92 BULLETIN OF 1HE NUTTALL 



I might go on and take np and criticise, one by one, each of these 

 supplemental opinions, but as they are only opinions unsupported by 

 facts, I view them as valueless. Some I know to be incorrect. Vireo 

 gilvus and Zenaedwra carol inensis, for instance, to my certain knowl- 

 edge, have been found very nearly, if not quite, throughout New Eng- 

 land. Then, too, " H. A. P." and your humble servant do not appear 

 to always attach the same significance to the same words, — "rare," 

 for instance. With all due deference to his opinions, as expressed 

 in all the instances where I have made use of this word, I must still 

 adhere to my own, and am prepared to take issue with him squarely 

 in every instance named by him where he challenges its use. Until 

 he can produce the data for his sweeping declarations I am not 

 prepared to admit the correctness of any of his unproven state- 

 ments or inferences. I do not believe, for instance, that Perissoglossa 

 tigrina, Geothlypis Philadelphia, or Contopus borealis are " generally 

 common " throughout Northern New England. Neither am I pre- 

 pared to admit, without positive proof, that Hehninthophaga chry- 

 soptera can be said to breed in any considerable numbers in South- 

 ern New England, nor does it, so far as I know, in any part of the 

 United States. The mere ipse dixit of a single observer, and scattered 

 insulated instances, do not afford even inferential data. The same 

 holds true of Coturniculus passerinus, though a much more common 

 bird, but the portion of Southern New England in which it breeds in 

 considerable numbers regularly must be small indeed. So far as my 

 own observations go, and so far also as I have been able to obtain 

 information from others, " H. A. P." is not warranted in his sweep- 

 ing statement that Micropalama himantopus is a regular migrant 

 along the whole New England coast. But if he is better posted, and 

 can produce the evidence to establish his views on this long-contro- 

 verted point, such data are too valuable and would be too inter- 

 esting to be suppressed. But let us have facts, not imaginative 

 opinions, and these not insulated, but in sufficient numbers. As for 

 Anthus ludovicianus, I speak of that which I do know when I repeat 

 that I have found it, sometimes in large flocks, in open country near 

 the coast, in Massachusetts, in midwinter, notwithstanding the 

 negative testimony of " H. A. P." to the contrary. 



But I will not occupy any further space by taking up, point by 

 point, the various forms of difference of opinion between " H. A. P." 

 and myself. I will only add, in conclusion, that I see nothing in 

 his criticisms, unsupported as they are by facts, to induce me to 



