CORRESPONDENCE. 



Bewick alotie having mentioned five instances of its occurring in 

 England." In this case both Mr. Morris and the reviewer are in 

 the wrong; the former in giving E. chlorocephala (Greenheaded 

 Bunting) as distinct from the E. hortulana (Ortolan Bunting), and 

 the latter in supposing the Greenheaded Bunting to be an acciden- 

 tal variety of the Yellow Bunting (E. citrinella). That Mr. 

 Morris should quote Fleming (!) Lewin (! !) and Gmelin (! ! !) in 

 support of a doubtful species is rather singular, and reminds one of 

 the drowning man catching hold of a broken reed. 



"Thirdly,*' continues Mr. Morris, "on whose authority do I 

 admit Falco lithqfalco as different from the Falco cesalon f I reply, 

 on that of Linnaeus, Buffon, Bewick, &c. Mr. Morris might just 

 as well have gravely quoted Pliny or Goldsmith in defence of a dis- 

 puted point in Natural History. Upwards of twenty years ago, 

 Montagu, with his accustomed acumen, pointed out the probability 

 of the F, cemlon and the F. lithofalco being identical ; and since 

 that time his suspicions have been fully confirmed, and the species is 

 now known under the name of Stone Falcon (Falco lapidarius, Wil- 

 lughby). 



Mr. iMorris, however, in placing the above duplicates in his list 

 as distinct species, observes that he " fully expects that one (the 

 Regidus), or more of them, will not remain considered as good spe- 

 cies." The birds here alluded to are those mentioned by the re- 

 viewer, namely, the Whiteheaded Forktail (Elanus albicapillusj, 

 the Brown Nightling (Noctua dasipusj, the Grayheaded Oatear 

 CPecula neglecta), and the Fire-crested Kinglet (Regulus ignica^ 

 pillusj. I may here mention, as Mr. Morris seems particularly 

 sceptical about the right of the Firecrest to be considered as a dis- 

 tinct species from the Goldcrest, that Temminck expressly states 

 his conviction of this being the fact ; and Mudie, in his Feathered 

 Tribes, has likewise given a detailed account of the specific differ- 

 ences of the two species ; and so also has Jenyns. 



Mr. Morris continues — " Whole Snipe your correspondent ima- 

 gines to be a misprint (for Large Snipe, as I suppose) ; but, what- 

 ever its market n?ime may be, it is by this name that the bird is 

 known to sportsmen, from Lincolnshire to Hampshire ; and there- 

 fore I see no reason, at present, to alter it." That an unmeaning 

 or erroneous name must remain unaltered because in use among the 

 sportsmen, is certainly not a very cogent reason. 



Thus concludes the list of errors charged by the reviewer against 

 Mr. Morris's Guide, After a " cursory inspection," however, I find 

 many others of a more serious mature ; some of which I will now 



