INTRODUCTION 77 
accompanying letterpress is tco brief to be satisfactory. A somewhat 
similar work, Abbildungen von Vogel-Skeletten, was begun in 1879 by Dr. 
A. B. Meyer, and is still in progress, 210 plates of Birds’ skeletons having 
already appeared. Some of these are excellent, but photography, by 
means of which they are all represented, is an unintelligent art, and as 
the sun shines alike on the evil and the good, so minor characters are as 
faithfully portrayed as those which are of importance, and indeed the 
latter are often, from the nature of the case, obscure or even indistinguish- 
able. Yet we may be sure that every possible care was taken to avoid 
the disappointment thus caused.! 
That the eggs laid by Birds should offer to some extent characters of 
utility to systematists is only to be expected, when it is considered that 
those from the same nest generally bear an extraordinary family-likeness 
to one another, and also that in certain groups the essential peculiarities 
of the egg-shell are constantly and distinctively characteristic. Thus no 
one who has ever examined the egg of a Duck or of a Tinamou would 
ever be in danger of not referring another Tinamouw’s egg or another 
Duck’s that he might see to its proper Family, and so on with many 
others. Yet, as is stated in the text (p. 182), the expectation held 
out to oologists, and by them, of the benefits to be conferred upon 
Systematic Ornithology from the study of Birds’ eggs, so far from being 
fulfilled, has not unfrequently led to disappointment. But at the same 
time many of the shortcomings of Oology in this respect must be set down 
to the defective information and observation of its votaries, among whom 
some have been very lax, not to say incautious, in not ascertaining on due 
evidence the parentage of their specimens, and the author next to be 
named is open to this charge. After several minor notices that appeared 
in journals at various times, Des Murs in 1860 brought out at Paris his 
ambitious Trait¢é général dOoloyie Ornithologique au point de vue de la 
Classification, elsewhere mentioned (Eaas, page 191, note), which contains 
(pp. 529-538) a ‘Systema Oologicum’ as the final result of his labours. 
In this scheme Birds are arranged according to what the author considered 
to be their natural method and sequence ; but the result exhibits some 
unions as ill-assorted as can well be met with in the whole range of 
tentative arrangements of the Class, together with some very unjustifiable 
divorces. This being the case, it would seem useless to take up further 
space by analysing the several proposed modifications of Cuvier’s arrange- 
ment which the author takes as his basis. The great merit of the work 
is that the author shews the necessity of taking Oology into account when 
investigating the classification of Birds, but it also proves that in so doing 
the paramount consideration lies in the thorough sifting of evidence as 
to the parentage of the eggs which are to serve as the building stones of 
the fabric to be erected (Ibis, 1860, pp. 331-335). The attempt of Des 
Murs was praiseworthy ; but in effect it has utterly failed, notwithstand- 
1 A countless number of osteological papers have appeared in journals, and to 
name them would here be impossible. The more important have generally been 
mentioned in the body of this work in connexion with the species or group of species 
they illustrate ; but many that are gocd are necessarily passed oyer. 
o 
