40 Elliot, Truth versus Error. [^ a u n k 



" In North America at least " everything is not lovely.and serene. 

 There are a "few ! " even Dr. Allen admits that much, who with 

 Dr. Coues and myself refuse to bow the knee to Baal. We may 

 be of little repute, but so long as we insist upon writing grammat- 

 ically and spelling correctly there can be no uniformity in the 

 nomenclature of North American ornithology, in spite of the fact 

 that "so nearly all" of the " leading authorities," will hereafter 

 do their best to perpetuate blunders. If, as is claimed, the 

 "leading authorities" among American ornithologists have nearly 

 all become advocates of the doctrine of error preached in Canon 

 XL we must not forget that some of them were members of the 

 Committee that formulated its provisions, and it was to be expect- 

 ed that they would do their utmost, like my friendly critic, to 

 induce others to adopt these and enjoy the manifold blessings 

 they shower on thankful hearts. Only one of the Committee 

 has publicly expressed his disapproval of this rule. Possibly 

 there are others of his opinion but who have not yet spoken. If 

 among those who as yet have not attained the dignity of being 

 a " leading authority," there are some who have accepted this 

 Canon as their mentor and guide, it is probable that they have 

 been influenced in a large degree so to do from a mistaken loy- 

 alty to the Union. This same mistaken loyalty to the works of 

 the Committee caused the adoption of our Check-List, when it 

 was known to contain many, even grievous errors, certain of 

 which have lately been corrected, but the end is not yet. A sim- 

 ilar exhibition of courage in removing blunders and which should 

 eliminate Canon XL, would be advantageous to the Union and 

 Ornithological Science. Dr. Allen seems considerably elated 

 because other Naturalists as he claims besides ornithologists 

 have in some degree adopted this Gospel of Error. While we 

 may all be gratified to witness the A. O. U. Code accepted by 

 other zoologists in all its provisions, excepting Canon XL, and 

 believe it the best guide they can have, we must not lose sight of 

 the fact that the Code was written primarily for ornithologists, 

 and one of its chief aims was the attainment of a stable nomen- 

 clature for birds. Therefore, if one of its Canons proves to have 

 been unfortunately drawn, and contains precepts that will effec- 

 tually defeat the very object desired, it is poor comfort to learn 



