LANGUAGE OF BIRDS 



invented by comparatively modern anthropo- 

 morphists. Not the poets alone, but all the 

 greatest thinkers throughout the ages when 

 dealing with the song of birds — the glorious 

 outburst of the lark, the deep, soul-stirring notes 

 of the nightingale — appear to have been struck 

 by the fact that here was an expression of 

 intense feeHng. 



What precisely this feeling may be, untaught, 

 wildly rapturous, what the objects may be which 

 are : — 



" the fountains 

 Of thy happy strain; 

 What fields, or waves or mountains. 

 What shapes of sky or plain," 



are, by no means, easy to guess. Still, knowing 

 that every soimd that proceeds from a living 

 creature — ^the moan of pain, the cry of fright, 

 the chuckle of content — enables us to enter to 

 some extent into the state of consciousness of 

 which it is the expression, we are inclined to 

 follow Tennyson, Wordsworth, Shelley, Keats 

 when they read into the song of lark or 

 nightingale, not only praise and thanksgiving, 

 but many more subtle intuitions as well. 



' ' Teach us, sprite or bird, 



What sweet thoughts are thine. 



I have never heard 



Praise of love or wine 



That panted forth a strain of rapture so divine." 



But all this is the mere frivolity of fancy when 

 regarded by the cold, clear, scientific eye. 

 This then, is the final word " entirely new" " of 

 true originality " given to humanity with the 

 imprimatur of our medical journal : 



" Singers need plenty of drink, whether they 

 are birds or human beings. This is evidenced 

 by the merry noise in our gardens immediately 

 after the rains in July. Birds sing because 

 their throats have been lubricated by drink." 



103 



