230 Mr. Blyth's Commentary 



special passerine type of organization. Prof, Kaup's views I 

 would, on the contrary, stigmatize as unmitigated heresy, to be 

 repudiated by every devout ornithologist. What is there but 

 superficial resemblance as opposed to intrinsical conformity? — the 

 identical principle which would include the Hyaena under Canidce 

 instead of Viverrida, and would make a Squirrel of the Chinchilla, 

 a Rodent of the Chiromrjs or of the Marsupial Wombat, or an 

 ordinary Edentate of the Monotreme Echidna, which not only 

 would consider Anguis to be an Ophidian, but would put the 

 Salamanders in among the Lizards, the Cetaceans among Fishes, 

 the Orthopterous Lepisma among Crustacea, the Crustaceous 

 Barnacle among Shelled MoUusks, and the Ascarida among the 

 Red-blooded Annelides; which would make a Leech of a Planaria, 

 and in botany would refer the tree ferns, the Cycadacea, and the 

 pandanaceous Nipa to the order of palms ! Prof. Kaup^s op- 

 ponents in this matter may perhaps be excused if they likewise 

 venture to indulge in a little mild fanfaronnade. They cannot 

 help recalling to mind that redoubtable popular group of " shell- 

 fish," which comprehends Oysters and Snails (Whelks and Peri- 

 winkles) and Lobsters, with Turtles and (may be) Armadillos, 

 and the Echinidce of course, — this notable aggregation compri- 

 sing alike forms of the Vertebrata, Ammlosa,Mollusca, and Ra- 

 diata. Scientific zoology discriminates between real and merely 

 seeming and superficial distinguishing characters, fundamental 

 affinity from its deceptive guise, mere adaptive modifications 

 from the more comprehensive special bases of the organization, 

 and the "mocking^' of one group by members of another (which 

 Bates and Wallace have shown to exist among the Butterflies), so 

 many instances of which at once arise to the recollection. It is the 

 business of the naturalist to disentangle all such intricacies, to 

 go deeper than the surface, and try to find out what objects 

 really are, and not what they only seem to be. Lnbued with this 

 idea, it appears to me that the association of the Swifts and 

 Swallows in one family, or even immediately higher group, is 

 about tantamount to subordinating the Shrews among the Mu- 

 ridcE — or the Tupayes among the Sciuridce — in the class of 

 Mammalia. The Hirundinidce illustrate and exemplify, even to 

 the minutest detail, the special passerine type of conformation. 



