Government Marine Aquarium on the Marina promenade, Madras, established in 1909

-- by Anantanarayanan Raman

In 1905–1906, Edgar Thurston (Superintendent, Madras Museum, 1885–1908) sowed the seeds for a marine aquarium in Madras, because of city’s coastal proximity. This effort eventuated as the Madras Marine Aquarium (MMA) in1909. Directed by the superintendents of Madras Museum during its initial days, the MMA was handed to the Department of Fisheries, Government of Madras, in 1919. Frederick Nicholson, James Hornell and B. Sundara Raj superintended the MMA in 1909-1918, 1918-1924 and 1924–1942 respectively. From 1919, a research thrust was envisaged. Consequently, reasonable research progressed at MMA utilising the organisms held in captivity. With the World War II (1939–1945) threatening India, Madras especially, the MMA was shut down in 1942. It reopened in 1955 but more as a freshwater aquarium, disengaging from its original concept of a marine centre. This article clarifies the ­pioneering efforts made by Nicholson, Hornell and Sundara Raj in bringing organisms live from sea for the common person of Madras to see, enjoy their colours and forms, and learn from them. Efforts made by Nicholson, Hornell and Sundara Raj instilled a sense of what we today re fer to as ‘biological diversity’ and ‘phenotypic variation’. The MMA was the spark that ignited the fire of setting up similar educational-cum-scientific institutions elsewhere in India in later years.

The Marina promenade

The Marina in Madras holds a pride of place in India for its adorable beach – with incessantly rolling blue and silvery waves and a vast expanse of serene and shimmering sand – free to any visitor (Figure 1). What used to be the ‘South-Beach Road’ and presently Kamarajar Salai – a popular promenade that runs parallel to the shoreline from Fort St George in the north to St. Thomas’s Cathedral and beyond in the south – was conceived, planned, and executed by Mountstuart Elphinstone Grant-Duff (1829–1906), Governor of Madras (1881–1886). Grant-Duff christened this stretch as Marina and opened it to the general public of Madras in October 1884.

Many historic institutions, such as the University of Madras (Chepauk campus), Humayun Mahal (the Chepauk Palace of the Nawab of Arcot, 1768–1855), Presidency College, Marina Cricket Ground, Lady Wenlock Park, Queen Mary’s College, All-India Radio, Directorate-General of Police, and the Ice House (presently, Vivekananda House) dot the western edge of the South-Beach Road; no institution of significance either existed in the past or exists presently on the eastern edge of this promenade, except the Madras Marine Aquarium (MMA).

Madras Marine Aquarium

The MMA started on a modest scale on the Marina promenade in October 1909, intended as an entertainment–education precinct. James Hornell, Director of the Department of Fisheries, Madras Presidency, has the following to say, about MMA in 1922:

‘This aquarium has the distinction of being the only one on the Asiatic mainland; indeed, except for the ephemeral ones erected from time to time in Japan, it may be claimed as the first attempt of its kind east of Suez. It was designed by Mr. E. Thurston during the last years of his tenure in the post of Superintendent of the Madras Museum; the present writer well remembers discussing the arrangement of the tanks with him, and giving what advice lay in his power, little thinking that the whirligig of time would bring him the responsible charge of its superintendence. It was erected by the Madras Government primarily with a view to give the public an opportunity to learn something of the wonderful wealth of life in the sea at their doors, and partly to afford facilities for studying of the habits of marine animals.’

By the late 1980s – early 1990s, signs of degeneration and deterioration were showing up for little-known reasons. The 2004 tsunami drove the final nail in the coffin of MMA. The present article chronicles MMA’s life and the science it promoted in its halcyon days.

The names Frederic Nicholson, James Hornell and B. Sundara Raj feature prominently in the chronicles of MMA. Frederick Augustus Nicholson (1846–1936) of the Indian Civil Service (Figure 3), previously the Collector of Madras district, was deputed as the Fisheries Officer in 1905. Given that the presidency of Madras comprised (and continues so in the state of Tamil Nadu) a c. 1100 km coastline and extensive practice of fisheries including pearl and chank harvesting, Nicholson was given a dictate to develop fisheries benefitting the economy of Madras presidency. Nicholson proposed the creation of a ‘Bureau of Fisheries (BoF)’ aiming at increasing fish production, promoting fish-based industries, and improving the socio-economic conditions of the fisherfolk. In 1907, the BoF eventuated, which, in fact, pioneered professional fisheries management throughout India. Nicholson took over as the Honorary Director of BoF and served until 1918. James Hornell (1865–1949) (Figure 4) first arrived in Colombo from the UK in 1902 to execute a feasibility study of pearl fishery in the Gulf of Mannar endowed with ample populations of the pearl-yielding Pinctada radiata and P. fucata (Mollusca: Pteriidae) for the Government of Ceylon. He was appointed as ‘Marine Assistant’ in the newly established Madras BoF by Nicholson in 1906.

Following Nicholson’s retirement in 1918, Hornell succeeded and served the BoF until 1924. Hornell passionately pursued marine science and classified the sociology of the fisherfolk of the Tamizh land, e.g. their social life and their boats (catamarans and masulas). After 1924, he was a consultant to Sayajirao Gaekwad III (1863–1939) to develop marine and freshwater fisheries in the state of Baroda (Vadodara). Hornell wrote scores of scientific articles and monographs.

Between 1909 and 1919, the MMA was superintended by John Robert Henderson, Superintendent of Madras Government Museum, after Edgar Thurston. The MMA was handed over to the new Department of Fisheries, Madras Presidency – evolved from the BoF – in 1919. When designed, the MMA was contemplated as an aquarium to exhibit only marine organisms, with provisions made for circulating the closely available seawater. Plans for a marine aquarium in Madras were drawn by Edgar Thurston in 1905–1906 with the following objects: (i) an aquarium exhibiting marine vertebrates was necessary because Madras occurs on the coast of the Bay of Bengal (BoB), (ii) the BoB and coast contributed significantly to the economy of Madras, and (iii) the residents of Madras need to see and know the organisms that contributed to the economic development of the region.

The comprehensive and monumental 7-volume Castes and Tribes of Southern India by Thurston, assisted by Kadambi Rangachari is a glorious memorial to India’s complex Anthropology. Thurston also wrote books on metallurgy, geography and economic products of southern India (for details, see the University of Pennsylvania’s archives: https://online- books.library.upenn.edu/webbin/book/look- upname?key=Thurston, accessed on 28 December 2023). With Arthur Oliver Villiers Russell’s (the Second Baron of Ampthill (1869–1935), Governor of Madras (1900–1904)) support, Thurston led a committee consisting of A. G. Bourne, J.R. Henderson, P.F. Fyson, K. Ramunni Menon and W. Molesworth exploring the establishment of MMA. The Thurston Committee was fully conscious that the intended marine aquarium was the first of its kind between Italy in the west and the Philippines in the east, and there- fore, any available European model for a marine aquarium would not work, given that Madras is tropical. The Thurston Committee foreshadowed myriad problems – both administrative and financial. However, they overcame them.

The MMA was opened to the public on 21 October 1909. A modest brick structure on the seaward side of the Marina promenade, less than 100 yards (c. 90 m) from the sea, housed it. A rectangular hall of 50’ (15.25 m) x 35’6” (10.82 m) was the basic structure of the building, including a display space of 17,702 ft (164.42 m) (no floor plan traceable). The cost to build this structure was Rs 30,000 and the annual maintenance cost was Rs 7,000. The entrance led into the tiled rectangular hall wherein a centrally sunk artificial fresh-water pool existed, equipped with a water-fountain feature. Five water tanks with glass fronts, each 7 x 3 x 3½’ (2.1 x 0.91 x 1.07 m), lit from above, occurred on either side of the open hall. Smaller, rectangular glass-fronted, table-top tanks (measurements not available) were disposed about the hall depending on space. The two end walls of the hall were utilized to display preserved specimens and highlight the range of marine animals occurring on the Madras coast. The seaward side of the central space accommodated one large, open tank (measurements unavailable), housing a population of Chelonia mydas (green sea turtles, Chelo-niidae). On either side of the entrance to the hall existed two relatively smaller rooms intended for committee meetings and storing materials and furniture. The store room also housed a mechanical aerator.

The other live displays included locally available species of cuttlefish (Sepiidae), Holothuridae (Holothuroidea; possibly, Holothuria nobilis), a few species of the Decapoda, such as Clibanarius infraspinatus (hermit-crab, Diogenidae), Scylla serrata (orange mud crab, Portunidae), Panulirus homarus (spiny lobster, Palinuridae) and Peneaus indicus (the Indian prawn, Penae-idae).

In the Fisheries department report for 1911–1912 – published in 1918 – Nicholson indicates that the MMA required re-building and expansion. He says:

‘At the instance of Government, the Fisheries department submitted to government a scheme and plan drawn up by Hornell as an Aquarium expert, for the erection at Madras of a suitable Marine Aquarium (to replace the present very small but very popular one) and Marine Biological Institution: a special committee was appointed to consider the question and reported to Government strongly in favour of the scheme including not only an aquarium worthy of the country and its position as the only one between Naples and the Philippines, but a place of biological research and instruction, a source of supply of biological supply for use in educational institutions and for study by savants all over the world, and a suitable home for the Fisheries department which would, in turn, greatly strengthen its position and enhance its usefulness. Hornell also suggested the foundation of a research fellowship in fishery investigations tenable by graduates of the Madras University in connection with the economic work of the proposed institution, a suggestion which was warmly supported by the committee.’

However, in his annual report, Nicholson clarifies that the government had agreed, in principle, to add laboratories and offices for new staff with the refurbished MMA by 1919, thus developing it as the state-of- the-art ‘Fisheries Biological Station’. However, due to financial exigencies, that proposal was deferred, with no date stipulated.

MMA (1919–1942)

Reports of BoF made by Nicholson in 1918 and by Hornell in 1922 – the successive Directors of the BoF and the renamed Department of Fisheries, Madras – say that the MMA was well received by the Madras public. Highly likely, a revised stand by the Government of Madras should have occurred, details of which are not available. Incidentally and curiously, in 1919, the scope and mission of MMA were revised. A new goal was set: the MMA was to investigate the life histories of ‘edible’ fishes and oysters so that their stocking and breeding in monitored conditions could be achieved; consequently, the MMA should become a stocking-breeding facility. What Nicholson perceived as the ‘Fisheries Biological Station’ took a different shape. Hornell says:

‘The project for a marine aquarium and marine biological station advanced to the production of architect’s plans, in the preparation for which Mr. Hornell’s expert assistance was sought and given. Apart from the need for purely scientific research, there are many practical problems presenting themselves for enquiry, such as for instance, the life history of food fishes, the organisms they feed upon, and of their enemies, the examination of various marine products, and so forth. For such purposes, as well as for research by savants and students, and for the provision of specimens of marine life for scientific and educational purposes, the new institution, with its laboratories, library, and museum, will be most valuable while providing in the aquarium proper a means of popular and most interesting instruction.’

Hornell argued to the government that the MMA needs to be a centre of active research as well. Consequently, the Government of Madras considered enabling MMA with modern laboratories. Another effort by Hornell, after Nicholson’s previous vain bid, also did not materialise sooner. However, a later report by Hornell’s successor B. Sundara Raj includes a remark that research was activated with the use of Steam Trawler Lady Goschen (operational in 1927–1930) and on three newly established on-shore stations at West Hill (Calicut, presently Kozhikode, Kerala), Krusadai Island (Tamil Nadu) and Visakapatnam (Andhra Pradesh). Notably these are feathers in the cap of the Department of Fisheries and not that of MMA per se.

The launch of Guide to Madras Marine Aquarium (28 pages) in 1919 was a milestone in the memoirs of MMA. This guide included biological, common-English and vernacular names of exhibited organisms, further to brief biological and economic notes. A reference to the fifth-enlarged edition of this guide (45 pages), 1923, is available (https://books.google.com.au/books/ about/Guide_to_the_Madras_Marine_Aquarium_Fifth_html, accessed on 2 January 2024). The restored aquarium included a new set of electric lighting, displaying the tanks better, especially after twilight. Hornell remarks that the captive fishes expressed ‘perfect tolerance’ to artificial lighting, irrespective of the brilliance. The refurbished MMA attracted more visitors – despite the fee – evidenced by visitor numbers: 96,957 in 1918–1919 and 163,517 in 1919–1920.

The water-aeration mechanism in the tanks was improved to perform dually: the inflow of filtered seawater was regulated from a high-level storage reservoir; an air compressor delivered air at the bottom of every tank. But it was impossible to regulate aeration suiting the varying constitutional susceptibilities of every type of fish displayed in MMA. Consequently, some of them suffered the ‘gas-eye’ disease because excess oxygen induced the eye- ball to protrude. Hornell comments that the protruding eyeballs attracted predation by co-occurring predatory fishes.

All the fish displayed were from the sea in Madras’s neighbourhood. The exhibits were diverse, yet representative of those common on the Madras coast. Many, such as Tenualosa iisha (hilsa, Dorosomatidae), various Clupeidae (sardines, Clupeiformes) and Scombridae (mackerels, Scombriformes) were delicate to withstand handling and transport. A few others were either unattractive or bulky for exhibition. So they were not displayed. Hornell adds that taxa representing lower forms of marine life, such as the colourful and spectacular Nudibranchia and Euopisthobranchia (Gastropoda) commonly displayed in the European aquaria, did not exist in MMA. He regrets that the gaudy Ocypodidae (ghost and fiddler crabs, Brachyura), exquisite Palinuridae (spiny, rock lobsters, Pleocyemata), huge Penaeidae (shrimps, prawns, Penaeoidea) endowed with long antennae, purple and canary-yellow Holothurioidea (sea cucumbers, Echinozoa), crimson Oreasteridae (the cushion starfishes, Echinodermata), blue Porpitidae (blue-buttons, Hydrozoa), violet Siphonophorae (Hydrozoa) and the Janthinidae (violet-sea snails, Gastropoda) available in Pamban and Tuticorin of Madras presidency could not be exhibited in MMA for reasons of distance and transport-cost, and lack of space.

James Hornell’s guide to MMA (1921)

This section has been derived from the Madras marine aquarium of 1921, published in the Madras Fisheries Department Bulletin.

The preface to this guide (referred to as ‘handbook’ as well) explains the logistics Hornell had followed. But his note reads strangely for two reasons: (i) Hornell compares fish behaviour with human behaviour and (ii) for the kind of language he has used. That note is reproduced below as such:

‘An aquarium handbook cannot describe the creatures living in the tanks in the precise order of their relationship to one another, as found in a text book on zoology. Of necessity many types are missing, either because they do not occur in Madras seas or because of difficulties in bringing safely to the shore or maintaining health when placed in the tanks. Active and delicate fishes of the sardine and mackerel families are particularly difficult to keep alive in captivity. Another source of trouble in placing fishes in their proper order in the tanks lies in the mental and moral attitude of certain species towards their fellows. As with men, there are fishes with a predatory instinct highly developed; many are unabashed cannibals; others are of a nagging and bullying disposition, never happy ­except when teasing and snap- ping at others; another set ­revel in combats with their own or related species. It requires a large experience of the varying characters of the different kinds to know how to arrange happy families in each tank; sometimes, individuals of the same species have to be kept apart to prevent quarrels and bloodshed. Hence, the following notes cannot be arranged strictly in zoological order.’

Hornell also provides brief details of the displayed fishes. He has included 25 India-ink illustrations of select species. He acknowledges M. Ramaswami Nayudu and K.R. Samuel, his assistants at MMA, for preparing illustrations used in this guide (e.g. Figure 5).

This guide includes details of 44 species of Actinopterygii (ray-finned fishes), 16 of Arthropoda (animals with jointed legs), three of Chondriochthyes (cartilaginous fishes), two of Cnidaria (jellyfish), one of Asteroidea (sea stars), and two of Mollusca (a large group that includes a variety of snails, slugs, clams, and squids). As an example, I provide details about Hippocampus kuda (the sea horse, Syngnathidae: Hippocampinae) to illustrate Hornell’s style of presentation in this guide. He indicates that H. kuda is commonly seen in Madras seas. This is an ‘interesting’ organism, he says, more because of the quaintness in shape than any curious behaviour in its habits, as he had seen in the aquarium tank: ‘usually he [Hornell uses the gender pronoun ‘he’ and not a third-person pronoun ‘it’] rests quietly and apparently very observant, if we may judge by the quick movements of the eyes’; to anchor himself securely, he twists the end of his thin tail around a weed or a twig of a sea-fan (Cnidaria: Gorgoniidae) keeping his body vertical (Figure 6). The pipe fishes (Syngnathidae: Sygnathinae), close allies of the Hippocampinae, were also maintained in the same tank. Males in both Hippocampinae and Sygnanthinae store eggs laid by this mate in a long fold of the skin along each side of the body – which Hornell refers to as ‘incubatory pouches’, presently ‘brood pouches’. Hornell remarks that one male H. kuda opened ‘his’ incubatory pouch on a day early in December 1920 and released a little more than 200 fry, miniatures of himself but only less than 4 mm in overall length.

The MMA carried out basic biological investigations on some organisms in captivity. For example, one S.T. Moses, identified as ‘sub-assistant-in-charge of MMA’, investigated the anatomy of Notarchus (N. indicus–?, the sea hare, Mollusca: Aplysiidae) and published results. Moses of MMA also clarified the habits of the Parathelphusa (the paddy-cutting crabs, Crustacea: Gecarcinucidae) based on a request from the Department of Agriculture, Government of Madras. Details of two other publications by Moses, one on the anatomy of Turbinella pyrum (Turbinellidae) and the second on the anatomy and life-history of Ostrea madrasensis (Mollusca: Ostreidae) are available. Birthing in captivity by Narcine timlei (the Indian electric ray; Narcinidae) and Narke dipterygia (previously Astrape dipterygia; the numb ray; Narkidae), and Hydrophis cyanocinctus (previously Distira cyanocintus; the annulated sea snake; Elapidae) occurred in MMA in August 1926, which Sundara Raj announced in an issue of the Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society. This note includes brief details of the behaviour of both the mother and offspring soon and a little after parturition.

MMA (1942 and after)

Due to reasons attributed to World War II and anticipating the Japanese attack on Madras, the MMA was shut down in 1942. It was reopened in August 1955, but more as a freshwater aquarium than a marine aquarium, as intended in 1909. A news item in a popular newspaper indicates that the sea horse (H. kuda) was bred in captivity in July 1986 (https://www.the- hindu.com/news/cities/chennai/Plans-afoot- to-revive-aquarium-at-Marina/article1442- 6600.ece, dated 17 June 2016, accessed on 27 December 2023). My efforts to verify this claim from published papers proved in vain; nor Lipton et al. of the Vizhinjam Research Centre of the Central Marine Fisheries and Research Institute speak of any successful captive breeding effort of H. kuda made in MMA in their article on captive breeding and nursery rearing of H. kuda in India. But we know that biologists at the MMA developed appropriate protocols for ex situ culturing of Crassostrea madrasensis (previously Ostrea madrasensis, the Indian backwater oyster, the edible-Indian oyster; Ostreidae). This work carried out at the MMA in the early 1920s established that C. madrasensis fatten and breed only in low salinity, whereas Ostrea edulis (the European-edible oyster, a.k.a. the Colchester native oyster, mud oyster)grow well in high salinity.

Bernd Brunner – who presently writes on science for popular readership – has documented the history of marine aquaria in The Ocean at Home: An Illustrated History of the Aquarium. In this book, Brunner speaks of contemporary approaches to building and maintaining marine aquaria, from homes to walk-through oceanaria. In India, close to 20 aquaria presently exist in different cities (https:// en.Wikipedia.org/wiki/List of aquaria in_ India, accessed on 1 January 2024). Against these present-day developments, I am thoroughly convinced that the MMA has stood magnificently as a pioneer for Indian aquaria, be it marine or freshwater.