298 CORRESPONDENCE. 



or apparently wild, localities of our native trees, with anecdotes and 

 memoranda of any which are remarkable for their size, beauty, or 

 connection with the real or legendary history of the neighbourhood, 

 would prove very acceptable. I need scarcely add that such com- 

 munications will merit and receive my warmest and most grateful 

 acknowledgements. 



I am. Sir, your very obedient servant, 



WILLIAM ALLPORT LEIGHTON. 



Shrewsbury, May 23, 1836. 



P. S. — I would also take the opportunity of remarking that I shall 

 feel much pleasure in exchanging dried species of the rarer or more 

 local species of the plants of Shropshire for those of any more dis- 

 tant county. 



To the Editor of The Analyst. 

 Sir, 



I wish to pen a few remarks on a paper which appeared in No. 

 XIV. of The Analyst (vol. iii., p. 291), not with a view of shew- 

 ing Mr. Morris to be wrong, or his reviewer right, but simply to 

 point out a few facts which both appear, in some measure, to have 

 misunderstood ; as nothing tends -more to elucidate obscure points 

 in science than discussion carried on in a philosophic spirit. 



Mr. Morris begins his defence by saying — " He Qhe reviewer] 

 asks me on whose authority I admit the Picus medius as a distinct 

 species? — simply then on that of Linnaeus, Temminck, Bewick, 

 etc." I would here remark that Temminck and Linnaeus are right 

 in describing a species under that name, but that Bewick and other 

 British authors are wrong : what they have mistaken for the Picus 

 medius is the young of the Spotted Woodpecker {Picus Maculosus), 

 The P. medius is not an inhabitant of Britain. The reviewer's 

 question should, therefore, have been — Why is the P. medius ad- 

 mitted as a British bird ?* 



Mr. Morris continues — " Secondly, I am asked why do I admit 

 the Emberiza chlorocephala as a distinct species ? I do so because 

 Gmelin, Linnaeus, Lewin, Brown, Montagu, and Fleming, have 

 described it as a species ; and I include it among the British birds, 



• On reference to vol. iii., p. 99, of The Analyst, it will be perceived these 

 are the exact words used by the reviewer j and that they have been inexpli- 

 cably misquoted by Mr. Morris..— Ed. 



