kn()\\ij:i)c.i; 



jANtAKV, 191 



lluiiunis simisscs in pliysical scii-ncc anion^; his 

 stiuiuiUs wiTf more ihan scvni times as mimtroiis 

 1)11 an average as tliosi' of aiiv otlicr professor in 

 New /ealanti. The second attack was mori- snccess- 

 fnl. as lie was practicaliv f^iven tlu- option of resii^n- 

 in}4 either liis theory or liis professorial chair. Pro- 

 fessor Hirkerton valueil hispi>st less tlian his theory, 

 so after some years his connexion with the L'niversit\' 

 was se\eri'<l ami he was able to ilevote his time, nn- 

 tranimeile<i. to research. Some eiglit \ears after- 

 wards his choice was jnstilied. At the suj^gestion 

 of llarl I)udle\'. then (iovernor-Cicnernl of Australia, 

 a fund was started : the Hoard of tile very Univer- 

 sity that had insisted on his resignation took 

 up the project, and the New Zealand ("ioverinneiit 

 contributed half the total sum. Thus subsidised. 

 I'r.if, <^nr IJickcrton was enabled li> i-.mn- in l".nt;laiid 



to la\' his theory clearly Ixifore the scientific world, in 

 the confident hope of securing its general acceptance. 



Professor Hickerton's object may be briefly stated 

 as follows : — 



To explain his theory of Partial Impact and tin 

 formation of the Third Hody and the many extra- 

 ordinary properties it possesses, and to show that 

 cosmic impact is not an accidental and destructive 

 occurrence, liut a law of nature brought about by a 

 great number of agencies, and that it is the most 

 powerful constructive factor in the wlujle scheme of 

 creation. We believe that all who have carefully 

 read Professor Bickerton"s four articles will agree 

 that he has made out a very strong case and that 

 this theory deserves the closest and most sympathetic 

 attention from all astronomers, professional and 

 amateur. 



.A NAi'iRi-: ( .\i.i:\i).\ 



\\\ (.ii.i;i;kr wiini:. 



ii\ III r.i:KT II. I'ooLE. 



Gll.Hr.ur WillTi:, of Selborne, can need no 

 introduction to readers of " Knu\vi,i;i)(;i:," for 

 manv of us obtained our earliest natural history 

 impressions from the fascinating pages of that 

 old-time but perennially interesting volume " The 

 Natural History of Selborne." 



Gilbert White kept very full records of his 

 observations for over forty \ears, and his diaries 

 (which have been preserved) begin in 1751 and 

 continue until his death in 1793. For the first 

 thirteen years they are mainly concerned with 

 gardening operations and contain but few notes on 

 will! nature. In 1765, however, a change occurs. 

 White in that year bought a copy of Hudson's 

 " Flora .\nglica." beginning in earnest the study of 

 botany, and his notes reflect this new interest : but 

 his ordinary diary for 1766 contains naught but 

 garden observations, all his natural history notes 

 during that Near being reserved for a special and 

 uni<]ue compilation — the Nature Calendar w itli 

 which we are now concerned. 



The Selborne Societv has just |)ublislied. in 

 facsimile, a reproduction of this interesting work, 

 which is edited by Mr. Wilfred Mark Webb, F.L.S. 



Ill the Introduction it is shown tliat this record was 

 most proliablv cf)mpiled to form a basis for the 

 ■■.\nnus Historico-naturalis " mentioned in White's 

 last letter to Dailies Harrington. On the back of 

 the title-jiage of the manuscrii)t it is called " Flora 

 Selborniensis: with some co-incidences of the com- 

 ing, and departure of birds of passage, and insects: 

 and the appearing of Reptiles: for the Year 1766." 

 It also contains a number of interesting weather 

 records. I'roni this it will be seen that the work 

 was not intemled to deal with jilaiits alone, but 

 forms an exceedingly interesting genenil Nature 

 Calendar. 



The total miiii!)er of species of plants that Wiiiti' 



recorded as occurring in tiie parish of Selborne is 

 four iuindred and thirty-nine. In this Calendar for 

 ]766o\er four hundred are detailed — a verv note- 

 worthv list for one year. \'ery few records are 

 secondhand, perhaps half-a-dozen ; all the rest are 

 the personal observations of the famous naturalist. 



.An entry for July 2nd is of considerable ornitho- 

 logical interest. It runs " Caught, and ascertain'd 

 the Rcgiilus lion cristcittis. It is a very small bird, but 

 bigger than the golden-crowned wren ; jiretty common 

 and very mischievous among pease and cherries." 



It is well known that White differentiated the 

 Chiff-chaff, W'illow-warbler and Wood-warbler 

 wliich, until his day, had all been lumped together 

 under the name of Willow Wren. This date 

 probablv marks his first record of P/iyllascopiis and 

 two years later, .August 17th, 1 76M, he enumerated 

 the three species in a letter to Pennant. 



The wrongful accusation that the Willow - 

 warbler is a frugivore. which he reiterated in Letter 

 X\'I to Pennant, .\pril ISth, 1768, is a curious 

 error for such a keen observer as Gilbert \\'hite to 

 make. The three Pliylloscof}! are now considered 

 to be entirely insecti\orous. Harting. however, has 

 suggested that White may have mistaken the young 

 of garden-warblers — which do at times eat fruit, 

 and, as a species, were unknown to White — for 

 willow warblers. 



In the ample Index much research has been 

 devoted to the task of supplying the modern 

 scientific names to the i)lants. birds, insects, and so 

 on, recorded by Gilbert White: but a few still 

 require identification. 



One example of these interesting lacunae is to be 

 foiinil on page 5S which we are able to reproduce 

 herewith. No. 27 2 of Kay's " Historia Insectorum " 

 is doubtless Izristalis fciuix. but No. 27 1 is so far 

 unidentified. (See Plate I.) 



