58 



THE OSPEEY. 



Falco Pensylvanicus Slate-coloured Hawk, 



I Hi undo Americana Barn Swallow. 



Lanius Carolinensis Logger-head Shrike. 



Oriolus Baltimore Baltimore Oriole. 



— Mutatus Orchard Oriole. 



Picus Auratus Gold-winged Wood- 

 pecker. 



R alius I 'irginianus Virginia Rail. 



Strix I irginiana Great Horned Owl. 



— Nyctea- Snow Owl. 



Scolopax Semipalmata Semipalmated 



Sniper. 



Sylvia Sialh Blue Bird. 



— Marilandica Maryland Yellow- 



throat. 



— Coronata Yellow-rump Wa rb- 



ler. 

 Sim uus J'nda/o) ins Red-winged Star- 



ling. 

 Tardus Migratorius Robin. 



— Polyglottus Mocking Bird. 



— Livid us Cat Bird. 



Tetrao I 'irginianus Virginian Rail.* 



Trochilus colubris Humming Bird. 



WILLIAM SWAINSON AND HIS TIMES.— VIII. 



By Theodore Gill, Washington, D. C. 

 [Continued from Vol. V, page 39.) 



The quarrel between Swainson and Vigors is 

 of no interest or importance perse, but a con- 

 sideration of it may give a good idea of the 

 status of zoology at the time and the men of 

 the day. Consequently a brief summary of it 

 may be not unwelcome. 



In 1825 and 1826, Vigors and Horsfield pub- 

 lished in the Zoological Journal the diagnoses 

 of several new genera of Parrots which they 

 had either eliminated from the huge medley pre- 

 viously confounded under the name Psittacus or 

 based on new species. This was capped by an 

 article by Vigors giving the outlines of a gen- 

 eral system of ornithology, and including a 

 re-arrangement of all the genera of Parrots 

 recognized by him in live subfamilies. It ap- 

 peared in a section "On the arrangement of 

 the genera of Birds" in a comprehensive series 

 of articles entitled "Sketches in Ornithology;" 

 [etc.] The subdivisions of the Parrots (vol. ii, 

 p. 400) were enumerated as below. The names 

 accepted by the most recent monographer of the 

 group (Dr. T. Salvadori) in the Catalogue of the 

 Birds of the British Museum (Vol. xx, 18911 are 

 added in brackets after the Vigorsian names; 

 when the name adapted by Salvadori is the same 

 as that given by Vigors, the initial (S.) is alone 

 used with the number of the page. 



II. Kara. PsittaciikK. Leach. [(Jen. Psittacus. 

 Linn.] 

 * Subfam. Psittacina. 

 Psittacus. Auct. — Androglossa. [Psittacus 

 S. 377.] 



: Subfam. Plyctolophina. 

 Plyctolo p h us. / "it-ill. [ Cacalua S. 115. ] 

 Calyptorhynchus. [S. 106.] 

 Microglossum. Geoff. \_Microglossus S. 

 Ki2.[ 



■ Subfam. Macrocercina. 

 Macrocercus. Vieill. [Ara S. 151.] 

 **** Subfam. Palaornina. 



Psittacara. [Conurus S. 170.] Nanodes [S. 



5'i2.[ Platvcercus. [S. 540.] Pezoporus. 



///. [S. 596.] Palseornis. [ S. 433. | Tri- 



choglossus. [S. 49.] Lorius. [ S. 3 1 .] 



Brotogeris. [S. 253.] 

 ***** Subfam. Psittaculina. 

 Psittacula. Kuhl. [S. 240.] 



In 1x27, Desmarest, in the 39th volume of the 

 Dictionnaire des Sciences Naturelles, published 

 a monograph of the Parrots, giving all the 

 species recognized by him. in the article "Per- 

 roquet." He gave a summary of the previous 

 arrangmeuts of the group, the latest of which 

 were those of Vigors and Horsfield, and gave his 

 opinions of their new genera in terms which 

 displeased those authors. The points to which 

 especial exceptions were taken may be aptly in- 

 dicated in Vigors's own words. (Z. J. iii, 92.) 



"The chief points contained in this critique 

 may be stated as follows. — A general condem- 

 nation is inferred of any subdivision in so 

 natural a group, [le genre si naturel,] as that 

 which forms the Linnean genus Psittacus. The 

 subdivisions which have been pointed out by Dr. 

 Horsfield and myself are affirmed to be founded 

 on minute differences, without any value, or 

 any apparent regard to the mode of life of 

 the animals that compose them; — [sur des differ- 

 ences minutieuses, sans aucune valeur, et sans 

 aucun rapport evident avec le genre de vie des 

 animaux dont on les compose]. Most of our 

 groups, it is asserted, have not even the merit of 

 being- original. They have nothing new but 

 their names; "being the same,' it is averred, 

 'as those secondary groups which have been 

 long since pointed out. and well distinguished, 

 [tres-bien distingues], by MM. Brisson, Buffon, 

 Vieillot, Le Vaillant, Kuhl, and other natu- 

 ralists who have made a true progress in this 

 branch of ornithology, without overcharging it 

 with new] and useless denominations.' A few 



•Misprint for Quail. 



' I do nut exactly discern the force of the above epithets >>f the French writer. If we give a name to a newly characterized 

 group 11 must necessarily tie a new one. To give an old name would decidedly be an errour. A useless name must indeed be 

 allowed to be objectionable; but it must be proved to be useless before the objection can be made with justice." [Vigor's note.] 



