Letters, Extracts, Notices, i^c. 399 



to fresh grass as often as necessary, and which in winter 

 was frequently protected by a covering of matting. 



Yours &c., 



J. H. GuRNEY, Jun. 



Sir, — While fully recognizing the friendly spirit of the 

 criticism of the 'Zoological Record^ [Aves] in the last 

 number of the ' Ibis/ I think it is due to myself, as well as 

 to the jmblic, to make some reply ; inasmuch as, with one 

 exception — kindly attributed to America — the so-called 

 errata are either matters of opinion or are rather referable 

 to the Reviewer than to the Recorder. And, moreover, it is 

 hardly fair, and is at least misleading, to include the former 

 under the head of errors equally with matters of fact. 



I shall be delighted to acquiesce in the suggestion of altering 

 the position of the Oligomyodse, now simply grouped with the 

 other abnormal Oscines ; but I cannot agree that the alpha- 

 betical order of the families of Passeres can cause any but 

 fancied inconvenience to workers, who certainly know where 

 to look at present, while under other and varymg systems 

 they as certainly do not. When a universally-accepted 

 classification is brought forward, I will adopt it at once. 



Nor, again, should I consider it wise to follow the 

 " arrangement " of the British Museum Catalogue of Birds. 

 Why follow the " arrangement " of a work which is divided 

 against itself, in vvhich it would appear that one genus (or 

 more) is in danger of omission owing to the discordant views 

 of the writers of the separate volumes, in which the plan is 

 presumably that of Sundevall — artificial enough at first, and 

 since diversified by modifications or alterations of questionable 

 advantage ; in which, in short, no one can divine what the 

 final " arrangement " or " disarrangement " may be, or can 

 guarantee the views of the compilers who take in hand the 

 families still to appear ? 



To notice separately the alleged " errata '' and '' emen- 

 danda." 



P. 5. " Certhilauda duponti, n. subsp.,'^ should be " C. 

 duponti lusitanica, n. subsp.^^ See p. 42. 



