many other circumstances have forced conviction upon us. About six years back, in the early part of the year, we were angling in the river May (a tributary of the Earn), which is much visited by salmon in the spawning season, and killed a good many fish, which at first sight we supposed to be samlets. It so happened, that, in disengaging one of these from the hook, it slipped from our grasp, and in seizing hold of it rather rudely, to our surprize the whole scales adhered to our fingers, and the fish then presented the exact appearance of a par. Upon handling several others the same thing happened, and upon inspecting the fish more minutely, it appeared that the second or silvery white scales were growing out between the others which still remained on the fish after it had assumed the appearance of a par. On this particular day we did not kill a single fish without those scales, although par at other seasons of the year are numerous in the May. About a month afterwards we visited the spot again, and this time killed a number of par, on none of whom did the second set of scales appear. This led to the conjecture, that the first set of fish had gone down to the sea, and that the second, which we now met with, were the young of salmon who had ascended the river later in the season, and consequently were later in being disengaged from the ova. We regret that it was not in our power to visit the same river at a later period, being convinced that we should then have met with the second breed of fish in the same situation as the first-viz. undergoing the change from the state of par to that of salmon.

It was the constant habit of the late Mr. James Hogg, well known to the world as the Ettrick Shepherd, to mark every par he caught in the Yarrow, by making a particular incision in its tail, and to return it to the river. This practice he not only followed himself, but recommended to his friends, and to all those who frequented the banks of that delightful border stream; and many and many is the par which we ourselves have marked, and returned to the water whilst fishing in company with him. The result, as stated by the Shepherd, was very remarkable. Within a year of the time when this practice was commenced, no less than four salmon with this particular mark were taken in the Yarrow, besides many that must have been captured in the Tweed, where, as the experiment was not known, they would of course be disposed of without examination. On the next and the successive years the result was still more convincing; and all that can be alleged against the credibility of the fact is this-that it is highly improbable that, out of the few fish thus marked by Mr. Hogg and his friends, so many should return to their native river, or in their mutilated state should have escaped the thousand dangers that beset them on their double journey.

To this we reply, first, that it has been ascertained by repeated experiments (such as the planting of salmon in a river which they never before frequented-practised with success in Sutherland), that a salmon invariably returns to the stream where it first was spawnednay, so curious in this matter is the perception of the fish, that it will pass by three or four tributaries of the principal river, until it reaches that which it descended on its way to the ocean. Secondly, that we are inclined to believe that the number of fish in almost every river is greatly overrated, and that it would be no difficult task for two or

three expert anglers in such a river as the Yarrow to capture in the course of a season a very large proportion of the number it contained. Let us see how this matter stands. River trout in a good situation are of rapid growth, and in the course of a couple of years, or even less, will weigh more than a pound. Now supposing an angler has in the course of the day killed sixty fish, how many, think you, will exceed a pound? Not three in any Scottish river excepting those of the North, which are scarcely ever fished. Every practical angler will agree with us in this so that when you hear a fellow talking of his great achievements on the Tweed, of the hundreds of two-pounders and threepounders that he has inveigled from the pools, you may safely set him down for an impudent and ignorant impostor. Perceiving this, and being at the same time aware of the rapid growth of fish, the young angler naturally asks, "How is it that I cannot capture any of these large Leviathans? Surely my right hand is deficient in cunning." Not a bit, our good Sir; we have watched you for this last half hour, and beg leave conscientiously to compliment you on the admirable manner in which you throw your flies, spin your minnow, and work your worm. You do not know us we perceive: allow us to introduce ourselves. We are THE ORGANIST. Nay, nay, our kind Sir! your hat to its proper use, we are but a mortal like yourselves. And to reconcile you with your own misfortunes, we will allow you, what we seldom vouchsafe to strangers, a peep into our basket. You observe, it is tolerably well filled; some ten dozen perhaps, but there are not seven of them above a pound weight, and only one that we can swear to as being an ounce above four. The truth is, that the majority of these fish have not roamed in the waters for more than a year. It is their fecundity that preserves the breed. A single female will produce spawn enough to stock the eighth part of a mile of water: were it less, the race of trout would in this river have been long ago extinct. Look up and down the water we pray you, and tell us what you see. Eight fishing-rods waving in the wind! Do you wonder any longer that comparatively few fish escape the grasp of the destroyer for a longer period than a year?

Thus then we think it very likely that the number of par returned marked by Mr. Hogg bore a larger proportion to the number of those untouched than most persons are apt to suppose, and the probability of the story is thus materially increased. As for the objection that the fish were unlikely to return, being mutilated, that we think is not entitled to any weight, as the mark was so small as by no means to impede them in the act of swimming. We shall now mention another fact, which we take to be a poser.

Every river in the southern counties of Scotland having free access to the sea abounds in par. There are, however, two streams situated close to Edinburgh in which not a single par is to be found. Those two are the water of Leith and the Almond. The first is rendered utterly impassable to salmon by a variety of obstacles, setting aside altogether the large proportion of city filth which is discharged into it near its mouth, and which would effectually prevent any cleanly salmon from entering although the passage were as open as the mouth of Dando the oyster-eater. The second is now closed by a large dam near the sea, above which no salmon can ascend. This dam was

erected or raised a few years ago, and it is within our own memory that salmon were caught as far up as Mid Calder, and even in one of the tributaries which join the Almond near that picturesque village. At that time par abounded in the Almond, and there is not one now to be found throughout the whole of its course.

Either

Now what is the inference we must draw from this fact? that the par are the young of the salmon, or that the par are, like the salmon, a migratory fish, and must resort to the sea. Dr. Parnell, in his very able paper on "Fishes found in the Firth of Forth," repudiates the latter idea, stating truly that there is no instance of a par having ever been caught in the sea. Yet the Doctor maintains that the par is a distinct species from the salmon! How then will he account for the fact which we have stated above? how explain that in these rivers, since they were shut up against the salmon, the par has never been seen, and that, moreover, not a single par is to be found above the falls of Clyde, which no salmon can ascend however vigorous his leap?

We wish devoutly that some good anatomist would take up the cudgels on our side, and meet our medical opponents on their own particular dunghill. Let the supporters of the claims of the par to the dormant salmon peerage be ever so practical, let their experience be ever so great, they are sure to be overcrowed by the knights of the lancet and the scapel. Your internal evidence is a terrible stumblingblock in the way of us puny whipsters, who content ourselves with admiring external Nature, and can draw no deductions from the arcana of comparative anatomy. Yet in the absence of learned defenders, we, although no chirurgeon, shall modestly and with a decent blush on our cheeks venture to dispute the most material distinction which Dr. Parnell lays down in this paper (see "Transactions of the Edinburgh Royal Society, Vol. XIV., Part I.") as existing between the par and the young of the salmon. He says that the cœcal appendages of the salmon (we quote from memory) are fifty-five, and those of the par only forty-three. This we venture to say is not a sufficient argument against their identity, unless Dr. Parnell is prepared to prove that the food of the young fish and of the old is the same, which it is not supposed to be. In nature there are many instances of a change in the internal structure of an animal as it advances towards maturity. The intestinal canal, for example, of a tad-pole is very different from that of a frog, the habits of the creature at the two great periods of its life being essentially opposite. May not the same change be wrought in the fish during its progress to maturity? We ask with modesty, and expect a reply with diffidence.

Dear reader, have we been tedious in these cursory remarks? If you are not an angler, you will probably cut us off in the prime of life by replying in the affirmative; if you are one, we expect a milder sentence. Truth is to be gained by the accumulation of small facts, just as a sovereign may be made up by a multiplicity of congregated pence; and if we have added the value of four farthings to the collection, we are abundantly satisfied. We shall devoutly hope, for your sake and our own, that we shall not be often thus tedious, but that when we meet again you may find matter more attractive in the Sporting Autobiography of AN ORGANIST.

ON THE ADVANTAGES OF RACE-HORSE VANS, AND OTHER MATTERS CONNECTED WITH RACING.

THERE is no class of men who appear to have improved more under the influence of education than trainers. Some fifty years ago they were composed of an ignorant, bigoted, and obstinate community, very different from most of the present day, who possess much discrimination, watch attentively the tempers and constitutions of the horses which they train, and, being guided by the circumstances which occur, bring them to the post in very high condition. The treatment which they exhibit towards the animals under their care is dictated by humanity and kindness, far different from what it was in former days, when the ignorant stupidity which prevailed actuated the trainer to inflict upon his horse the most absurd and injurious discipline. What the old-fashioned trainers would have said to having their horses conveyed from one race to another in a carriage, I can scarcely imagine; but then there were not so many places of sport as there now are. In 1739, we only find thirty-six meetings recorded; in 1805, there were ninety-four; in 1820, ninety; in 1829, one hundred and twenty-eight; and in 1838, one hundred and fifty-four.

The first attempt to convey race-horses from one place to another in a caravan appears to have been made by Mr. Terrett, a gentleman residing in Worcestershire, who sent his horse Sovereign in one to run for the Two Thousand Guineas Stakes at Newmarket; but his horse was beaten, and the carriage laid aside. This was in the year 1816. In 1836 the use of the caravan was effectually established. Elis was conveyed in one from Goodwood to Doncaster, having The Drummer to beat time for him; and as Elis was fortunate enough to win the St. Leger, caravans became in favor. Previous to the race, the surmises as to the probable effect which such a mode of conveyance might produce were numerous, and induced many to bet heavily against the horse. The subsequent proofs that we have had of the advantages derived by so easy, I may term it so luxurious, a system have quite changed the odds, and the horse which arrives at the scene of action in his carriage will be a much better favorite in the betting circles than the one which is compelled to travel on foot.

Many improvements have been made in the construction of these vehicles. Mr. Herring, of Westminster Road, London, built the one for Elis, and it was made to contain two horses, consequently requiring four posters to work it. The same builder has also constructed most of the others that have appeared, and, having had great practice in building similar carriages to convey wild beasts in, he is much more conversant with the business than an ordinary coach-builder. The most useful description of van is that which carries but one horse; it is very light, and is easily drawn by a pair of posters; whereas the double vans require four. There is a door behind for the horse to enter, so formed as to become, when open, an inclined platform for the horse to ascend. The front part of the carriage opens in the same way, so that the horse walks out without experiencing any inconvenience in being turned.

VOL. XIX.-SECOND SERIES.No. 109.

E

A patent drag, which enables the trainer, or any person riding in the coupe, to drag the wheel when about to descend a hill, or in case of an accident, without alighting, is attached to the caravans which Mr. Herring builds, and it gives universal satisfaction.

The most convenient plan for a double van, if such a one is required, is that in which the horses stand reversed; that is, the horse which enters first passes on through a space left in the partition, turns into the adjoining stall, and rides with his head towards the hind part of the carriage. The other horse walks straight into the carriage, and consequently travels with his head to the front. At the end of the journey the horse that entered first is ready to descend, when the other is turned into the stall just vacated, and so walks out. The difficulty and risk of turning a horse in a small space is thus obviated. The axle trees are cranked the body of the carriage is therefore only eighteen inches from the ground.

The necessity of a caravan is now become imperative, as, without one, a man cannot compete with those who have them. Last year King Cole was enabled to win the Gloucester Stakes of £170 entirely by the aid of one. He ran on the Monday at Wolverhampton, where he was beaten, and where his other engagements did not give promise of much success: he was conveyed in a caravan to Gloucester, a distance of fifty miles, on the evening of the day on which he ran at Wolverhampton, and on the following day (Tuesday) he won the above Stake.

This year Mr. Maley's Bellissima won the Tally-ho Stakes at Northampton, the Granby and the Billesdon Coplow at Croxton Park, all within about nine days, amounting to something like £1000, which in all probability she would not have accomplished if she had been compelled to have travelled on foot all the way from her stables at Stockbridge.

After all, it is a cheaper method than that of travelling horses on foot, when all expenses are calculated and the length of time that a horse must remain out if he has any distance to go. The caravan takes horse and boy, trainer, and jockey if required. The advantages of the horse doing all his work at home are very important, and as soon as the race is over the expenses of an inn are curtailed, as the party can immediately return home. Combat won the Surrey and Middlesex Stakes at Egham last year, and was in his own stable at Stockbridge the same night, a distance of fifty miles.

The railways present a speedy and safe mode of conveyance; but unfortunately the caravans are too high, when placed on one of their platforms, to go under the arches, consequently the horse must be placed in one of their boxes, and his own carriage left behind. The Company's fares are very high, and I am quite certain they would make more profit if their charges for the carriage of horses were fixed at a lower rate.

The gradual improvement which has taken place in the construction of all sorts of carriages since they were first invented has been steady and unequivocal, although I must confess the rejection of a perch is not advisable. Some of the caravans have been so built; and, although they may weigh lighter, they do not follow so well, neither are they so safe,