| OCR Text |
Show 1878.] MR. F. DAY ON FEAR AND ANGER IN FISHES. 221 short, invariably seize their prey with their mouths, and that without calling the caudal fin into play. In fact, a stroke with the tail appears sometimes to denote contempt in fishes; it is not rare that anglers find fishes sometimes swim up to their bait, which they not only refuse, but, giving it a lash with their tail, decline to rise any more. This may, however, be a symptom of curiosity, which is largely developed in the finny tribe. " I might multiply instances from many authors, but consider those adverted to are sufficient to show that various ichthyologists have remarked upon the emotions of anger and terror in fishes being shown by the erection of their dermal appendages and gill-covers, as well as by changes of colour, whilst terror induces some species to emit sounds that are not commonly perceived; that fishes sometimes show affection for their partners in captivity, mourning their removal; that they may be tamed sufficiently to come to a recognized sound, even to individual names that have been bestowed upon them ; and that some species have an instinctive affection for their eggs and young, which they guard against intruders with the greatest determination. "At the present time, in the Royal Westminster Aquarium, is a live example of the Electric Eel (Gymnotus electricus) which has in its electric organs the means of showing when it is affected by anger or terror. Some consider this curious property is for protection against Alligators ; it is certainly used against fishes for the purpose of obtaining food ; but when we remember how, when the Indians drive in horses and mules to the waters infested by the Eels, they immediately attack them, we must admit that such cannot be for the purpose of preying upon them, but is due to anger or terror at being disturbed." Mr. Whitmee being unable to attend, the Secretary read the subjoined reply to Mr. Day's remarks. " By the courtesy of the Secretary I have seen Mr. Day's comments on m y paper. As I cannot attend the meeting to-morrow evening, I crave the liberty of presenting two or three written observations. "1. M y paper was written in Samoa in 1875 ; and my position there, of course, prevented me from having access to the whole literature of this subject. I was aware of the conduct of the Stickleback in guarding its nest, and also of similar conduct in some other fishes. But my object was to show, in opposition to a view quoted, that fishes, as a class, manifest as much feeling as most other animals. In stating that I had not met with observations showing this, I did so as an excuse for presenting a paper which I feared possessed little intrinsic value. I am glad the paper has led Mr. Day to bring forward so much evidence in confirmation of the view I advocated. " 2 . Mr. Day gives a more general application than I intended to my observations about the mode of fighting with the tail. I stated an observed fact, viz. that certain fishes in my aquarium, when fighting, lashed at each other with their tails. From this I inferred |
