INTRODUCTION 75 
sternum of Birds (Ann. Sc. Nat. Zoologie, ser. 4, vi. pp. 5-15). The con- 
siderations are not very striking from a general point of view ; but the 
author adds to the weight of evidence which some of his predecessors had 
brought to bear on certain matters, particularly in aiding to abolish the 
artificial groups “ Déodactyls,” “Syndactyls” and ‘ Zygodactyls,” on 
which so much reliance had been placed by many of his countrymen ; 
and it is with him a great merit that he was the first apparently to 
recognize publicly that characters drawn from the posterior part 
of the sternum, and particularly from the ‘“ échancrures,” commonly 
called in English “notches” or “emarginations,” are of comparatively 
little importance, since their number is apt to vary in forms that 
are most closely allied, and even in species that are usually associated 
in the same genus or unquestionably belong to the same Family,! while 
these “notches,” sometimes become simple foramina, asin certain Pigeons, 
or on the other hand foramina may exceptionally change to ‘ notches,” 
and not unfrequently disappear wholly. Among his chief systematic 
determinations we may mention that he refers the Tinamous to the Rails, 
because apparently of their deep “notches,” but otherwise takes a view of 
that group more correct according to modern notions than did most of his 
contemporaries. The Bustards he would place with the ‘‘ Limicoles,” as 
also Dromas (CRAB-PLOVER) and Chionis, (SHEATHBILL). Phaethon (TRopic- 
BIRD) he would place with the “ Laridés” and not with the ‘ Pelécanidés,” 
which it only resembles in its feet having all the toes connected by a web. 
Finally Divers, Auks and Penguins, according to him, form the last term 
in the series, and it seems fit to him that they should be regarded as form- 
ing a separate Order. It is a curious fact that even at a date so late as 
this, and by an investigator so well informed, doubt should still have 
existed whether Apteryx should be referred to the group containing the 
Cassowary and the Ostrich. On the whole the remarks of this esteemed 
author do not go much beyond such as might occur to any one who had 
made a study of a good series of specimens; but many of them are 
published for the first time, and the author is careful to insist on the 
necessity of not resting solely on sternal characters, but associating with 
them those drawn from other parts of the body. 
Three years later in the same journal (xi. pp. 11-145, pls. 2-4) M. 
‘Blanchard published some Recherches sur les caracteres ostéologiques des 
Oiseaux appliquées a la Classification naturelle de ces animaux, strongly 
urging the superiority of such characters over those drawn from the bill or 
feet, which, he remarks, though they may have sometimes given correct 
notions, have mostly led to mistakes, and, if observations of habits and 
food have sometimes afforded happy results, they have often been decep- 
tive ; so that, should more be wanted than to draw up a mere inventory 
of creation or trace the distinctive outline of each species, zoology without 
anatomy would remain a barren study. At the same time he states that 
authors who have occupied themselves with the sternum alone have often 
1 Thus he cites the cases of Machetes pugnax and Scolopax rusticula among the 
“Timicoles,” and Larus caturactes among the ‘‘ Laridés,” as differing from their 
nearest allies by the possession of only one “notch” on either side of the keel (¢f. 
supra, page 49), 
