oftJiis Magazine. 331 



the facts of the case. I did consult Mr. Swainson's paper, 

 — although 1 must confess it to be one of the most difficult 

 tasks imposed upon the naturalist, to hunt out all the scattered 

 information disseminated by the traders in science throughout 

 the multifarious periodical publications of the present day, 

 which afford a " consideration " for their scientific peltry ; — 

 I did, Sir, I repeat, consult Mr. Swainson's paper, and found 

 my two birds totally disagreeing with the descriptions* of his 

 two species. The very name of one of them actually proves 

 my reference to his species, as it points out the specific differ- 

 ence that separates one bird from the other. The species 

 which he meant to describe may by some possibility have 

 been the same as mine : but in that case his descriptions are 

 imperfect ; and, in the eyes of science, an imperfect description 

 stands for no description at all. After all, Sir, let us allow 

 that the worst suspicions of this writer have been realised, and 

 that I actually did describe a second time two species which 

 should have borne the honours of his important name, as 

 having previously been noticed by him ; is not this an error 

 of unavoidable and of everyday occurrence among our best 

 and most accurate writers ? — an error from which Mr. 

 Swainson is not, and cannot be supposed to be, exempt; — 

 an error which only requires to be noticed in a friendly- 

 manner, in order to be repaired on the first opportunity ; and 

 not, as in the present instance, to have been brought forward 

 after an interval of two years, as the subject of a grave and 

 formal accusation ? 



5. The foregoing charges are, comparatively speaking, of 

 little moment, as they involve the character and the feelings 



* The difference between my Colaptes collaris and Mr. Swainson's 

 Col. Mexicanus consists chiefly in the collar, which marks the breast of my 

 -bird, whence its name ; and which is not mentioned in the description 

 of the Mexican bird. I presumed that such an important character would 

 have been mentioned, if it had existed; particularly as less important 

 characters, such as the markings on the back, are particularised in the specific 

 description. My Pica Colliei (not Collieri, as Mr. Swainson misquotes 

 the word) differs from the description of his Pica formosa, by being one 

 third greater in size, and by having a black throat and breast, with a white 

 abdomen, while the whole under part of the latter species is white, with 

 the exception of a black pectoral band. I make little doubt that Mr. 

 Swainson's bird is the same as M. Wagler's Pica Bull6ck«, and M. Tem- 

 minck's Garrule commandeur. (pi. col. 436.) If I was in error in de- 

 scribing the bird brought home by Captain Beechey as different from the 

 Mexican species, and consequently deserving of the very flagrant censure 

 that he would bestow upon me, so equally was Mr. Children, so was the 

 editor of the translation of Cuvier's Animal Kingdom, so was Mr. Audu- 

 bon ; all of whom described the bird as different from Mr. Swainson's 

 species, and nearly at the same time with myself. 



