the Species.
Proc. Nat. Mus., 1880; pp. 452-458. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

SCIENTIFIC NAMES OF THE BLACK Bass. Forest and Stream,
Nov. 28, 1880; p. 340. (Reprinted in Henshall’s “ Book of the
Black Bass.’’)

DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SPECIES OF CARANX (Caranx beani)
FROM BEAUFORT, NORTH CAROLINA. Proc. Nat. Mus., 1880;
pp. 486-488.

ON THE GENERIC RELATIONS OF BELONE EXILIS, Grd. Proc.
Nat. Mus., 1880; p. 459. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

NOTES ON A COLLECTION OF FISHES FROM UTAH LAKE. Proc.
Nat. Mus, 1880; p. 459. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SPECIES OF Rock FIsH (Sebastichthys
chrysomelas) FROM THE COAST OF CALIFORNIA. Proc. Nat.
Mus., 1880; p. 465. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

1881.

OBSERVATIONS ON THE SALMON OF THE PAciFic. Amer. Nat.,
March, 1881; pp. 177-186. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

CHECK LIsT OF DUPLICATES OF FISHES FROM THE PACIFIC ©
Coast OF NORTH AMERICA, distributed by the Smithsonian In-
stitution in behalf of the United States National Museum, 1881.
Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 1881; pp. 1-18. (Jordan and Jouy. Pierre
Louis Jouy, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D. C.)

NOTES ON THE FISHES OF THE PACIFIC COAST OF THE UNITED
STATES. Proc. Nat. Mus., 1881: pp. 29-70. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

DESCRIPTION OF SEBASTICHTHYS MYSTINUS. Proc. Nat. Mus.,
1881 ; pp. 70-72. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

87.

88.
89.
go.

gl.

92

e

93:

94

95-

96.

97-

98.

99-

100.
TOI.
102.

103.

APPENDIX. 269

DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SPECIES OF PTYCHOCHILUS (Ptychochi-
lus harfordi) FROM SACRAMENTO RIVER. Proc. Nat. Mus.,
1881; pp. 72-73. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

NOTE ON RAIA INORNATA. Proc. Nat. Mus., 1881; pp. 73-74.
(Jordan and Gilbert. )

STORY OF A SALMON. Popular Science Monthly, May, 1881; pp.
1-6.

ON THE MOVEMENTS OF PLANTS. Review of Darwin’s “ Power of
Movement in Plants.” Dial, March, 1881.

NOTES ON A COLLECTION OF FISHES MADE BY LiEUT. HENRY
E. NicHots, U.S. N., ON THE WEsT Coast OF MEXxICco, with
Descriptions of new Species. Proc. Nat. Mus., 1881; pp. 225-
233. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

LisT OF FISHES COLLECTED BY LiEUT. HENRY E. NICHOLS,
U.S.N, IN THE GULF OF CALIFORNIA, AND ON THE WEST
Coast OF LOWER CALIFORNIA, with Descriptions of four new
Species. Proc. Nat. Mus., 1881; pp. 273-279. (Jordan and Gilbert )

DESCRIPTION OF THIRTY-THREE NEW SPECIES OF FISHES FROM
MAZATLAN, Mexico. Proc. Nat. Mus., 1881; pp. 338-365.
(Jordan and Gilbert.)

DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SPECIES OF POMADASYS FROM MAZAT-
LAN, with a Key to the Species known to inhabit the Pacific Coasts
of Tropical America. Proc. Nat. Mus., 1881; pp. 383-388. (Jor-
dan and Gilbert.)

DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SPECIES OF XENICHTHYS (Xenichthys
xenurus) FROM THE WEST COAST OF CENTRAL AMERICA,
Proc. Nat. Mus., 1881; p. 454. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

DESCRIPTION OF FIVE NEW SPECIES OF FISHES FROM MAZAT-
LAN, MExIco. Proc. Nat. Mus., 1881; pp. 458-463. (Jordan
and Gilbert.)

An ASCENT OF THE MATTERHORN. Our Continent, Nov. 2, 1881.

1882.

DESCRIPTION OF FOUR NEW SPECIES OF SHARKS FROM MAZAT-
LAN, MExIco. Proc. Nat. Mus., 1882; pp. 102-110. (Jordan and
Gilbert.)

DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SHARK (Carcharias lamiella) FROM SAN
DIEGO, CALIFORNIA. Proc. Nat. Mus., 1882; pp. 110-111.
(Jordan and Gilbert.)

BuLit-TROUT AND PoMPANO. Forest and Stream, April 20, 1882.

DARWIN. Dial, May, 1882; p. 2.

HUXLEY’s SCIENCE AND CULTURE. Review in Dial, May, 1882;
p- 9.

DESCRIPTIONS OF NINETEEN NEW SPECIES OF FISHES FROM
THE BAY OF PANAMA. Bull. U.S. Fish. Comm.; pp. 306-365.
June, 1882. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

104. SOME ICHTHYOLOGICAL TERMS, Forest and Stream, Aug. 20,

1882.

270 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

105.

106.

107

108.

109.

IIo.

III.

112.

LES:

114.

115.
116.

117.

118.

1IQ.
120.

121.

THE AIR WE BREATHE. Review of Tyndall’s “ Floating Matter
in the Air.’’ Dial, September, 1882; pp. go-93.

NOTES ON FISHES OBSERVED ABOUT PENSACOLA, FLORIDA, AND
GALVESTON, TEXAS, with Descriptions of new Species. Proc.
Nat. Mus., 1882; pp. 241-307. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SPECIES OF BLENNY (Jsesthes Gilberti)
FROM SANTA BARBARA, CALIFORNIA. Proc. Nat. Mus., 1882;
PP- 349-351-

DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SPECIES OF CONODON (Conodon serri-
jer) FROM BOCA SOLEDAD, LOWER CALIFORNIA. Proc. Nat.
Mus., 1882; pp. 351-352. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

CATALOGUE OF THE FISHES COLLECTED BY MR. JOHN XANTUS
AT CAPE SAN LUCAS, WHICH ARE NOW IN THE UNITED
STATES NATIONAL MuSEvuM, with Descriptions of eight new
Species. Proc. Nat. Mus., 1882; pp. 353-371. (Jordan and
Gilbert.)

List OF FISHES COLLECTED BY MR. JOHN XANTUS AT COLIMA,
Mexico. Proc. Nat. Mus., 1882; pp. 371-372. (Jordan and
Gilbert, )

List OF FISHES COLLECTED AT PANAMA BY CAPT. JOHN M.
Dow, NOW IN THE UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM.
Proc. Nat. Mus., 1882; pp. 373-378. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

LisT OF A COLLECTION OF FISHES MADE BY MR. L. BELDING,
NEAR CAPE SAN LuCAS, LOWER CALIFORNIA. Proc. Nat.
Mus., 1882; pp. 378-381. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

List oF FISHES COLLECTED AT PANAMA BY REv. MR. ROWELL,
NOW PRESERVED IN THE UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM.
Proc. Nat. Mus., 1882; pp. 381-382. (Jordan and Gilbert. )

DESCRIPTIONS OF TWO NEW SPECIES OF FISHES (Sebastichthys
umbrosus AND Citharichthys stigm@us) COLLECTED AT SANTA
BARBARA, CALIFORNIA, BY ANDREA LARCO, Proc. Nat. Mus.,
1882; pp. 410-412. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

THE GASPER-GOU. Forest and Stream, Oct. 5, 1882; p. 192.

A REVIEW OF THE SILUROID FISHES FOUND ON THE PACIFIC
CoAsT OF TROPICAL AMERICA, with Descriptions of three new
Species. Bull. U. S. Fish. Comm., 1882; pp. 34-54. (Jordan
and. Gilbert.)

List OF FISHES COLLECTED AT MAZATLAN, MEXICO, BY CHARLES
H. GILBERT. Bull. U. S. Fish Comm., 1882; pp. 105-108.
(Jordan and Gilbert.)

List OF FISHES COLLECTED AT PANAMA BY CHARLES H. GIL-
BERT. Bull. U. S. Fish Comm., 1882; pp. 1og-111. (Jordan
and Gilbert. )

AN ASCENT OF THE MATTERHORN. Our Continent, Nov. 8, 1882.

DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SPECIES OF GOBy (Godiosoma ios) FROM
VANCOUVER’S ISLAND. Proc. Nat. Mus., 1882; pp. 437-438.
(Jordan and Gilbert.)

THE BLuE-BACK TROUT (Salvelinus oguassa). Forest and Stream,
December, 1882; p. 389.

122,

123.

124.

E27;

128.

129.

130.

ele

132.

133-

134.

APPENDIX. 27%

Dr. HENSHALL’S SCIENTIFIC NOMENCLATURE AGAIN. American
Angler, Dec. 16, 1882; p. 391.

THE NOMENCLATURE OF OUR BirDs. Dial, December, 1882; pp.
165-167. Review of the Coues Check List.

REPORT ON THE FISHES OF OHIO. Sec. IV., Report of the Geo-
logical Survey of Ohio, vol. iv. pp. 735-1002. December, 1882.

1883.

. STRIPED BAss OR ROCK-FiIsH. Forest and Stream, Jan. 4, 1883;

P- 450.

. NEw METHODS OF ANATOMICAL DIssECTION. Dial, January,

1883; pp. 202-203. Review of Wilder and Gage’s Anatomical
Technology as applied to the Domestic Cat.

CONTRIBUTIONS TO NORTH AMERICAN ICHTHYOLOGY, based pri-
marily on the Collections of the United States National Museum.
IV. A Synopsis of the Fishes of North America. Bull. U.S.
Nat. Mus., XVI., 1882; pp. 1145. January, 1883. (Jordan and
Gilbert. )

NOTES ON THE NOMENCLATURE OF CERTAIN NORTH AMERICAN
FIsHES. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 1883; pp. 110-111. (Jordan
and Gilbert.)

DESCRIPTION OF TWO NEW SPECIES OF FISHES (Afrion ariom-
mus AND Ophidium beani) FROM PENSACOLA, FLORIDA. Proc.
U.S. Nat. Mus., 1883; pp. 142-144. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

A REVIEW OF THE AMERICAN CARANGIN&. Proc. U.S. Nat.
Mus., 1883; pp. 188-207. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

NOTE ON THE GENERA OF PETROMYZONTID&. Proc. U.S. Nat.
Mus., 1883; p. 208. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

DESCRIPTION OF A NEW MURANOID EEL (Sidera chlevastes)
FROM THE GALAPAGOS IsLanns. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 18833
pp. 208-209. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SPECIES OF RHINOBATUS (Rhinobatus
glaucostigma) FROM MAZATLAN, Mexico. Proc. U. S. Nat.
Mus., 1883; pp. 210-211. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

LisT OF FISHES COLLECTED IN THE CLEAR FORK OF THE CUM-
BERLAND, WHITLEY COUNTY, KENTUCKY, with Descriptions of
three new Species. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 1883; pp. 248-257.
(Jordan and Swain. Joseph Swain, Indiana University, Bloom-
ington, Ind.)

. NOTES ON AMERICAN FISHES, preserved in the Museums of Lon-

don, Paris, Berlin, and Copenhagen. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci.,
Philadelphia, 1883; pp. <81-293.

. REVIEW OF BOULENGER’S CATALOGUE OF BATRACHIA GRADI-

ENTIA IN THE BRITISH MuSEUM. Science, January, 1883.

. SKETCH OF FELIPE Poy. Popular Science Monthly, 1883; pp.

547-5526

272

142.

143-

153.

154.

SCIENCE SKETCHES.

1884.

- SOME GossIP ABOUT DARWIN. American Naturalist, January,

1884; p. 108.

. THE BEGINNING OF LIFE. Dial, February, 1884; p. 231. (Re-

view of G. Hilton Scribner’s, “ Where did Life Begin?” )

. REVIEW OF YARROW’S CHECK LIST OF NoRTH AMERICAN REP-

TILIA AND BATRACHIA. Science, Feb. 29, 1884.

. NOTES ON THE FISHERIES OF THE FLORIDA Keys. Bull. U.S.

Fish. Comm., 1884; p. 77. (Also published in American Field
and American Angler.)

NOTES ON FISHES IMPROPERLY INCLUDED IN THE FAUNA OF
THE UNITED STATES. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci., Philadelphia,
1884; Pp. 99-103.

A REVIEW OF THE GENUS CALAMUS. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus.,
1884; pp. 14-24. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

. DESCRIPTIONS OF TEN NEW SPECIES OF FISHES FROM KEY

WEST, FLORIDA. Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., 1884; pp. 24-32.
(Jordan and Gilbert.).

. NOTE ON CARANX RUBER AND CARANX BARTHOLOMCE!I. Proc.

U.S. Nat. Mus., 1884; pp. 32-33. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

. NOTES ON THE FISHES COLLECTED AT PENSACOLA, FLORIDA, BY

SILAS STEARNS, with Descriptions of two new Species. Proc.
U.S. Nat. Mus., 1884; pp. 33-40.

. NOTES ON AELURICHTHYS EYDOUXI AND PORICHTHYS POROSIS-

stimus. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 1884; pp. 40-41.

. List OF FISHES FROM EGMONT KEY, FLORIDA, IN THE MUSEUM

OF YALE COLLEGE, with Description of two new Species. Proc.
Acad. Nat. Sci., Philadelphia, 1884; p. 42.

. THE CANADIAN SEA TROUT (Salvelinus fontinalis inmaculatus).

American Field, July, 1884.

. THE RAINBOW TROUT (Salmo gairdneri irideus). Forest and

Stream, July, 1884.

. NOTE ON CALAMUS PRORIDENS, A NEW SPECIES OF CALAMUS.

Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., 1884; p. 50. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

. DESCRIPTIONS OF SCAROID FISHES FROM HAVANA AND KEy

WEST, including five new Species. Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., 1884;
pp. 81-102. (Jordan and Swain.)

List OF FISHES COLLECTED AT KEY WEST, FLORIDA, with Notes
and Descriptions. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 1884; pp. 103-150.
AN IDENTIFICATION OF THE FIGURES OF FISHES IN CATESBY’S
NATURAL HISTORY OF CAROLINA, FLORIDA, AND THE Ba-

HAMA ISLANDs. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 1884; pp.1g0-199.

. NOTES ON FISHES COLLECTED BY DAVID S. JORDAN AT CEDAR

Krys, FLorRIDA. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 1884; p. 230. (Jor-
dan and Swain.)

. List OF FISHES OBSERVED IN THE ST. JOHN’S RIVER AT JACK-

SONVILLE, FLORIDA. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 1884; pp. 235-236
(Jordan and Meek. Seth E. Meek, Eureka College, Eureka, Ill.)

it Be

170.

171.

172.

APPENDIX. 273

NOTES ON FISHES COLLECTED AT GUAYMAS, MEXICO, BY Mr.
H. V. EMERIC, with a Description of Godiosoma histrio, a new
Species. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 1884; pp. 260-261.

. A REVIEW OF THE AMERICAN SPECIES OF MARINE MUGILIDA.

Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., 1884; pp. 261-275. (Jordan and Swain.)

. A REVIEW OF THE SPECIES OF THE GENUS HAMULON. Proc.

U.S. Nat. Mus., 1884; pp. 281-317. (Jordan and Swain.)

. LIsT OF FISHES COLLECTED IN THE VICINITY OF NEW ORLEANS

BY DR. R. W. SHUFELDT, U.S.A. Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus.,
1884; pp. 318-322.

- List oF FISHES COLLECTED IN LAKE JESSUP AND INDIAN

RIVER, FLoripa, BY Mr. R. E. EARLL, with Descriptions of
two new Species. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus, 1884; pp. 322-324.

A REVIEW OF THE AMERICAN SPECIES OF EPINEPHELUS AND
RELATED GENERA. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 1884; pp. 338-410.
(Jordan and Swain.)

. A REVIEW OF THE SPECIES LUTJANINZ AND HOPLOPAGRINE

FOUND IN AMERICAN WATERS. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 1884;
Pp. 427-474. (Jordan and Swain.)

. DESCRIPTION OF FOUR NEW SPECIES OF CYPRINIDE IN THE

UNITED STATES NATIONAL MusEuM. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus.,
1884; pp. 474-477. (Jordan and Meek.)

. DESCRIPTION OF FOUR NEW SPECIES OF PCCILICHTHYS IN THE

UNITED STATES NATIONAL MuSEuM. Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus.,
1884; pp. 477-482.

- DESCRIPTION OF SCIANA SCIERA, A NEW SPECIES OF SC!IHNA

FROM PANAMA. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 1884; p. 480. (Jordan
and Gilbert.)

. DESCRIPTION OF ZYGONECTES ZONIFER, A NEW SPECIES OF

ZYGONECTES, FROM NASHVILLE, GEORGIA. Proc. U.S. Nat.
Mus., 1884; p. 482. (Jordan and Meek.)

. PROPOSED PROPAGATION OF CATFISH AS A Foop FIsH. Bull.

U.S. Fish. Comm., 1884; p. 292.

. DESCRIPTION OF THREE NEW SPECIES OF FISHES (Prionotus

stearnst, Prionotus ophryas, AND Anthias vivanus) COLLECTED
AT PENSACOLA BY MR. SILAS STEARNS. Proc. U. S. Nat.
Mus., 1884; pp. 541-545. (Jordan and Swain.)
SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES ON NORTH AMERICAN FISHES. Proc.
U.S. Nat. Mus., 1884; pp. 545-548.
DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SPECIES OF HyBOGNATHUS (Aydogna-
thus hayi) FROM Mississippi. Proc. U. S, Nat. Mus., 1884;

PP. 548-550.

1885.

LIsT OF FISHES COLLECTED IN IOWA AND MissourI IN AUGUST,
1884, with Descriptions of three new Species. Proc. U.S. Nat.
Mus., 1885; pp. 1-17. (Jordan and Meek.)

18

274 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

173. A REVIEW OF THE AMERICAN SPECIES OF FLYING-FISHES (EF xo-
cetus). Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 1885; pp. 44-67. (Jordan and
Meek. )

174. NOTES ON SKELETONS OF THE ETHEOSTOMATIN#. Proc. U.S.
Nat. Mus., 1885; pp. 68-72. (Jordan and Eigenmann. Carl H.
Eigenmann, Indiana University, Bloomington, Ind.)

175. NOTE ON THE SCIENTIFIC NAME OF THE YELLOW PERCH, THE
STRIPED Bass, AND OTHER NORTH AMERICAN FISHES.
Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., 1885; pp. 72-73.

176. NOTE ON Mr. GARMAN’S PAPER ON THE AMERICAN SALMON
AND TrRouT. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 1885; pp. 81-83.

177. IDENTIFICATION OF THE SPECIES OF CYPRINIDA AND CATOSTO-
MID4&, described by Dr. Charles Girard in the Proceedings of the
Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia for 1806. Proc.
U.S. Nat. Mus., 1885; pp. 118-127.

178. ON THE ETHEOSTOMA VARIATUM OF KIRTLAND. Proc. U. §,
Nat. Mus., 1885; pp. 163-165.

179. NOTE ON EPINEPHELUS NIGRITUS. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 1885 ;
Pp. 208-209.

180. A CATALOGUE OF THE FISHES KNOWN TO INHABIT THE WATERS
OF NORTH AMERICA NORTH OF THE TROPIC OF CANCER,
with Notes on the Species discovered in 1883 and 1884. Wash-
ington: Government Printing Office (October) 1885. (Also in the
Annual Report of the Commissioner of Fish and Fisheries for
1884, p. 185.)

181. A List OF THE FISHES KNOWN FROM THE PACIFIC COAST OF
TROPICAL AMERICA, FROM THE TROPIC OF CANCER TO PAN-
AMA. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 1885; pp. 361-394.

182. NOTE ON SOME LINNHAN NAMES OF AMERICAN FISHES. Proc.
U.S. Nat. Mus., 1885 ; pp. 394-396.

183. THE HABITS AND THE VALUE FOR FOOD OF THE AMERICAN
CHANNEL CATFISH (/cfalurus punctatus, Rafinesque). Bull.
U.S. Fish Comm., 1835 ; p. 34.

184. NOTES ON FISHES OBSERVED IN LAKE SUPERIOR. Bull. U.S.
Fish Comm., 1885; p. 1gI.

185. THE MOUNTAIN OR SALMON TROUT OF OREGON. Bull. U.S.
Fish Comm., 1885; p. 310.

186. THE FISHERIES AND FISHERY INDUSTRIES OF THE UNITED
STATES, prepared through tne co-operation of the Commissioner
of Fisheries and the Superintendent cf the Tenth Census, by
George Brown Goode, Assistant Director of the U.S. National
Museum, and a Staff of Associates. Section 1, Natural History
of useful Aquatic Animals, with an Atlas of two hundred and
twenty-seven Plates. Washington: Government Printing Office,
1884 (February, 1885). (Quarto, p. 893. Discussions of Fresh-
Water Fishes, chiefly by Dr. Jordan; of Pacific Coast Fishes,
chiefly by Jordan and Gilbert.)

187.:A MANUAL OF THE VERTEBRATES OF THE EASTERN UNITED
STATES, including the Region east of the Mississippi River and

APPENDIX. 275

north of the northern Boundary of North Carolina and Tennessee,
exclusive of Marine Species. Fourth edition; revised and en-
larged. Chicago: Jansen, McClurg, & Co., 1885.

188. THE STANDARD NATURAL History. Vol. II. S. E. Cassino &
Co., Boston, 1885. (Part relating to soft-rayed fishes.)

1886.

189. LisT OF FISHES COLLECTED IN ARKANSAS, INDIAN TERRITORY,
AND TEXAS, IN SEPTEMBER, 1884, with Notes and Descriptions.
Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 1886; pp. 1-25. (Jordan and Gilbert.)

190. NOTES ON FISHES COLLECTED AT BEAUFORT, NoRTH CAROLINA,
with a revised List of the Species known eon that Locality. oe,
U.S. Nat. Mus., 1886; pp. 25-30.

List OF FISHES COLLECTED AT HAVANA, CUBA, IN DECEMBER,
1883, with Notes and Descriptions. Proc. U.S. ‘Nat. Mus., 1886;
PR 58555:

192, A REVIEW OF THE GENERA AND SPECIES OF JULIDINEZ FOUND

IN AMERICAN WATERS. Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., 1886; pp. 56-
70. (Jordan and Hughes. Elizabeth G. Hughes, Indiana Uni-
versity, Bloomington, Ind.)

193. NOTES ON SOME FISHES COLLECTED AT PENSACOLA BY MR.
SILAS STEARNS, with Descriptions of one new Species (Chetodon
aya). Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 1886; pp. 225-229.

194. A REVIEW OF THE AMERICAN SPECIES OF TETRAODONTID.
Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., 1886; pp. 230-247. (Jordan and
Edwards. Charles L. Edwards, Minneapolis, Minn. )

195. RAFINESQUE. Popular Science Monthly, November, 1886.

196. A REVIEW OF THE AMERICAN SPECIES OF THE GENUS PRIONO-
Tus. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 1886; pp. 327-338. (Jordan and
Hughes.)

197, A REVIEW OF THE AMERICAN SPECIES OF BELONID&. Proc.
U. S. Nat. Mus., 1886; pp. 338-361. (Jordan and Fordice.
Morton W. Fordice, Indiana University, Bloomington, Ind.)

198. A REVIEW OF SEELEY’sS ‘‘ THE FRESH-WATER FISHES OF Ev-
ROPE.” Dial, June, 1886; pp. 34-35.

199. A REVIEW OF THE “A.O.U. CODE AND CHECK LisT oF NORTH
AMERICAN Birps.” The Auk, July, 1886 ; pp. 393-398.

200. DESCRIPTION OF SIX NEW SPECIES OF FISHES FROM THE GULF
OF MEXICO, with Notes on other Species. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus.,
1886 ; pp. 466-476. (Jordan and Evermann. Barton Warren
Evermann, Indiana State Normal School, Terre Haute, Ind.)

201. A REVIEW OF THE GOBIIDH OF NORTH AMERICA. Proc. U.S.
Nat. Mus., 1886; pp. 477-518. (Jordan and Eigenmann.)

202. NOTES ON TYPICAL SPECIMENS OF FISHES DESCRIBED BY CU-
VIER AND VALENCIENNES, AND PRESERVED IN THE Musf&E
D'HISTOIRE NATURELLE IN PARIS. Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus.,
19865) p. 525.

Ll

19l.

2706 SCIENCE SKETCHES.

206.
207.

208.

209.

210.

211.

212.

213.

214.

. A PRELIMINARY LIST OF THE FISHES OF THE WEST INDIES.
Proc, UW.) S.Nat. Mus. 4886.
. ULRICH VON HUTTEN. The Current, Dec. 4 and 11, 1886.

1887.

. THE ORIGIN OF THE FITTEST. A Review of Professor E. D.
Cope’s “ Origin of the Fittest.” The Dial, March, 1887.

THOREAU AND JOHN Brown. The Current, April, 1887.

NOTE ON POLYNEMUS CALIFORNIENSIS Thominot. Proc. U.S.
Nat. Mus., 1887.

THE Foop-FIsHEs OF INDIANA. Rept. Dept. Agr. Ind. for 1886.
August, 1887. (Jordan and Evermann.)

A REVIEW OF THE FLOUNDERS AND SOLES (Pleuronectid@) OF
AMERICA AND Europe. Rept. U. S. Fish Comm. for 1886-
August, 1887. (Jordanand Goss. David Kop Goss, Bloomington,
Ind.)

A REVIEW OF THE SCIZNOID FISHES OF AMERICA AND EUROPE.
Rept. U.S. Fish Comm. for 1886. September, 1887. (Jordan
and Eigenmann. )

SCIENCE SKETCHES. Chicago: A. C. McClurg & Co., September,
1887; pp. 261. (A collection of eleven essays, some of them re-
printed ; among them the following hitherto unpublished.)

THE DISPERSION OF FRESH-WATER FISHES. Science Sketches,
pp. 82-132. (President’s Address, Indiana Academy of Sciences,
December, 1886.)

DARWIN. Science Sketches, pp. 171-195. (An address before the
Indiana State Normal School, May, 1885.)

THE EVOLUTION OF THE COLLEGE CURRICULUM. Science
Sketches, pp. 228-260. (President’s Address before the Indiana
College Association, December, 1886.)

SiN aie
U We hi af
ot ty } May

Ne ty a are
MAN en
al ie

fi
i

| EN a
TE ty iN pay’
ADIN) | BY yoy}
wie
{i :
Te Vie

4
nr
; ;
f
ra
:

a lays Wy i ;
rs F mi ‘ ‘ oa
DA f 14) e
AL aA a " id
, (y' $66P :
{ ¢ S

sepa?

“
'

ft a
ie |
a

i

SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION LIBRARIES

IAIN

9088 00055 4428

|