Remarks on Audubo?i > s Biography of Birds. 217 



should be given to the world as the author of the work. To 

 this the gentleman would by no means listen, having pro- 

 bably in mind the old verse, which would have suited his 

 case admirably, with a trifling alteration : — 



Has volucrum vitas scripsi, " tulit alter honores." 



'Twas I who put these birds in story; 

 Another wears my wreath of glory. 



Mr. Audubon's application to this gentleman clearly shows 

 the consciousness of his own inability to write the work 

 which now bears his name. Indeed, had this proof been 

 wanting, his ill-written paper on the Fultur Aura tells us, in 

 language not to be mistaken, what a sorry biography of birds 

 we should have had, if Mr. Audubon had not taken the wise 

 precaution to get it done by proxy. He acknowledges that 

 his book received aid from a friend ; but where, I ask, are 

 the amended parts ? In what quarter of the Biography of 

 Birds can the reader trace the friendly tutor's hand ? 

 Throughout the whole of the work, I am unable to detect 

 the presence of any interpolation of good amongst bad. 

 From the beginning of the first page to the end of the last, 

 there is the decided appearance of the same masterly hand at 

 composition; and I defy the keenest eye to discover how 

 much of the work Mr. Audubon has written, or how many 

 asperities his friend has rasped away. Again ; while Mr. 

 Audubon acknowledges to have received assistance in the 

 scientific details, and in smoothing down the asperities of his 

 ornithological biographies, he says not one single word of aid 

 afforded in his numerous episodes; for example, that of the 

 Ohio, &c. Now, the style of writing — the very same style 

 of writing — which appears in those, appears equally in 

 these. Pray, how are we to account for this ? 



In fine, the whole work, from beginning to end, bears 

 evident and undeniable marks of being the produce of one 

 pen. One hand alone has directed that pen. Has this hand 

 been that of the reputed author ? — No. His former appli- 

 cation to get his book written for him shows how fearfully he 

 must have mistrusted his own way of writing; while the 

 faulty paper on the Fultur Aura proves its worthlessness. I 

 request the English reader to weigh well in his own mind 

 what I have stated ; and I flatter myself that he will agree 

 with me, when I affirm that the correct and elegant style of 

 composition which appears throughout the whole of the 

 Biography of Birds cannot possibly be that of him whose 



