I89i] " Quite a Sermon." 363 



three) on a first meeting with them could be considered sufficiently 

 certain, unless the birds had been actually obtained ; and I am sure you 

 will agree with me that it is much better and safer to make quite certain 

 by relying only on specimens, in these cases of very rare and most 

 improbable birds, and keep back the record, rather than run any risk of 

 having doubt thrown upon the statements hereafter. 



Of course, I need hardly tell you how unlikely nay, almost impos- 

 sible it is that a bird only known as one of our rarest winter visitors 

 should breed with you I do not think that any amount of study- 

 ing books and figures is sufficient to ensure the correct and certain 

 identification of rare birds, with which the observer was not previously 

 acquainted. Why, I would not trust my own eyes altogether in such a 

 case. But we do want to be quite sure, before publishing anything. 



Do try and give up thinking you have seen any rare bird which you 

 do not shoot. It is the most unsafe course in natural history, and leads 

 to innumerable mistakes, and to the discrediting of the observer. All 

 such cases should be strictly excluded, and, if worth mention at all, be 

 given only as a footnote, with " I believe " or " I think " to qualify the 

 statement. Unless you follow my advice in this and I have often 

 urged it upon you, and shall continue to do so you will find very 

 unpleasant doubts and criticisms raised; and I am sure no skilled 

 naturalist will, for a moment, believe that you have satisfactorily iden- 

 tified the Kentish Plover in the manner which you describe. No : you 

 must try and dismiss these supposed rare occurrences from your mind, 

 until you have obtained a specimen and had a safe opinion on it. How 

 often am I to urge caution upon you, and to tell you it is better to make 

 sure of a smaller number than to add anything that is in the least 

 uncertain. How much better to have it said, " He made no mistakes, 

 and all his observations were founded upon specimens" I sometimes 

 think that you are endowed with a poetic fancy, and this often leads 

 the imagination too far ahead of the facts. Quite a sermon I am 

 writing ! But I know you will take it in good part, as it is meant. 



I am afraid you are getting into the way of making random shots, 

 which is nearly as fatal in botany as in shooting. How could you mis- 

 name Valeriana officinalis Valerianella olitoria ! ! Did you try the 

 description at all, and have you got your " Hooker" with you? (To 

 this correspondent, however, he very soon wrote again in a relenting 

 strain" Do not think that I was intending to be hard upon you. I was 

 only amused at the guesses which you made, and I hope that, as a 

 botanist, you will in future always carry your Hooker.") 



The following is addressed to a young correspondent 

 who was putting together some bird-notes for popular 

 rather than scientific perusal : 



Pray, avoid too many Latin and technical terms, and consider how 

 plainly you should write for the printer. Excuse me if I say that your 



