1 66 



delicacy for me to answer it here in the proper manner, and I 

 greatly deplore the necessity for so doing. 



In the first place Mr. Finn greatly discounts his 

 repudiation by the tardiness with which it appears. 



I first repeated his information in the issue of Bird Notes 

 for Nov. 1903. To carry any semblance of weight his denial 

 should have been forthcoming directly after this mention of his 

 statement, made at a time, be it borne in mind, when my inter- 

 view with him of a week or two back was too recent for its details 

 to have been forgotten by either of us. Instead of this, his 

 denial has been delayed for more than eighteen months (during 

 which period I have more than once repeated his statement), 

 and even now it only seems to have been called forth by 

 the fact that his recent unqualified assertions as to the " need " 

 of egg are found to clash with his former statement and its 

 only possible inference. Surely there were better methods of 

 extricating himself from an illogical position. 



What Mr. Finn said to me was that the Chinese never gave 

 ^^% in any form to any of their birds^not even the insec- 

 tivorous ones ; that all they gave was dried flies and husked 

 millet, given dry ; and that what the Chinese did not know 

 about bird-keeping was not worth knowing. 



Being told shortly afterwards that Mr. Finn had never 

 been in China, and that in consequence his information was 

 onl}' hearsay, and being therefore anxious to test its value, I 

 wrote to Mr. Heselton (who had spent a good deal of time in 

 that country), stating what I had been told by Mr. Finn. He 

 confirmed Mr. Finn in each particular save one — that relating 

 to the dried flies. These he said he had never seen in China, 

 maggots being used instead. He also made special mention of 

 the Japs. 



With the same desire to be accurate, and not wishing to be 

 guilty of any inadvertent misrepresentation of Mr. Finn, I had 

 previously ivritten to him also on the subject. After having thus 

 taken ever}' conceivable precaution against error, a course in 

 which it seems I was wise, I felt justified in quoting Mr. Finn, 

 and shall do so again as occasion demands. 



I find by a foot note attached by " A.G.B." to my letter on 

 this subject in the current Avicultural Magazine, that a similar 

 denial by Mr. Fiiin appeared in the Feathered Worldow June 

 30th, the same date as the above letter by him was posted to 

 Bird Notes. W. Geo. Creswkl,!.. 



