its whereabouts by a sound resembling a short growl, followed by a short sharp bark, not unlike that of a puppy at play. When I first heard it in a tree, I looked up for a monkey, but on many subsequent occasions, it appeared very much like the barking of a small dog. They are very difficult to detect, however, cunningly concealing themselves, and although I have watched for one barking a few yards above my head in a tree, I have looked in vain for a considerable time. They are very fond of coming into houses, and are considered by the Malays as reptiles of good omen. They feed upon insects and moths, being particularly partial to Sphingidæ.

The iguana is a larger species, which reaches a length of seven feet. Although in other respects harmless it does considerable mischief among domestic fowls, frequenting the neighbourhood of houses for the purpose of robbing the hen-roosts. For that reason, they are destroyed, and moreover by some they are considered excellent eating. While drying some marine animals in the sun one morning, an iguana appeared upon the scene, walking on tiptoe across the grass, and lifting its head as if scenting something. On my driving it away it returned again three times to the spot, although the bait was not what I should have imagined to be very inviting. I was unwilling to shoot it, but two or three days after I fear it met with such a fate in neighbouring grounds, where it was found near the hen-roost. It was about four feet long, I believe these animals, however, do sometimes subsist upon marine animals, which they pick up on the beach. I have more than once observed them skulking among the roots of the trees close to the margin of the shore; and on one occasion, I passed and repassed the spot several times on purpose to observe it. Each time I passed it retreated into the jungle, but was always at its post when I came back. On one occasion I disturbed a large iguana in such a situation that in order to escape, it had to run some distance across an open space in my full view; and it did ruu tolerably quickly, but in a most ludicrous manner: the short and peculiarly situated fore legs had an awkward waddling motion, while the hind legs, seeming less encumbered, ran more quickly, and threatened to overtake the head, while the long tail followed behind, as if it scarcely belonged to it, swaying from one side to the other according to the direction the animal took. With all this, however, I should scarcely have caught it in a flat race.

Chameleons of more than one species exist in Labuan. The

SECOND SERIES-VOL. II.

31

natives have a great prejudice against them, and will not touch them, believing them to be deadly poisonous.

CUTHBERT COLLINGWOOD.

Variety of the Perch.-While fishing with trimmers in Virginia Water, near Windsor, last July, we caught a perch without any of the usual transverse lines perceptible. It was a large fish, but in bad condition: it weighed just 2lbs. The same absence of the transverse bands or lines in this specimen, was noticed in Mr. Gunn's fish, mentioned in the Zoologist' (S. S. 513).—A. Clark-Kennedy.

Ianthina fragilis in Dingle Bay.—On the 27th of August I found on the shore at Dingle Bay several specimens of Ianthina fragilis; they were quite alive, and had the peculiar apparatus of bubbles attached to them. I picked up ten beautiful specimens in a distance of about a mile. A great many more were destroyed by the oystercatchers, which were on the look out for them. The shore was strewed with the remains of Velella (lutea): several of these were almost perfect and were covered with the beautiful purple jelly-like covering. There had been a fresh breeze from the S.W., but no gale of wind.-E. C. Buxton; Daresbury Hall, Warrington, August 29, 1867.

Mackerel in the Boulogne Aquarium.-Under this title I inserted what appeared to me a most interesting extract from the Field' newspaper (S. S. 917). Its publication in that excellent journal seems to have excited the animosity of Mr. Lloyd, the curator of the Aquarium at Hamburgh, who wrote a captious and somewhat offensive commentary on Mr. Smith's paper, which commentary also appeared in the 'Field.' Mr. Lloyd now asks me to reprint this commentary, but as it gives no additional information I prefer extracting from the Field' of the 21st of September, Mr. Smith's final reply to Mr. Lloyd's strictures, inasmuch as this reply will itself show to what passages in Mr. Smith's prior communication Mr. Lloyd takes exception. The subject of salt-water aquariums has for many years been one of unceasing interest to myself, and this must be my apology, if one be needed, for again introducing it to my readers.-E. Newman.

་

Keeping Mackerel in Aquaria.-In writing to the Field' an account of the introduction of mackerel into the aquarium of Boulogne, and of their conservation therein, I did not think it necessary to describe at length the aquarium itself, or even to specify the nature of those defects in its structure of which I hinted the existence. The observation of my friend Mr. W. Alford Lloyd, however, in the Field' of August 31st, that the aquarium of this town" is not what is ordinarily termed an aquarium, but a marine pond having sea-water pumped into it by a steam engine," might mislead many persons, not so well instructed in these matters as that gentleman, into supposing that the arrangements thus described possess some advantages over the arrangements ordinarily adopted for keeping marine animals in inland situations. I therefore beg to state that the sole advantage resulting to the Boulogne aquarium from its proximity to the sea consists in the facility thus afforded for obtaining animals either for exhibition or for food; and that it is not only possible, but easy, to construct aquaria in inland towns which would be capable of maintaining marine fishes for longer periods than those during which the same creatures could at present be kept alive in the aquarium above named. I will also-to save interrogation on this point-indicate the serious

defects which exist in the aquarium of this town. The first and greatest defect consists in the fact that it is "a kind of open-air pond ;" and I call this exposure to the open air a defect because it is not possible to regulate the temperature of the water so exposed, because it is not possible to regulate the light, and because it permits the importation into the aquaria of dust, of leaves of trees, and of cuttings of grass, &c. The second defect consists in the uncertain and intermittent nature of the supply of sea-water. The third serious defect is that the sea-water pumped into the aquarium is taken from the swimming-bath of the "établissement," and this bath is filled direct from the port. As the town of Boulogne is drained into the harbour, it is just possible that the water may not at times be capable of supplying one of the well-known requirements of most fishes, leaving "pelagic" fishes out of the question.. If there are any of the conditions above-mentioned which Mr. Lloyd would be desirous of securing in the construction of an aquarium, his views have been singularly modified since the time when I had the pleasure of being in daily communication with him. The species of mackerel to which I alluded in my letter to the Field' was Scomber scomber; but there were at the same time living in company with them eleven full-grown specimens of Scomber pneumatica, besides some hundred and fifty other fishes of various kinds, and ranging from six inches to upwards of forty inches in length, but which, from their well-known greater powers of endurance, I did not think it worth while to speak of. Mr. Lloyd takes exception to my statement with respect to the possibility of keeping Scomber scomber permanently, and also to what I have said to him privately in reference to the facility with which Hippocampus brevirostris. may be kept in confinement; but, whilst disputing that which I asserted broadly with regard to a species, he wishes to saddle me with a similar responsibility in the case of every individual of that species. This is slightly unreasonable. I may be "too hasty and positive" in this matter, and those who have had more practice may be more cautious in their assertions. I am willing to admit that they may have sufficient reasons for being so. I may observe that my "practice" began in July, 1856, and that I never penned a line for publication until July in 1867; and for the reason that, although I have long been in a position to write of what I believed could be done, I preferred waiting until I could write of what I knew could be done. If, from the hundreds of instances in which Mr. Lloyd has failed to keep his animals continuously, he will kindly select and quote a few cases in which fishes have died owing to the absence of some known condition which cannot be supplied in an aquarium, something will be established. If I can have given me by anyone a single sufficient reason why any ordinary fish which can live in aquaria for a month or two months (performing in a satisfactory manner during that period all the functions of life) cannot be so kept for a longer time, or for "the term of its natural life," then I shall very readily own that I have been "far too hasty and positive." Let me add that I shall be sorry to a corresponding degree for having been so. Until this can be done, I must be excused for preferring to draw my conclusions from those things which have been effected by Mr. Lloyd, by myself, and by many other persons, to having my views modified by the failures from unexplained causes which any person or any number of persons may have experienced. The implication that Mr. Lloyd wishes to attach to my statement, that certain animals can be kept indefinitely in properly constructed aquaria, is an entirely unwarranted one. It might as reasonably be assumed that the promise that man shall live "three score and ten years" implies that every man shall attain that

age. I have not previously made any allusion to "the lower marine animals,” and I do not pretend to know all the conditions upon which depend their permanent wellbeing either in captivity or in freedom; but Mr. Lloyd, writing so long ago as the year 1858, was able to say that those conditions were "few and simple;" and in this I so far agree with him as to state my belief that many of these creatures may in captivity attain a greater age than they wonld probably ever arrive at in a state of nature. I do not lay claim to any exclusive knowledge; but that which I have done has been to seek most of the animals I endeavoured to keep in their natural habitats, myself collecting and carrying them home; and I have ever thus gained important hints towards success. The "money expression" of the matter of mackerel-keeping in London or Paris is not practicable in the form in which Mr. Lloyd wishes me to express it. It is not probable that anyone will incur an expense so disproportioned to the result which could by any possibility be expected as that which would be obviously necessary in the case supposed by Mr. Lloyd. But, should it at any time be in contemplation to construct a public aquarium of adequate size, and should I happen to be consulted in the matter, I will promise that it shall (if my advice be taken) contain suitable accommodation for mackerel; and that I shall be prepared to take those animals to either London or Paris. For Mr. Lloyd's satisfaction I may say that, as the means which I should have to organize for doing this would also serve to supply economically all the requirements of the aquarium, mackerel could then be supplied at as small a cost, and kept at as cheap a rate, as any other hungry fish of similar size and habits. I may say that in the early part of last week two of the mackerel were still living. The last of these disappeared on the night of the 29th of August, and the deaths of all three are attributed by the persons now in charge of the aquarium to predacious fishes of large size, which were confined in the same basin with them. This may or may not be the case, as there is no positive evidence to he obtained as to whether they were eaten after death or caught whilst living. This much, however, is certain, that during the past month they have been subjected to such ill-treatment as would suffice to cause the ultimate (probably the immediate) death of many fishes which it is known have been kept in aquaria during periods of many years. I have this week been told that Hippocampus brevirostris bas propagated abundantly in the aquarium of Arcachon; my informant adds that the male carries his progeny about upon his tail.-John Smith, late Keeper of Boulogne Aquarium; Boulogne-sur-Mer, September 3, 1867.

The Oyster Fisheries of New South Wales.*-The oysters of New South Wales may, for all practical purposes, be divided into two kinds: the mud-oyster, which resembles the English oyster, is found in beds in comparatively still water, generally unattached, or in clusters of two or three, having a soft shell, easily separated and growing to a large size; specimens have often been found measuring twelve inches by eight, with a depth of six inches: these oysters require great care to keep them alive when once taken out of the water; some of them will not survive for one day: they are not in demand, though there are extensive beds of them

* From a paper, by Mr. R. Emerson, read at a Meeting of the Acclimatization Society, on the 25 h of June, 1867.

at several places along the coast, as at Pitt Water, Brisbane Water, Botany Bay, Port Aiken, Wogonga, Jervis Bay, Sydney Harbour and Panbula. The Western Port, Port Albert and Port Phillip oysters in Victoria, and the Spring Bay oysters in Tasmania, are all of this species. The other kind of oyster, whether named rock, cluster, drift, bank, whelk, channel, mangrove, half-tide, or bay oysters, are of one species, and all have in common a very hard shell; they will live out of the water from three to six weeks and improve. The beds or grounds are all situated in salt-water creeks extending inland, and communicating with rivers, or in estuaries, where there is a strong tide-way. They are mostly attached to each other in bunches, the roots of which are firmly fixed in the bed, some adhering to rocks, boulders, mangrove stumps, snags and whelks, but are never found unattached: the oysters of this class will require a very different system of protection to the former. The spawning season differs in each river; in some, each bed has a different time; in many places the bank and deep-water oysters differ as much as six months in their time of spawning. Some oysters have been known to spawn only once in three years, while others again will spawn two or three times in a year; but in all cases they are very much influenced by the weather, for, when any are ready to spawn, a cold, rainy south-east wind setting in will throw them back for a month. The greater portion of the oyster-spawn or spat that escapes destruction will be found attached to the large oysters, and when about two months old has the appearance of a fish-scale, and has but one perfect shell, the other being only partially developed, and cannot be removed from its place of attachment without destroying it. For these reasons I consider that a general close season, or three or four months in the year, would be all but useless, as no particular three or four months in the year will cover the spawning season of half of the oysters, and it would be very little protection to those it did cover, as directly after the close season the oysters may be taken, and from it being impossible to separate the young oysters their destruction will be inevitable when the old ones are removed. The proposed close time is also not a general spawning season, but occurs when most of the oysters are in the finest condition-the Camden Haven, Manning and George's River (deep-water oysters), and the Port Stephen bank-oysters spawning in May. One cause of the deterioration of certain oyster-beds is that, after the regular oyster-gatherers have discontinued working, and left them to recover, settlers and others are continually dredging, thus destroying the young oysters. Another great cause of destruction is the taking of oysters and shells to burn into lime; the shell-dredgers on the Hunter, for example, go to work on any part of the oyster-grounds, taking up oysters and shell indiscriminately, thus not only destroying the oysters but the oyster-grounds as well, removing the whole of the bed, which, in many instances, is six feet thick of solid shell, leaving nothing to which the spat can attach itself; and thus thousands of bushels of oysters are destroyed, and the beds are gradually reduced in size. From Broken Bay there are four or five vessels constantly employed in bringing live shell→ that is, young oysters-to Sydney for the lime-burners. They bring about 65,000 bushels annually, in addition to which about half that quantity is burnt in the river, making a total of 97,500 bushels of young oysters destroyed every year, in that place only; and a similar destruction is taking place over nearly all the oyster-grounds. Oyster-beds are often destroyed by freshes in the rivers, covering them with a deposit of silt; and a shift in the channel of a river will sometimes be another cause of their destruction by diverting their food. Oyster-beds are considerably improved by being