94 Recently published Ornithological Works. 



students look for arguments^ not opinions ; what they want 

 are facts, and they will be grateful to any writer who pro- 

 vides them/^ 



Without entering upon matters of detail, we may remark 

 that the last two parts of Mr, Seebohm^s work show some 

 signs of haste. Errors in proper names (Mr. Seebohm is 

 no respecter of persons) and inaccuracies in descriptions of 

 localities are not unfrequent ; while some of the generaliza- 

 tions appear to be rather rash. As an instance of the latter, 

 Mr. Seebohm says that ^'the slightly spotted egg of the 

 Puffin is an exception to the almost universal rule that 

 eggs laid in holes are unspotted Avhite ; but the faintness of 

 the spots suggests the idea that the bird has comparatively 

 recently adopted the habit of breeding in a hole, and is 

 consequently gradually losing its power of depositing 

 coloured spots on its eggs. The colour- glands are pro- 

 bably disappearing, according to the well-known law of ' de- 

 gradation from disuse.'" This is extremely hypothetical, 

 and the modern student wants " facts, not opinions. '^ The 

 richly marked eggs of the Black Guillemot are frequently 

 deposited in crevices beyond the reach of light ; so are, in a 

 somewhat less degree, those of the Razorbill. And, again, the 

 remark as to the eggs of the Puffin would apply still more 

 forcibly to those of the Little Auk, about which Mr. Seebohm 

 makes no similar remarks. All the Procellariidae lay eggs of a 

 pure white, with, at most, a few minute reddish freckles, and, 

 except in size and thickness of shell, there is no difference in 

 this respect between the egg of the little Storm-Petrel and the 

 gigantic White Albatross ; but the former is hidden in holes, 

 the latter placed on a raised open nest. What idea does this 

 suggest to Mr. Seebohm ? He has been unfortunate in his as- 

 sertions that 'Hhe young in first plumage of the Fulmar Petrel 

 appear to have been undescribed,'' and that ''it is not very 

 creditable to British ornithologists that such should be the 

 case'' ; for this plumage was distinctly described in the fourth 

 edition of ' Yarrell's British Birds' (vol, iv. p. 5), a year before 

 Mr. Seebohm wrote the above. Nor is it quite correct to say 

 that the only regularBritish breeding-place of the Fulmar is in 



