THE OSPREY. 



171 



number of rare specimens of birds, shells, and 

 books, all I have yet seen." (The birds of this 

 collection long afterwards were purchased by 

 Dr. Thomas Wilson for the Academy of Natural 

 Science of Philadelphia, and now form part of 

 the Academy's collection.) The next Saturday, 

 Swainson and Audubon ag"ain went to Baron 

 Cuvier's. 



On Friday morning' of the next week, (Sep- 

 tember 19th,) Swainson went with Audubon, 

 whose compan3' he had requested, to "complete 

 a purchase of skins." 



On the fourth week of their stay, Swainson 

 and Audubon went "to the Pantheon to see if 

 the interior corresponds with the magnificence 

 of the exterior." They find that "it is fine, but 

 still unfinished." Audubon at least thinks 

 that "all, or almost all, the public edifices of 

 Paris far surpass those of London." 



In the fifth week, on Saturday, (October 4th,) 

 Audubon "went with Swainson to the Jardin 

 du Roi to interpret for him." 



This is the last notice of the Swainsons' stay 

 at Paris, and the next week they must have left. 

 Audubon, however, remained till the beginning 

 of October to secure subscribers to his great 

 work. In this he was successful, obtaining 

 "thirteen subscribers in Paris" after an ex- 

 penditure of "two months" and "forty pounds." 



Back again in England, on the 23rd of Decem- 

 ber Audubon records, "my friends the Swain- 

 sons have often been to see me." 



Nothing further is recorded in Audubon's 

 Journal of this, his first visit to England, and 

 in the following spring, April 1, 1829, he sailed 

 for America in the Columbia. 



NEGOTIATIONS BETWEEN SWAINSON AND AUDU- 

 BON FOR CO-OPERATION. 



But the next year (1830) there was corres- 

 pondence between Audubon and Swainson res- 

 pecting co-operation in the preparation for the 

 press of the text of Audubon's work. Audubon 

 was not a scientific or systematic ornithologist, 

 and must have become cognizant of his defi- 

 ciencies through his intercourse with other 

 naturalists. Both men must have desired to 

 come together. Swainson apparently', sometime 

 before he met Audubon, had made a bid for the 

 function by an eulogistic review contributed to 

 the Magazine of Natural History (May, 1828,) 

 entitled "Some account of the work now pub- 

 lishing by M. Audubon, entitled The Birds of 

 America." He closed that notice with the state- 

 ment: "I have no personal acquaintance with 

 M. Audubon, I never even saw him. The copy 

 of his work, which furnished these remarks, 

 has been lent to me. These are vouchers of my 

 sincerity and disinterestedness." Later they 

 came together as recorded. Doubtless the two 

 then felt for each other's views. But nothing 

 was decided upon, or perhaps broached in a 

 positive form. 



Audubon returned to Britain in April, 1830, 

 and in the fall was established in Edinburgh. 



When still in Edinburgh, Audubon evi- 

 dently wrote to Swainson, making certain pro- 

 positions. What they were we do not know 

 positively, but probably Audubon made known 

 with sufficient clearness that he wished to have 

 the co-operation of Swainson for a pecuniary 

 compensation to be determined on, but did not 

 want his name to appear as a co-author. We 

 infer this from a letter of Swainson to Audu- 

 bon in reply to one received from him. Swain- 

 son's letter is dated "Tettenhanger Green, 2d 

 October, 1830," and has been published by Coues 

 in The Auk for January, 1898, (p. 11-13). It will 

 bear republication so here it is, with all the 

 peculiarities of spelling, capitalization and 

 punctuation reproduced from Coues' print, 

 which, he assures us, is "printed literally and 

 punctually true to the original in S.vainson's 

 handwriting." 



"Tettenhanger* Green, 



2d October 1830. 

 "My dr Sir 



"I have refrained from replying to j-our letter 

 until I thought you had returned to London. 



"Either you do not appear to have understood 

 the nature of my proposition on supplying scien- 

 tific information for your work, or j'ou are very 

 erroneously informed on the manner in which 

 such assistance is usually given. Dr Richai'd- 

 son, and a hundred others, similarly' situated, 

 might with equal justice say that no name 

 should appear but their own; as it would rob 

 them of their fame, because notes are furnished 

 by one or two other persons, your friends would 

 tell you, if you enquired of them, that even i)iy 

 name would add something to the value of 'The 

 Birds of America' You pay me compliments on 

 my scientific knowledg^e, and wished you pos- 

 sessed a portion; & you liken the acquisition of 

 such a portion to purchasing a sketch of an 

 eminent painter — the simile is good, but allow 

 me to ask you, whether, after procuring the 

 sketch, you would mix it up with your own, and 

 pass it off to your friends as your production? I 

 cannot possibly suppose that such would be 

 your duplicity and I therefore must not suppose 

 that you intended I should give all the scientific 

 information I have laboured to acquire dur- 

 ing twenty years on ornithology — conceal ni3' 

 name, — and transfer my fame to j'our pages 

 & to your reputation. 



"Few have enjoyed the opportunity of benefit- 

 ing by the advice and assistance of a scientific 

 friend so much as yourself; and no one, I must 

 be allowed to say, has evinced so little inclina- 

 tion to profit by it. When I call to mind the 

 repeated off"ers I have made you to correct the 

 nomenclature of your birds, from the first time 

 of our acquaintance, and recollect the dislike 

 you appeared to have to receiving any such in- 

 formation or correction, I cannot but feel perfect 

 surprize at your now wishing to profit by that 

 aid, vou have hitherto been soindifl'erent about. 



(Tb be Contbiued.) 



*Tettenhanger is the word as spelled ia Coues' article, but Tittenhanger is the one always used by Swainson; 

 Coues probably mistook an ijfor an e. 



