12 



THE OSPEEY. 



ciallv where there is hardly any variety at all. 

 as for instance in the case of Pfvr/ionv/ip/nis 

 ainitiiiis. quoted in my February article. What 

 business has this in a private (I) student's cabi- 

 net. This was pointed out by Mr. F. H. 

 K(nowlton) already, likewise by me. and is done 

 so again in --Hints to young Bird Students" 

 (Auk. Vol. xiv. No. 3. page 303). This escaped 

 your observation, Mr. Norris! Besides, why did 

 you not abuse Mr. Knowlton too? Was he too 

 much for you? Or did your courage fail you? 

 Then Mr. Norris is mistaken, if he considers me 

 an Audubonian. I have never belonged to an 

 .\udubon Society, nor will I ever. In regard to 

 my '-tield experience", please ask the Michigan 

 Ornithological Club, above all the migration 

 committee. How many intelligent collectors of 

 the Norris kind never take highly incubated 

 eggs or leave alone the second or third set from 

 the same parents? If I was to publish a book 

 on Oology and Ornithology I would avail myself 

 of a collection in some museum. l)ut would not 

 amass an unreasonable amount of eggs in m^' 

 own cabinet, nor would I ask Mr. Norris for his 

 help. As Davie and Norris have liad much more 

 field experience than any other living Ornitho- 

 logist, why don't they publish a book that tells 

 us something of the way. and manner, in which 

 birds build their nests, instead of giving a dry 

 enumeration of nest material, and egg measure- 

 ment only, which alone do not suffice, and prove 

 nothing. As far as belonging "to the great 

 multitude of those who are crazy to get into 

 print" is concerned, let me say that I have been 

 in print too long to be crazy about that. But 

 then Mr. Norris presumably reads nothing else 

 but Oliver Davie's Nests and Eggs of N. A. birds; 

 otherwise he would know better than to write 

 silly remarks about other people, which apply 

 rather to his own case. 



Finally, let me say that I am exceedingly 

 sorry that I have worked several years at an 

 European museum in the Department of Oology, 

 instead of studying Norris's great collection. 

 Likewise am I sorry that I studied Oology under 

 the indirect tutorship of the late Dr. E. Balda- 

 mus, instead of Oliver Davie, Norris and Co. 

 That was my crime, dear readerl From that 

 source my dense (I) ignorance is derived, which 

 calls forth the intelligent (?) higher (1?) criti- 

 cism (?) of Mr. Norris. This dense ignorance 

 was also the reason why I abstained from un- 

 gentlemanh'and unmanly personal slurs towards 

 my adversaries. These slurs form the prin- 

 cijjal features of Mr. Norris's article, and are 

 undoubtedly the best proof for his learning and 

 knowledge and my ignorance. In this respect 

 just as in the others, not the young collectors 

 need enlightenment, but Mr. Norris. 



"Voi,CANic Ekui>T[()n". Mun VoixanoI 



Under the title of "Volcanic Eruption" an 

 individual from N. J., wrote an article in the 

 May Number of Thk Osi'KKY against me. 



The most prominent feature of this article is 

 his own precious "I" as it appears at the head 

 of three fourths of his sentences. Furthermore 

 not all volcanoes send forth a consuming fire, 

 but some only sputter forth mud. Such a mud 

 volcano was the one which burst open in the 

 above-mentioned article, as that was not the 

 consuming fire of criticism, only the sputtering 

 forth of dirty personal abuse of so low and 

 base a type, that Mr. Norris's words are quite 

 seraphic in comparison with it. Were it not for 

 the readers of the OspkKY, I would not take 

 notice of this venomous article. Had the writer 

 of that article ever seen anything else but his 

 native backwoods with its Leech's devil and 

 similar superstitions, he would know that onU' a 

 small number of pastors have the custom to <.>-et 

 the unconverted souls to the altar; that by frr the 

 greater number of churches in this world have 

 not this custom. So it happens to be not even 

 the custom in our church, not even my task to do 

 this. Besides I fear it would be useless in his 

 case any how. As he was to give us more rea- 

 soning than I did, I g-ladlj^ looked for it, but it 

 failed to realize. Where in my article did I heap 

 any personal abvise on Messrs. Davie, Crandall 

 and Norris or on their profession? All I fought 

 against was one feature of Mr. Davie's book, 

 and the claim of being scientific menl W^here 

 got I my diploma? Where you didn't get it, 

 Wm. B. Crispin — one in Europe, and one here! 

 You see? What do you mean by Nature's 

 diploma? Bombastic phrasel 



In regard to the Flicker and hen, which you 

 don't seem to be able to distinguish, read Auk, 

 Vol. xvi. No. 3, page 304. Latin names were 

 used. The only trouble is stability. Dr. E. 

 Coues has a sensible reason, when he speaks of 

 abandoning them; not so Crispin. Get down 

 to other classes of zoologj- once, for instance 

 the Infusoria, Rhizopoda, Radiolaria, Heliozoa 

 and others. Where would we be without the 

 rigid Latin namesl 



The modern languages are not up to the emer- 

 gency. Similar reasons prevail in the Latin 

 names for ornithology. But to abandon it be- 

 cause Crispin is of "English descent," thoug'h 

 not of "English decency", is no reason at all. 

 Perhaps he thinks I handle him a little roughly. 

 As he shuns Latin so. here is the answer in that 

 language: Quanti quisque alias facit, tanti solet 

 ipse fieri. 



W. F. Hknninger. 



