34 REMARKS CONDUCIVE TO THE IMPROVEMENT &C. 



dipper (cinclus). Speaking of two species of this genus, Bonaparte 

 says : — " The two species are so much alike in size, shape, and even 

 colour, as to defy the attempts of the most determined system-maker 

 to separate them into different groups." And thus (especially as 

 the localities and habits of all the members of this interesting genus 

 are so similar) it would be very difficult to hit on an appropriate 

 specific name, either in vernacular or scientific nomenclature. — 

 *' Aquatica" does not distinguish the species, in the present system, 

 though in that of Willoughby it answered the purpose very well : 

 he calls the bird '' Merula aquatica. Water Ouzel/' Nor is the term 

 Kuropea, applied by Stephens, unobjectionable ; being, as Mr. N. 

 Wood candidly owns, rather vague. (Vide Analyst, vol. ii, p. 421). 

 And here I cannot but acknowledge the very handsome manner in 

 which that intelligent writer has mentioned my paper on Nomen- 

 clature, which appeared in vol. ii., p. 305, of " The Analyst,'* 

 and which was, by some mistake of the printer, signed " N. F." 

 Instead of adhering to his own name, after being convinced of 

 its impropriety, as, I am sorry to find, several writers do, he 

 at once — although the objection was slight — gave up his own 

 name and adopted the improved one. This is the conduct of one 

 in earnest in his search after truth. The same writer says (vol. ii, 

 p. 239) : — " I am extremely happy in being able to mention Tem- 

 minck and Stephens amongst those writers on Ornithology who have 

 attended to this important part of nomenclature. Even these have 

 not always succeeded, but they have got the principle, and that is 

 more than half way towards being right." I agree in thinking 

 Temminck and Stephens, on the whole, good nomenclators, but both 

 have erred in many instances, of which, by way of illustration, I 

 will give examples. Temminck includes the Eagles, Buzzards, 

 Harriers, Hawks, &c. in the genus Falco ; but instead of applying 

 one French generic name, (Faucon) as he has done in his genus 

 Silvia, he gives no less than six ! The two Kinglets he includes in 

 the genus Silvia ; but instead of applying the name Becfin (as 

 through the rest of the genus) he calls them Roitelet — which 

 would be the proper name in the system of Selby. The genus Gal- 

 linula he calls Poule-d'eau, instead of Gallinule, as Vieillot has very 

 properly done. There are several more errors of this kind, but the 

 nomenclature is generally correct, and;» compared with that of Buf- 



