In the same year, Dr. Kirtland adopted Centrarchus fasciatus as synonymous with Le Sueur's and Rafinesque's numerous descriptions of the small-mouthed species.

In 1850, Prof. Agassiz recognized the generic identity of the former descriptions of the Black Bass by Le Sueur, Cuvier and Valenciennes, and DeKay, and retained the name Grystes for the same.

In 1854, Prof. Agassiz obtained specimens of the largemouthed Bass from the Tennessee River, near Huntsville, Ala., which he named, provisionally, Grystes nobilis. In the same year, Messrs. Baird and Girard described specimens of the same species from Texas, as Grystes nuecensis.

In 1857, Dr. Garlick described the small-mouthed Black Bass as Grystes nigricans, and the large-mouthed species as Grystes megastoma.

In 1858, Girard described the large-mouthed Bass as Dioplites nuecensis.

In 1860, Prof. Theo. Gill restored Rafinesque's earliest name for the small-mouthed form of the Black Bass, calling it Lepomis achigan; which, however, he changed in 1866 to Micropterus achigan; and still later, in 1873, he adopted Lacépède's name, Micropterus salmoides, for the same species.

In 1865, Prof. Cope named the large-mouthed Bass, Micropterus nigricans, which name was also adopted by Prof. Gill in 1866.

In 1874, when, apparently, the oldest generic and specific names had been restored; after Prof. Gill's masterly review of the species in the previous year (when the tangled web had been, seemingly, straightened), when dry land was thought to have been reached at last;-then came the French naturalists, again. MM. Vaillant and Bocourt,

of Paris, instead of profiting by the experience of their predecessors in this matter, tried to show that we had four species of Black Bass, where but two really existed, and this in spite of the fact that the Gallic misnomer of the type species still existed as a terrible warning to them, of the folly of indulging their national love of novelty where so grave a matter as science was concerned. They proposed the title Dioplites variabilis for the small-mouthed form, and Dioplites treculii, Dioplites nuecensis and Dioplites salmoides, for the large-mouthed form, under several unimportant varietal, or individual, differences.

In 1876, Professor G. Brown Goode restored Le Sueur's name, and called the large-mouthed Black Bass Micropterus floridanus.

In 1877, Professor David S. Jordan restored the still older name of Rafinesque for this species, and with the full concurrence of Professor Theo. Gill, designated it Micropterus pallidus.

In 1878, Professor Jordan divided the small-mouthed species into two geographical varieties, distinguishing the Northern form as M. salmoides var. achigan, and the Southern form as M. salmoides var. salmoides.

Finally, MM. Vaillant and Bocourt (Miss. Sci. au Mexique ined.) adopted the generic title Micropterus, but recognized four provisional species: M. dolomieu and M. variabilis for the small-mouthed form and M. salmoides and M. nuecensis for the large-mouthed form, under certain, evidently, unimportant variations. As they have not yet published these names, they may conclude to suppress or change some or all of them.

Thus, it will be seen that, from the first, the nomenclature of the Black Bass species had been involved in

great doubt, uncertainty, and confusion; and while much of the complexity had been, apparently, dissipated, there still existed among ichthyologists some difference of opinion as to the proper differentiation of the species. Even the generally accepted nomenclature of the past few yearsunfortunately and unavoidably established, as it was, on an insecure basis-was liable, at any time, to fall to the ground, while the said differences among the authorities existed.

It was the earnest hope of the writer, however, that the generic and specific names and distinctions as proposed by Professors Gill and Jordan would be found correct, and their position prove impregnable; and that, in good time, all naturalists, to avoid further confusion, would finally agree to accept and adopt the same, and so set the vexed. question at rest forever; for these eminent ichthyologists had really investigated the matter more thoroughly and intelligently, and had had larger opportunities and greater facilities for doing so than all other ichthyologists combined. They labored faithfully and well, with strict fairness, and, with the light afforded them, in perfect accordance with the established principles of nomenclature, and had, at least, placed the anglers of America under a lasting debt of gratitude.

But these very differences among the authorities showed that the end was not yet; that the problem had not been solved; that there was still something hidden that should be brought to the light; some flaw in the chain that would eventually destroy it; some stone in the foundation that would yet crumble and work the destruction of the superimposing pile.

And, now, with much hesitation, and I hope with be

coming modesty (for I do not wish to be thought presumptuous), and with feelings akin to regret―much like that of tearing down an old homestead endeared by many tender associations and fond remembrances, to make room for a more substantial structure-but at the same time feeling that I am doing an act that is simply right and just, I feel constrained to make a radical change in the nomenclature of the Black Bass as it is at present understood in America.

But in order to arrive at a clear understanding of the subject, I propose, in the first place, to present to the angler, as well as to the student of ichthyology, all that is really worth knowing of the scientific literature of the Black Bass; in doing which it becomes a matter of necessity, as well as of choice, to draw liberally upon the writings of Professors Gill and Jordan.

The following disquisitional résumé is from Professor Gill's admirable monograph, entitled, "On the Species of the Genus Micropterus (Lac.) or Grystes (Auct.),"* and is the most able, concise and original paper ever written upon the subject; and, so far as it goes, presents the whole matter clearly and succinctly, and according to the views of most of our best naturalists:

The nomenclature of the species has become involved in much doubt, and, if we may judge from the literature and the distinctions insisted on by Prof. Agassiz and others,† at least four or five species

* On the Species of the Genus Micropterus (Lac.) or Grystes (Auct.). By Theodore Gill, of Washington, D. C. < Proceedings of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, XXII, 1873, pp. B. 55–72.

In the nominal (1) “Grystes fasciatus Agass.," it is said, "the scales are a little smaller, but of the same form as in (2) G. salmoides; the radiating striæ are perhaps less marked. They cover the opercular apparatus and the cheeks,

are supposed to exist in our waters; but it is evident from a perusal of the descriptions that the distinctions hitherto made are of very doubtful value.

Having been requested by the United States Commissioner of Fish and Fisheries (Prof. S. F. Baird) to determine the number of species represented in the fresh waters of the United States, and the earliest names respectively assigned to them, all the specimens in the collections of the Smithsonian Institution were examined, as well as a large series from many other localities kindly transmitted for that purpose by the Museum of Comparative Zoology (Prof. Agassiz, Director). Study and comparison of those specimens clearly demon

but at this latter place their [the scales'] smaller size is quite remarkable; this latter character is very striking when we compare both species."-Agass., Lake Superior, p. 296. -' The italicized portion (not italicized in original) indicates that the G. salmoides Agass. was a large-mouthed form. (3) "Huro nigricans Cuv. is another species of the lower Canadian lakes, which occurs also in Lake Champlain I shall, therefore, call it in future Grystes nigricans Dr. DeKay describes it as Centrarchus fasciatus, although he copies also Cuvier's description and figure of Huro nigricans, but without perceiving their identity." Agass., Lake Superior, p. 297.-Huro nigricans Cuv. and Val. and Centrarchus fasciatus DeKay are unquestionably distinct, the former being the large-mouthed species, and the latter the smallmouthed one. It is probable, however (thus giving him the benefit of the doubt), that Prof. Agassiz based his idea of the species on the large-mouthed form.

"The species of this group [Grystes Cuv.] are indeed very difficult to characterize. They differ chiefly in the relative size of their scales, the presence or absence of teeth on the tongue, . etc. There are, besides, marked differences between the young and adults. These circumstances render it impossible to characterize any one species without comparative descriptions and figures. (4) The species from Huntsville [Ala.]. differs equally from [G. fasciatus Agass. and G. "salmoneus" Agass.]. I call this species provisionally Grystes nobilis Agass."-Am. Jour. Sci. and Arts (2), xvii, p. 297, 298, 1854.

Prof. Agassiz thus recognized four species (besides indeterminate ones), viz :

2. G. salmoides Agass. (not Cuv. and Val. nor G. salmoneus Agass., 1854): M. nigricans.

=

Judging by the comparisons, Prof. Agassiz had in view, in 1854, in the "G. salmoneus," the true M. salmoides.

Baird and Girard added to these species, also, in 1854, (5) their G. nuecensis = (M. nigricans).