502 BURMA, ITS PEOPLE AXD PRODUCTIOXS. 



THE TAL PALM {Borassiis) (Page 383). 



That tberc may be no mistake, I may say that I cannot remember ever seeing 

 nests of the Baya attached to the Tfil palm— the P/iosiiix being universally selectefl 

 in preference. The reason is obvious, as the leaf of the Borassus does not offer so 

 convenient a basis of attachment as the leaf of the Phoenix does. 



CISSA (PSILORHINUS) MAGJSTIEOSTRIS (Page 3S7). 



Of this bird Dr. Mason writes : " General Johnson had one which exhibited all 

 the traits of the English magpie. It would take bones, liide them in a hollow 

 bamboo, cover them up with a rag, and return to them when needed. When a 

 bamboo could not be found, it would hide its spare food under the mat." 



CORVUS SPLENDENS (Page 387). 



The cases of birds attacking men in defence of their young are too numerous to 

 need reference or quotation ; but birds occasionally attack men, seemingly without 

 provocation. For example, Judge Norman, who was assassinated on the steps 

 of the Town Hall in Calcutta, related to me once that he was standing just out- 

 side his house in Calcutta, when suddenly a kite swooped down at his bare head, 

 and with its claws inflicted a severe wound on the scalp. In this case there was 

 absolutely no provocation, neither is it easy to assign any reason for the bird's 

 behadour. It is just possible, if Judge Norman had a handkercliief thrown over his 

 head at the time, that the bird may have swooped at the handkerchief, supposing it 

 to cover something to cat, but this I cannot say ; anyhow, the bird iuflicted a painful 

 Boalp wound, which was some days in healiug. 



PALJSORNIS VIBRISSA (Page 409). 



In the Edinburgh Review for April, 1882, appears an article on 'The late Lord 

 Tweeddale's Ornithological Essays,' which deserves a passing comment for the singular 

 dishonesty it displays, in the brief allusion it indulges in of a naturalist who stands in 

 the foremost rank of those who have made Indian Ornithology their study. The 

 article in question is in fact a sustained eulogy of the deceased nobleman, and as such 

 is admirable in its way ; but when its author contrives by both a siiggedio falsi -atiA the 

 suppressio veri to calumniate one of India's ablest naturalists, because, forsooth, ho 

 once wrote disparagingly of Lord Tweeddale, and in a strain (it may be admitted) of 

 doubtful taste, it behoves all who do not wish to see the scandalous malignity which 

 disgraces political controversy introduced into scientific discussion, to lift up their 

 voice in protest. 



The first passage which betrays the animosity of the writer to Mr. A. O. Humo 

 is where, in alluding to his Lordship's first Memoir on Captain Beavan's collection of 

 birds from British IJurma, he says, " The birds of British Burma were not nearly so 

 well known as they now are from the labours of Davison, Ramsay and Oates." To 

 those familiar with Indian ornithology, the omission of the name of Mr. A. 0. Hume 

 (not to mention others) from a place among those who have worked out the orni- 

 tliology of Burma, may simply excite laughter or contempt, but as the majority of 

 readei's of the lleview ai'e not versed in ornithological matters, the omission in 

 question, all things considered, is simply dishonest, and that this omission is studied, 

 and not accidental, is proved by the deliberate omission throughout tlie article of all 

 mention of Mr. Hume's special claim to the gratitude of all interested in Indian orni- 

 thology, as editor and originator of ' Stray Featliers.' 



Lord Tweeddale (as we all know) revised and edited the ornithological portion 

 of Blyth's posthumously published Catalogue of the Mammals and Birds of Burma — 

 good. But the reviewer adds, "This memoir (Blyth's memoir, be it remiMubered) 

 is still the leading \olume of reference on the birds of British Burma, though it is 



