° 1915 J PaIiMBR, In Memorian: Theodore Nicholas Gill. 401 



"The time has come to commence another ornithology, to gather the 

 harvest scattered in many fields, to bring it together in a new granary. 

 A very decided improvement too, can be effected, it seems to me, in the 

 treatment of the life histories of the beings to which we are devoted .... 

 One of the features that would be most desirable in the new Avifauna would 

 be a recapitulation of the habits common to all the species of a genus under 

 the generic caption. In fact a summary of all the ecological features 

 characteristic of the combined species, and an indication as to the range 

 of difference or divergence .... The various biographies should be pre- 

 pared on a regular plan and the data given in a uniform sequence for each 

 species and a summary furnished for each genus. The deficiencies in our 

 knowledge could then be perceived at once, and some one of the numerous 

 observers might be incited to fill the void. ..." 



Naturally the first biography published was that of the species 

 after which the journal was named, the Osprey. This was begun 

 in September, 1900, a year and a half after the announcement and 

 was continued in installments through nine numbers to September, 

 1901, making in all a publication of about twenty pages. 1 



As already indicated, Gill's contributions to ornithology are not 

 to be measured by his formal papers. Indeed his titles on birds 

 are so few and so widely scattered that they scarcely appear in 

 ornithological bibliographies and are apt to be overlooked unless 

 the search be extended to include somewhat obscure nooks and 

 corners. Nevertheless his influence made itself felt in many quar- 

 ters and his ideas and suggestions may be found in several standard 

 works on ornithology, in the Code of Nomenclature, and in the 

 zoological parts of the Century and Standard Dictionaries and 

 Johnson's Cyclopedia. His was an indirect rather than a direct 

 influence, as gentle and persuasive as his personality, but none the 

 less real and effective. His suggestions and criticisms, always 

 made in a kindly spirit for the assistance rather than the discom- 

 fiture of the inquirer, bore rich fruit in the works of others. 



Gill's views on the classification of birds were very positive and 

 in some respects widely divergent from those of most American 

 ornithologists, but he was interested chiefly in the relation of the 

 higher groups and paid little attention to species and subspecies. 

 Apparently he never described any new species of birds but in 



'Vol. V, pp. 11-12; 25-28; 40-42; 60-61; 73-76; 92-93; 105-106; 124-125; 

 141. 



