of Naumann's * Vogel Deutschlands/ 57 



in that vicinity, and his having obtained, without eggs it is true, a 

 supposed nest. This was a domed structure, but, unlike those 

 built by most Phyllopneustce, not placed on the ground. He 

 also states that its song is somewhat like that of our Wood Wren, 

 but is much weaker in tone. And here we part company for the 

 present with our small friend, trusting we have done somewhat 

 towards restoring him to his long-neglected honours. 



There is one other topic upon which we cannot refrain from 

 saying a few words before we dismiss the work we have been 

 reviewing. It is well known that naturalists, whatever be their 

 particular lines of study, are, as a rule, to be divided into two 

 schools. Our entomological and botanical brethren, to whom 

 the characteristics of either party have been more especially 

 brought home, have, if we are not mistaken, recognized these 

 two sects in common parlance as the "splitters" and the 

 "lumpers'' — those who erect every trifling diflference into a 

 specific distinction, and those who refuse to acknowledge that 

 these differences possess any scientific value. This last body 

 we have thought it right, a few lines above, to condemn. It 

 remains to be said that the authors of the continuation of Nau- 

 mann's great undertaking are not adherents of the former. 

 They exhibit, on the contrary, a most remarkable and praise- 

 worthy exception to the bigotry of both parties. Dr. Blasius, as 

 may be gathered from the expression of his opinions recorded in 

 the article which appeared in one of our former numbers, has 

 very strong convictions on this point, but he has given utterance 

 to them in a temperate manner, and one worthy of a deep- 

 thinking philosopher. Dr. Baldamua, to whose share in the 

 work before us we feel that in this notice we have hardly done 

 suflScient justice, appears fully to coincide with the views of his 

 colleague. Together they have produced a volume of the highest 

 use to the student of the European Fauna, and have set an ex- 

 ample to the naturalists of other countries which well merits 

 imitation. In England much aversion has hitherto been popu- 

 larly entertained towards the writings of German ornithologists ; 

 chiefly, we believe, excited by the notion that they all resembled 

 those of a well-known leader of the " splitters." A more just 

 appreciation, we trust, will soon succeed; and if so, German 



