February 
distinctions here referred to are almost value- 
less, as they are too minute to be recognizable 
at the ordinary distance of observation. 
Again, they can be grouped according to 
their habits: either as regards their habitat, 
as land, shore, and water birds, or as aérial and 
terrestrial ; or with a view to their differences 
of diet, as carnivorous, insectivorous, and gra- 
nivorous. But, while all these differences enter 
into the computation of a bird’s status, they 
are too indefinite in themselves to afford any 
satisfactory basis of arrangement. 
The third method, while in a sense more 
superficial and arbitrary than either of the 
others, is, after all, the most feasible for merely 
cursory study, the most natural for outdoor in- 
vestigation, and the method which any one 
without suggestion would inevitably adopt after 
a year’s continuous experience, viz., grouping 
them according to the season of the year when 
they appear. However shallow this system 
evidently is, it is none the less efficient for 
practical purposes. This does not preclude the 
more detailed grouping according to their evi- 
dent resemblances of form, color, habitat, 
habits, and temperament, by which they are 
found to be differentiated ; and while depend- 
47 
