26_L Recent Literature. [April 



••I. I never bought but one specimen. 



"2. That is the one in the Museum, and I bought it from Mr. Cook. 



"3. I never heard of a second specimen and do not believe there was one. 



"4. To the best of my recollection, my specimen was without feet, though 

 I am not positively sure, as it is now a good many years since I purchased 

 it." 



Simultaneously I had asked Mr. J. A. Allen, the Curator of Mammals 

 and Birds of the New York Museum, for information, and as his answer 

 goes a good way to explain the case, I take the liberty to reprint it in full, 

 as follows : "There is only one specimen of the Great Auk in the Ameri- 

 can Museum of Natural History, and this Museum * has never had any 

 other. The reference by Professor Newton to an imperfect specimen, 

 without feet, obtained by Mr. D. G. Elliot, doubtless relates to the Labra- 

 dor Duck, of which there is here just such a specimen, received from Mr. 

 Elliot. It was mounted by the taxidermist, J. G. Bell, of this city, who 

 supplied the feet of some other Duck. This specimen is still in the mu- 

 seum, and has its defects and the character of the restoration indicated in 

 writing on the bcjttom of the stand." 



To make perfectlv sure, I requested Mr. Allen to examine the specimen 

 of the Great Auk carefully, and here is his answer, dated January 4, 18S6 : 

 "In accordance with your request I have carefully examined the speci- 

 men in relation to its feet, and so far as I can judge the feet belong to the 

 specimen, and are not those of some other species, as has been presumed. 

 They are certainly not the feet of anj' Loon or Duck, or any other water 

 bird with which I am acquainted, and correspond with what I should ex- 

 pect to find the feet of the Great Auk to be. So far as I am able to judge 

 they are genuine. Indeed, I am unable to see an>' indication that they are 

 not a part of the skin itself." 



It seems now unquestionable, that the bird in the New York Museum is 

 not the skin "without the feet and breast plumage," which was sold by 

 Herr Mechlenburg in Flensburg to Siemsen, a merchant in Reykjavik, 

 Iceland (Grieve, App. p. 11). Nor can it be the skin with only one leg, 

 which was in Brvce Wright's possession, if this really be a different one 

 from the above (Journ. f Ornith. 18S4, p. 114). The -defect skin' is, con- 

 sequentlv, not in New York, but the question still remains, what has 

 become of it? Once I thought that I had the solution, as in one of his let- 

 ters to me Mr. Allen says : "Mr. Cor\' of Boston, has, I think, a Great Auk 

 in his collection which is in part 'made up.' " I am in the position, how- 

 ever, to positive) v declare, that this is not the missing skin, either. Mr. 

 Charles B. Cory has, a few inoments ago, orally informed me, that what 

 he possesses is only a fragment of skin of the breast, and afezv odd feath- 

 ers said to be from the Great Auk, which he bought some years ago of a 

 dealer a little outside of London, and for which he paid £2. So much for 

 the specimens in American Museums. There are, consequently, in this 

 country only four specimens, as enumerated by Dr. Blasius, and not five 

 or six. 



Referred to above as the Central Pork Mr.rc \\m 



