494 



REVIEWS OF NEW PUBLICATIONS. 



On the Natural History and Classification of Birds. By William Swainsok, 

 A.C.G., F. R. S., F. L. S., &c. Vol. II. London : Longman and Co., and 

 John Taylor. 1837. l2mo. pp. 398. 



The present volume contains a brief but masterly explanation of the affinities 

 of Dentirostres, Rasores, Grallatores, and Natatores, or the Dentirostral birds, 

 Gallinaceous birds, Waders, and Swimmers, illustrated by numerous wood-cuts. 

 The work is for the most part written in our author's usual philosophic spirit, 

 but we greatly dislike the tone of the following extract : — 



If our opponents, by any theory of their own, equally comprehensive, can explain and illus- 

 trate what this cannot do, we will then not only consent to abandon our propositions as unten- 

 able, but adopt any other more demonstrative of the unity of Nature's laws. Until this, how- 

 ever, is done, or until something more philosophic is urged against us than the old reiterated 

 assertion that "the time Ins not yet come" for these investigations, &c. &c, we may be 

 allowed to preserve silence: these vague and querulous complaints, in truth, have emanated 

 from those only who have hitherto done nothing to place their names in the prominent ranks of 

 science, and who may consequently be presumed inadequate judges upon matters they have not 

 sufficiently studied.— p. 2. 



Mr. Swainson is here alluding to the leading article in the first number of the 

 Magazine of Zoology and Botany, by Mr. Jenyns. It is, to say the least, un- 

 courteous to judge thus harshly of so excellent a naturalist as Mr. J., w T ho w r as 

 merely expressing the individual opinion at which he had arrived respecting the 

 classification' ; and, if to either of these gentlemen, we should in this instance be 

 inclined to ascribe the *" querulous complaints" to Mr. Swainson. 



We believe thee quinary system to be more in accordance with Nature than any 

 other arrangement "hitherto promulgated. In this country it appears to have 

 been adopted by almost every naturalist of note who has impartially investigated 

 the theory. On' the other hand We are not aware of its having ever been opposed 

 with anything like success. It has l>een sufficiently ridiculed in private, but 

 never openly and fairly grappled with in public. Naturalists holding contrary 

 views must either consider' the subject too absurd to be gravely discussed, or 

 there must be a lack of realobjections'to the System. Some years ago an attack 

 upon the doctrine was published in 'the second edition of Montagu's Ornithological 

 Dictionary, by a gentleman evidently little acquainted with the subject. At- 

 tempted demolitions of the quinary system have likewise appeared in the Maga- 

 zine ofNahiral History (Vol. IX., we "believe), by Teter Rylands, Esq., and 

 Mr. Blytm. 



