iSSS.] Lucas, Notes on the Great Auk. 283 



that the Great Auk could not have been a powerful swimmer, 

 owing to the small size of its feet, forgetting that, like the Pen- 

 guins and the Alcidte, the Garefowl depended for swimming 

 chiefly upon the wings, and if the bird coidd not fly over the 

 water it certainly could beneath. 



I cannot close this paper without referring to the published 

 figures of the Gi-eat Auk, for this bird has suffered grievously at 

 the hands of nearly every artist (Audubon is an exception) who 

 has been called upon to portray it. 



It is true that the artists may plead extenuating circumstances 

 in the shape of the stuffed — it were flattery to say mounted — 

 specimens that have served as models, most of which are from 

 two to eight inches longer than they should be. I trust that Mr. 

 Hancock will pardon me for including his figure in this criticism, 

 for his bird is too long, too slender, and with too pronounced a 

 crop. 



Artists have evidently recognized the fact that the stuffed Auks 

 are too slender, and endeavored to make amends for the short- 

 comings of the taxidermist, for obesity is the general trouble with 

 figures of the Great Auk, although the neck is usually as much 

 too thin as the body is too stout. Could the bird have seen him- 

 self portrayed as- he is even on the cover of his namesake, he 

 might, like Wolfe, have exclaimed, "now I die content." 



The question might naturally be asked what right has one who 

 never saw the Great Auk alive to criticise him dead, and the 

 answer is this, having just compared three mounted skeletons 

 with one of the Razorbill the conclusion is vuiavoidable that the 

 two species i^esembled one another very closely in outward con- 

 tour. 



As for internal structure, I must plead guilty to a belief that 

 the two species should be included in the genus A/ca, and with 

 this bit of cis- Atlantic heresv bring these notes to a close. 



