of our queens from the tablet of Abydus, by saying that it must be
considered as a tablet “purely _genealogical_.” First Letter to the
D. de B. p. 89. A reader is naturally disposed to acquiesce in this
explanation, since Mr. Champollion, who has carefully examined it,
asserts it on his own credit; especially as the assertion appears to
be supported by a long and minute discussion. Unhappily, however,
it is only necessary to compare his brother’s chronology in P. 107,
with his own Plates II. and III. fig. 5, from which it appears
that Amenses, who _reigned_ more than 20 years, was the mother
of Thuthmosis the second, whose name is in the tablet, while his
mother’s is _omitted_. It is true that, with his usual ingenuity, Mr.
Champollion seems afterwards to change his ground in the same page:
for he says, that one only of two brothers or sisters was inserted,
in order to keep the number of the [p320] _generations_ unaltered:
and he might have added that Amenses was the sister of Amenophis,
whom she succeeded. If he had stated this clearly, the reader might
have judged for himself, whether such a coincidence was or was not
sufficient to support the chronology of Manetho; which was, however,
by no means in want of _such_ support: in the article EGYPT, for
example, Manetho’s chronology of this dynasty is fully adopted: and
the same ‘cartouche’ is read _Thuthmosis_, which Mr. Champollion,
after all his parade, still admits to be Thuthmosis: nor is there
a difference of half a century in the dates assigned to his reign
by various chronologists. It was established in the article Egypt,
that the name contained that of Thoth, the Egyptian Hermes, and for
this reason it was considered as better established than any other
of the names of the Pharaohs. Mr. Champollion had never discovered
this for many years afterwards: and yet we have been told by an
ENGLISHMAN in the last Quarterly Journal, that to Mr. Champollion the
_greater part_ of the _discoveries_ made by the interpretation of
hieroglyphics are owing!
Believe me, dear Sir, very sincerely, yours,
* * * *
_London_, 24 _Nov._ 1827.
_On the Naturalization of Fish. By_ J. Mac Culloch, M.D., F.R.S., &c.
Dear Sir,
As I promised you that I would communicate to you, from time to
time, any new remarks or facts which might occur on the subject
of naturalizing sea-fish in fresh water, I am pleased to have an
opportunity of noticing a few circumstances which may serve to keep
alive in the public mind a subject, from which I cannot yet help
foreboding useful results, in spite of the neglect and opposition
which it has experienced from every person, I believe I may safely
say, to whom it has been proposed, except Mr. Arnold. I am perfectly
safe in saying, that, with this sole exception, every individual to
whom the facts have been described, and the experiment proposed, have
replied by doubts, or cavils, or objections of some kind; many, by
[p321] positive disbelief of the very facts; while the far greater
number have been persons, whose entire ignorance of every requisite
point of physiology, natural history, and chemistry, must, of course,
have rendered their objections sufficiently unworthy of notice,
though not sufficient to restrain the confidence with which they
have been urged. The satirical writers of the day view this as the
character of the age: the more obvious aspect which this disposition
presents, is the feeling, as if he who attempted, by suggesting an
improvement, to render a service, was meditating an injury, and was
an enemy to be opposed at all hazards. I must permit you to settle
metaphysical and moral questions so profound as to exceed my own
ingenuity.
But I cannot avoid regretting that Mr. Arnold is not the rich
and idle proprietor of some of the tens of thousands of acres
of fresh water, whether Scotch or English, in which a ‘sea-fish
cannot possibly live,’ or ‘would certainly not be eatable’: and,
in addition, that, instead of a not very opulent and very busied
‘notary public,’ he was not in possession of some five thousand of
these acres, with as much money, and as much leisure. And I feel
bound to add to this apology for what he _has not_ yet done, that
the expense of such a course of experiments is considerable; at
least in this comparison. A superintendent would be necessary; and
for the purpose of taking and transporting the fish, still more of
drawing nets periodically and frequently, to ascertain the progress
of the transplanted fish, there must be expensive assistance, for
which, as yet, there can be no returns; while that, in addition
to irregularities and rocks in the pond itself, impeding the
accurate drawing and examination, must also be the apology for the
imperfection of the present additional report as to the success for
certain fishes. It is plain that, though ten or a hundred turbots
were present in a pond of four or five acres, the fact is not one
that can easily be ascertained. Let those who have money, leisure,
and water, and nothing else towards the investigation of this object,
restrain, at least, _their_ incredulity and opposition; as may also
they, very safely, who never saw a fish, except on the stall of a
London fishmonger.
With respect now to some facts: it had been said that the water was
salt, because this pond was situated at a sea [p322] embankment.
I stated before, that it admitted the sea, by leakage, in summer,
when there was little comparative supply of fresh water, and was
therefore brackish, or saline. I have since ascertained the exact
proportion of salt in the water, at those times when the fresh
water is least. In the driest and hottest part of one summer, the
proportion of salt in it, as compared to the sea without, was as 40
to 150. In another, peculiarly dry, 1827, it was one half; and the
water, having then been at the lowest, it cannot ever be computed to
exceed this. Moreover, this period of saltness cannot easily, even
in such a summer, occupy more than the months of June, July, August,
and September; or, more strictly speaking, it is probable, scarcely
one half of that time in general, in so rainy a climate; a climate
equalling Penzance in the quantity of rain.
In winter, that is, during five or six months, or less, if any
objector pleases, it is fresh. That cattle drink it freely, is not
an exact chemical proof; but I must admit, that I have not analyzed
the water at that period, holding the objection in great contempt.
It may be sufficient to say, that it then occupies a space of about
sixteen acres, or increases to this magnitude from four and a half
acres; so that it cannot, at least, be very salt, while the fish, and
the mullet in particular, are found in the remotest ditches, among
the meadows. But, in defect of an analysis, which I have not had the
means of making, there is a valid reason why the water should be
fresh when the size of the pond is much extended. The presence of
sea-water in it, is, in all cases, the consequence of a depression
of the water within the sea-wall, which allows of leakage or
infiltration at the upper part, so as, in high tides, to equalize, as
far can be done in the short period of high water, the levels within
and without. This, it is plain, must cease whenever the water within
is higher than the sea without; and hence it is that there can be no
access for the salt water in the winter or rainy months.
Enough of the mere fact: the objections derived from which ought
not to demand an answer among physiologists; while to those who
argue physiological points in utter ignorance of all that belongs
to physiology, it is probable that all answer is fruitless. It was
stated before—the question is simply twofold; [p323] respiration
and food. If fish can breathe indifferently salt water or fresh,
for one week or one month, and if, in their new element, translated
from salt to fresh, they thrive or grow, fatten and breed, the trial
of three weeks or three months is a sufficient proof that they will
neither sicken nor die of fresh water. If they can find food, it is
indifferent whether the medium is fresh or salt. It is the misfortune
of the age to understand every thing without knowing its principles;
just as every man is now a physician. A few, more profound, who
chance to know that salmon divide their time between fresh and salt
water, possess other reasons, and find other objections; which they
must be permitted to explain for themselves. I ought not, while on
this particular subject, to omit one fact, which has come to my
knowledge since the former papers were written, on the voluntary
emigration of a fish, supposed to be peculiarly delicate and
peculiarly attached to the sea, into fresh water. This is, that,
in Virginia, the herring ascends the rivers, even up into the most
minute communicating branches, and as far as it can reach; while a
somewhat recent traveller describes them as being so abundant, that
it is impossible to cross the fords on horseback during the season
of their migration, without destroying them by the horse’s feet. To
proceed to the _historical_ condition of this pond.
I have already stated the difficulties arising from want of leisure
and wealth in the proprietor, added to non-residence I should say,
whence chiefly has arisen the difficulty of tracing the results. Let
those try for themselves, who consider that all this might have been
ascertained in a twelvemonth, and with the same means. Since the
communications I formerly made, the Pilchard has been introduced. It
swam away briskly, therefore it would not die of the fresh water;
but it has not been retaken. The retaking of individual fish, to
ascertain their presence, is a fundamental difficulty, as I before
pointed out.
The Brill has also been introduced since my former list. It has been
retaken; and, within one year, had grown to double the original size.
The Turbot. Fifty or sixty were introduced, averaging about eight
inches in length. Some were retaken in a year, for the purpose of
examination merely, like the former and most others; [p324] they
also had grown to double the size. There is no prospect of dying
in these cases, it is abundantly plain; that they will breed is
probable, but there has been no time, nor would the young have been
taken. What is to prevent healthy fishes from breeding? The young,
indeed, may be eaten; if so, it is for want of room, or want of a
proper balance in this mixed population. No one knows any thing,
either of the ordinary growth, propagation, or destruction of fishes;
and how then can any one decide on what is regular or extraordinary?
The Wrasse has been retaken after a considerable period; therefore it
is not dead.
The Basse has propagated; and so has the Brill.
The Red Mullet has been introduced, and is living.
The Whiting was introduced, and taken in good health many weeks
after, but not since.
The Grey Loach is thought to have bred considerably.
The Atherine continues to breed.
I formerly mentioned that the flavour of the several fishes was
improved: this is now more positively asserted, in addition, of the
Basse, the Plaice, and the Red Loach. Others were mentioned in former
communications.
Loss of property, or flavour, has been made a speculative objection
by the unvarying objectors. General experience has shown, that in all
fishes, as far as known, the access to fresh water, or fresh water
food, improved the flavour; in many, in oysters, muscles, cockles,
shrimps, it is vulgarly notorious; as in mere sea water they are
worthless.
There is a popular objection, on this head, made by the country
gentlemen, which I must answer; to those who _think_ about what they
know, it would have been superfluous. The salmon is good when it
comes from the sea, and bad when it is returning. Doubtless, it is;
while the reason ought to be plain, even to an angler. It is in full
health in the first case: in the latter, it has spawned; and, at that
period, every fish is proportionally as bad as the salmon; many are a
great deal worse. The fault is not in the water, nor probably in the
food; it is in the spawning, and with any food the same effect takes
place, in all fishes, everywhere.
I suggested in former communications, that an essential point [p325]
to ascertain, in any view of economy, or management, would be the
proper balance of species; to discover what kinds would so live
together that all the species might find food; might breed, each to
its useful limits, so as to be serviceable to ourselves, the keepers
or the flocks, and without hazard of the extermination of any kind. I
may illustrate what is here meant, by a simple fact, in the ordinary
economy of fresh water fishes in confinement. Pike and perch can live
together, because the natural defences of the perch prevent the pike
from exterminating the race, voracious as the enemy is. If trout and
pike were confined in a narrow water, the trout would be destroyed.
Or otherwise, it must be our object to ascertain, in an economical
view, how to feed, by means of species that we do not desire to eat,
those which we do cultivate for our own uses. This is a difficult
question, which can only be overcome by time and experience; by
knowledge; by knowledge, when we are in a state of entire ignorance;
ignorance of every thing that relates to fishes, as great as if they
were the inhabitants of another planet. This was one great source of
difficulties with us in this case; and I, myself, must plead guilty,
I fear, to a general recommendation of introducing every fish as a
mere matter of trial; the result of which has been mischievous. The
basse appears to have been the great enemy; to have eaten up the
greater number of many species, and given no return. It has proved
the pike of this pond. This could not have been foreseen; it is a
caution for future speculators. Others will be discovered in the
course of trial. It appears also that the common crab has proved
destructive, probably by eating the spawn of larger fishes. From some
enemy or other, the eels, which at first abounded to an incredible
degree, have most materially diminished, and so have the shrimps.
The latter, at least, appear to have been destroyed by the basse.
Time and trial will teach us what to do in this case; in the infancy
of ignorance, man might have supposed that he could keep wolves and
sheep in one field, and have constructed a pen for foxes and fowls,
rabbits and weasels. We must not accuse nature of our own ignorance.
The question is here a difficult one; but a little more study [p326]
of the general habits of fishes, merely as we know them already,
and even of their anatomy, will go far to lay the foundation of
useful rules on this head, even without a hazardous trial, which may
ultimately not become in our power to remedy, as I much fear may
prove the case with respect to these unlucky basse. Not to enter on
this further than as it may serve for a general illustration of what
is here meant, the anatomy of the mullet proves that it lives on
worms; on the lumbricus marinus, and others; and so do its habits.
So also may the very food of others, as found in the stomach, serve
to indicate their natural or ordinary food. Reversely, the anatomy
of a cod’s jaws, and its stomach also, prove it to be omnivorous,
omnivoracious. Or, further, the anatomical character of the diodon
proves that it eats shell-fish; as we are equally able to limit the
range of food in the flat-fish which have no air-bladders, and cannot
quit the ground.
But in this brief communication, I must not enter further into this
subject than is necessary for mere illustration. I may take some
further opportunity to point out the probabilities, as to mutual food
and protection, in any artificial cultivation of this nature, as they
might be derived from studying the little that we do know about the
structure and habits of fishes. All that I need add here, is, that I
have suggested the introduction of limpets, periwinkles, and cockles;
as affording food without furnishing enemies: a matter which had
been overlooked. To exterminate the enemies which have been unwarily
introduced, will not prove so easy a task; unless, at least, we could
find their natural enemies; find the great secret by which alone, in
all cases, man can make war on those whom neither his artillery, his
physic, nor his politics can reach.
The transportation of fishes has been objected to as difficult.
I had occasion to make some remarks on this formerly, and on the
vitality of some kinds. The difficulty is not so great as has been
imagined. The fact generally is, that fishermen, even down to the
very sentimentalists who worship the gentle Izaak, and who are
sometimes scarcely possessed of the wit of a fish, treat them as they
would a stone; as if they had not lives, and wills, and opinions,
and were not part of the same [p327] creation as ourselves; as if
that creation, which outnumbers ourselves by millions of millions
almost beyond algebra to express, was not, like ourselves, under His
care. They are easily killed by violence; they kill themselves by
over-exertion, from anatomical peculiarities; as every trout-fisher
knows; that is to say, the fact, not the cause. Let them be treated
with gentleness when taken, as if they could feel; and they will
not die in being removed into a cask of water. The flat fish are
all peculiarly tenacious of life, so are all those of firm muscles
generally: the vitality of the carp and of the minnow also is
notorious; and so it is as to many other kinds. All these can be
removed, and carried far, even in straw; but in truth, he who chooses
to make his experiments like a philosopher, and who desires to
succeed, will not fail.
Yet let me point out what I have suggested to Mr. Arnold, among
other things: to him, whose merit as an ardent experimenter, always
ready to adopt a reasonable suggestion, and never seeking for an
objection, ought to stamp his character as a genuine follower of the
true philosophy; the exception, in this particular case, to every one
else. This is, to adopt the Chinese method of transporting the spawn
of fishes; as affording a far greater facility to the introduction
of species. I presume that the general fact must be known to your
readers; though I believe that I ought to doubt: because I quoted
the same practice from Columella formerly, as in use among the most
ancient Romans, among the common farmers.
This substance is perpetually brought up by the trawl net, very
injuriously, as it relates to fisheries; and in many cases, the
fishermen contrive to guess tolerably well to what fish it belongs.
That it may be transported to any distance, the familiar practice
of China proves: since it is there a common article of sale in
the markets; while there also, I may incidentally remark, the
cultivation of fish for sale, their transportation to market, and
their replacement in the ponds, if unsold, is as much matter of
ordinary farming as the management of a poultry-yard; while the
pond is often the most profitable part of the farm. They also,
who do not already chance to know it, may be informed, that this
species of poultry-yard, or fish-pond, is as easily and regularly
[p328] stocked in this manner, and managed, as any other portion
of the farm: since it is even destroyed, or suffered to become dry
occasionally, and again renewed in the wet season, by the means of
purchased spawn, or stock; just as a sheep farmer buys lambs to stock
his mountains. If England is too wise to learn of Rome or China, or
of France and Germany, or even of the experiments on which I have
dwelt so much and so often, it must be a pleasing reflection that
it is already so amply informed as to have passed the bounds of
all possible improvement and all possible wishes. But that I may
terminate this particular suggestion, I will only further point out,
that lobsters, and the crab tribe generally, might very easily be
transported in this manner, and that, in them, it is easily known
when the _ovum_ has been impregnated, by means of a black spot with
which it is then marked.
If I ought to apologize already for the length of this communication,
I shall conclude it by saying, that whatever may be judged of the
general philosophy of this subject, there is not and never has been
any thing to prevent the cultivation of fish, in ponds of salt-water
at least, or the preservation of them in any water in which they will
live for a sufficient length of time, so as to render that a depôt
for the purposes of a fish store, calculated for the steady supply
of a market, in the manner which I formerly described and proposed.
If, after so many years as this proposal has been made, London has
not seen either the facility, or the utility, it will discover them
at some future day; just as it discovered, ten years after there had
been twenty-six steam-boats on the Clyde, that a steam-boat might
possibly be of use on the Thames; just as it opposed gas-lights, and
just as it has adopted gas-lights. [p329]
_Nugæ Chirurgicæ; or, a Biographical Miscellany, illustrative of a
Collection of Professional Portraits_. By W. Wadd, Esq., F.L.S. &c.
8vo. pp. 276. London, 1824 Longman and Co., and Callow and Wilson.
_Nugæ Canoræ; or Epitaphian Mementos (in Stone-cutter’s Verse) of
the Medici Family of Modern Times_. By Unus Quorum. London, 1827.
Callow and Wilson.
_Mems., Maxims, and Memoirs_. By W. Wadd, Esq., F.L.S.,
Surgeon-Extraordinary to the King, &c. 8vo. pp. 303. London, 1827.
Callow and Wilson.
We have placed these three Works together, because they are so
closely allied as to form a whole, and also because _Nugæ Canoræ_
and _Nugæ Chirurgicæ_ bear internal evidence of being written by
the same pen; and when we say further, that they are characterized
by good feeling and good humour, we are sure we are not far off in
our _guess_ about who is ‘UNUS QUORUM.’ These volumes come within
the scope of our Journal, as comprising an outline of the history
of medical science, sketched in a vein of pleasantry that makes it
no less agreeable to the general than to the professional reader,
and we have derived both amusement and information from its perusal.
Like the ‘Gold Headed Cane,’ it helps us to much curious modern
biographical anecdote, with the addition of varied entertainment for
the medical antiquary. While, however, we recommend these ‘Mems.,’
and commend the literary loungings of contemporary practitioners,
we cannot but regret the neglected volumes of Aikin and Walker, and
lament that the lack of feeling for the annals and literature of
their profession, should be less active in the medical public of this
country, than with our professional brethren on the Continent.
‘_Nugæ Chirurgicæ_’ is a _Catalogue Raisonnée_ of a scarce collection
of Medical Portraits. We believe only 250 copies were printed;
from which circumstance, and its recording the congregation of the
greatest assemblage of medical men ever met together, it is probable
that it may some day become a medical rarity. The author’s original
intention appears merely to have been to describe the portrait,
with some characteristic trait; but an after-thought seems to have
occurred, and in the “Memorabilia,” the “_Medici Family_” are, as it
were, retouched and varnished, so as to become [p330] very agreeable
pictures. We shall now present our readers with a few specimens of
this gallery, taken at random.
EURICUS CORDUS.
“Cordus, who was accustomed to receive his fees only at the
termination of patient’s disease, describes, in a facetious epigram,
the practitioner at three different times, in three different
characters.
Three faces wears the doctor; when first sought An angel’s—and a
god’s the cure half wrought: But when, that cure complete, he seeks
his fee, The devil looks then less terrible than he.
“The epigram of Cordus is illustrated by the following conversation,
which passed between Bovart and a French marquis, whom he had
attended during a long and severe indisposition. As he entered the
chamber on a certain occasion, he was thus addressed by his patient:
‘Good day to you, Mr. Bouvart; I feel quite in spirits, and think
my fever has left me.’ ‘I am sure of it,’ replied the doctor; ‘the
very first expression you used convinces me of it.’ ‘Pray explain
yourself.’ ‘Nothing more easy: in the first days of your illness,
when your life was in danger, I was your _dearest friend_; as
you began to get better, I was your _good Bouvart_; and now I am
Mr. Bouvart: depend upon it you are quite recovered.’ Bouvart’s
observation was grounded on a knowledge of human nature: every day’s
experience shows, that ‘_accipe dum dolet_’ should be the medical
man’s motto.
JOHN CASE.