Vol-XXVIIJ Recent Literature. 95 



the Hawfinch, Coccothraustes coccothraustes coccothraustes, and the Common 

 Swift, Apus apus apus, will not survive long, though it has to be admitted 

 that, at the present time, the system is very popular, while my views are 

 considered to be old-fashioned." Through his method of treating all 

 named forms as 'species,' even when proposed by the original describer 

 as only subspecies, it is impossible for anyone but an expert to know that a 

 very large number of the binomials stand merely for races, with no indica- 

 tion whatever of their real relationships or relative importance; or that 

 many already discarded forms are here given a new lease of life in the garb 

 of full-fledged species. Thus to the novice or the amateur the 'Hand-List' 

 is sadly misleading, and the expert, outside of the groups of which he has 

 critical knowledge, is put to the trouble of looking up the real status of 

 many alleged species in order to know their true status and affinities. 



It is for these three reasons that the 'Hand-List' is out of touch with 

 modern ornithology, and lacks a large part of the authoritativeness such 

 a work should possess. Yet it is a convenience of immense value to have 

 the described forms of birds catalogued in due form, with references to 

 works wherein they are fully described, and where figures of them may be 

 found in case such exist ; and for this reason the ' Hand-List ' will doubtless 

 be adopted in most ornithological museums as a basis of arrangement, 

 it serving so well as a directory for the location of material. 



The system of classification followed is that proposed by the author in 

 1891, of which he said eight years later (in Vol. I of the 'Hand-List'): 

 "I have seen no reason to modify the conclusions there recorded in any 

 material degree." In the fifth volume, however, he says: "In any future 

 edition of the 'Hand-List' I should divide the Class Aves into the two Sub- 

 Classes Palceognathce and Neognathce, since I consider this arrangement, 

 proposed by Mr. Pycraft, more natural than the old division into Ratitce 

 and Carinatce." Beyond this, apparently, he considers his system still 

 satisfactoiy. 



In reviewing Dr. Sharpe's invaluable 'Hand-List' from what appears 

 to be the generally approved modern viewpoint we are not disposed to 

 belittle the magnitude and usefulness of this great work, for which orni- 

 thologists the world over cannot be too grateful.^ J. A. A. 



Stone's 'The Birds of New Jersey.' ' — In response to the wide popular 

 interest in birds, and in promotion of this interest, manuals of birds have 

 been issued by the authority or under the auspices of several State govern- 

 ments, or through individual effort, till at present a considerable number 

 of excellent local handbooks of ornithology are available for those who desire 

 to become acquainted with the birds of their immediate region. The latest 

 of these to call for notice is Mr. Stone's ' The Birds of New Jersey,' recently 



1 The Birds of New Jersey. By Witmer Stone, Curator Academy of Natural 

 Sciences of Philadelphia. Annual Report of the New Jersey State Museum for 1908 

 (1909), pp. 11-347, 409-419, pU. 1-84. 



