5S 



ORNITHOLOGIST 



[Vol. 8-No. 8 



most as great, though a few species have 

 the same name in both. In this very same 

 group, at the opening of the books, Mr. 

 Ridg-way gives Merula migratoria as the 

 scientific name of the Robin, while Dr. 

 Cones gives Turdus migratorins. 



The Gray-cheeked Thrush is called by 

 Mr. Ridgway Hylocichla alicim, and Dr. 

 Coues calls it Turdus nstulatus alicim. 

 Both Doctor Coues and Mr. Ridgway 

 have given the Hermit a trinomial ap- 

 pellation ; but while the former calls it 

 Turdus tmalascm namis it has received 

 from the latter author Hylocichla tmalas- 

 cce pallasi. Turn to the middle of the 

 book and we will find that Dr. Coues gives 

 the Barn Owl the specific name of Pratin- 

 cola and Mr. Ridgway, Americanus. Mr. 

 Ridgway mentions three sub-species or va- 

 rieties of the Great-horned Owl, for which 

 he adopts the names of subarcticus, arcticus 

 saturatus, while Dr. Coues gives but two 

 and calls these arcticus {indjmci/icns — and 

 so on through the entire work. 



The "Long-tailed Jaeger" of Coues' list 

 is named huffo7ii and in the Smithsonian 

 list it is parasitictts, — the same English 

 name being given to the two species ; and 

 the very last species mentioned in the 

 Smithsonian list is not given by Dr. Coues. 



Such being fair examples of these rival 

 systems, it does not require a brilliant im- 

 agination to foresee that their use will 

 produce confusion. I have neither the 

 knowledge nor the inclination to discuss 

 their relative merits or demerits. I am 

 looking at the entire question from the 

 standpoint of a student who finds the 

 difficulties of study increased by the two 

 being used. Do I stand alone in this po- 

 sition ? Are not the mass of those who 

 read such books as " New England Bird 

 Life " ornithologists only in a very amateu- 

 rish way ? And even of the more advanced 

 students are there not but very few who 

 bother to hunt up the authorities for the 

 difi'erent names or who care a fig which is 

 adopted ? To the greater number it is of 



little consequence what name a bird is 

 known by, but a vei-y important matter 

 that the nomenclature shall not be so con- 

 fusing that there is an added difficulty in 

 the way of determining to which species a 

 name refers. 



Dr. Coues does not deny that the use of 

 these two systems will lead to confusion, 

 indeed in his letter he is frank enough to 

 admit that " it is to be regretted that there 

 are two claimants for public favor " ; and 

 in an article published in the Januaiy 

 number of the Bulletin of the Nuttall 

 Ornithological Club he g-oes further and 

 implies that he considers it an imperative 

 necessity that there should be but one 

 system in use and suggests the assembling 

 of " a congi'ess of American ornithologists 

 to discuss, vote upon, and decide each case 

 in which the Doctors disagreed .... 

 the congressmen to bind themselves to 

 abide by the decision of the majority." By 

 the Avay this does not quite harmonize with 

 what the learned Doctor has asserted in 

 his letter, i. e., "It is evident that in mat- 

 ters of science there can be no ' authority' 

 or ' officiality' especially of that impersonal 

 kind which could be attributed to any in- 

 stitution." Would not this congress which 

 he proposes be an institution whose author- 

 ity all its members — all American ornithol 

 ogists — would be bound to follow ? And 

 did not Dr. Coues, when he wrote the 

 above, lose sight of the "authority" exer- 

 cised by the British Association ? If he 

 replied to this question he might possibly 

 tell your readers that the "American 

 School," as they call themselves, did not 

 recognize this authority, and in proof of it 

 might state that while the British Associa- 

 tion uses only a binominal nomenclature, 

 the "American School" have adopted tri- 

 nomialism. He might forget to add, how- 

 ever, that European naturalists have con- 

 demned the Americans for so doing. 



No one who has read nuich of Dr. Coues' 

 writings can question his superior qualifi- 

 cation to prepare a system for classifying 



