3 
The Horned Lark is one example of this problem. The type subspecies 
Otocoris alpestris alpestris has generally been known as the Horned Lark 
regardless of the fact that any one of the fourteen or more other geogra- 
phical races have an equal claim to the name and that it is the only one 
for the species as a whole. The obvious course is to call the typical sub- 
species, Otocoris alpestris alpestris (only typical in the sense of being des- 
cribed first and not on account of any taxonomic superiority to other 
forms), Eastern Horned Lark and to apply the name Horned Lark to the 
whole collection of co-ordinate subspecies, making it synonymous with the 
. scientific binomial Otocoris alpestris. 
The Migrant Shrike offered other difficulties. The logical proceeding 
would be to call the whole species Louisiana Shrike, from its scientific name 
ludovicianus. This would, however, introduce an unfamiliar name recog- 
nizable by only a few. The species has, therefore, been called here the 
Loggerhead Shrike and the form of eastern Canada the Migrant Logger- 
head, on the assumption that a geographical term such as southern could 
be applied to the type race to which Loggerhead has hitherto been restricted. 
It would be too much to expect that the result attained will satisfy 
everyone; the writer hopes, however, that it will be accepted until the 
American Ornithologists’ Union committee takes the matter up and 
makes authoritative decisions. 
In the following pages the number and vernacular name, with as 
little modification as possible, have been taken from the American Ornith- 
ologists’ Union check-list and appear first as a specific heading in heavy 
type. Following, in smaller type, are the more common local names by 
which the species has been or is known in various localities. The French 
equivalent is then given, preceded by the contraction, “‘Fr.’’. These 
formal French names have been adapted from ‘‘Dionne’s Les Oiseaux de 
la Province de Quebec” and are followed when possible by vernacular 
terms in current use in French-speaking sections. Many of them were 
furnished by Dr. C. W. Townsend who has had considerable ornithological 
experience in the eastern provinces. Where French terms are missing, 
there is as far as the writer is aware no accepted French name. 
The Latin specific name follows in italics and is always binomial. 
Preceded by the initial ‘‘L”’ the length of the species is next given in 
inches and decimals of an inch. The length of a bird is determined by 
measuring it, in the flesh, in a straight line from the tip of the bill to the 
end of the longest tail feather, the bird being stretched only enough to 
straighten the neck curves. The measurements given are those of the 
average adult male and indicate the comparative size of the species under 
consideration. They are not for specific identification, as in most species 
there is more or less individual and sexual variation. 
Only an outline description of species is given and where there are 
illustrations the description is omitted and the reader is referred to the 
illustration instead. 
Under ‘Distinctions,’ an attempt is made to bring out the salient 
points by which the species, when in hand, may be separated from other 
similar forms, and the work of other authorities has been freely drawn upon 
to supplement the writer’s observations. Many of the distinctive points 
are naturally only superficial, but all are, as far as possible, reliable. 
Under the heading ‘‘ Field Marks,” the features by which the species 
may be recognized in life are mentioned. In these the writer has been 
) 
