ii Recent Literature. 234 
this country by the Macmillan Company of New York; and repeat our 
already expressed opinion that it is the best book ever written about 
birds. No ornithologist, no person who desires or intends to become one, 
can afford to be without it. We wish that we could record our conviction 
that its reception by the public will be according to its merits; but that 
seems improbable, for mediocrity has no means of measuring pre- 
excellence. 
Recognizing fully, as we do, the inexorable limits of a single volume, 
we have no disposition to find fault with anything that this ‘ Dictionary’ 
does not contain; and even if the principles upon which Professor 
Newton has made up his alphabet are not always clear to us, we are quite 
ready to believe them judicious, or best forthe end he had in view. We 
are thankful for all that is implied by the admission of our Koel or our 
Paauw, though we may have to look elsewhere for the difference, if any 
there be, between a Thrush-Titmouse and a Titmouse-Thrush. It is 
enough to add that we are not here concerned with a Giebel, but with a 
Newton; and long-protracted lexicographic work of our own has satisfied 
us that the author need not have recorded any reason for moulding the 
main body of his treatise dictionary-wise — not even so good a reason as 
the following (prefatory Note, p. vii) : 
“T would say that the alphabetical order has been deliberately adopted 
in preference to the taxonomic because I entertain grave doubt of the 
validity of any systematic arrangement as yet put forth, some of the later 
attempts being in my opinion among the most fallacious, and a good deal 
worse than those they are intended to supersede.” 
Considering the attention already bestowed upon Parts I-III of the 
‘Dictionary’ bya competent critic (“J. A. A.”), whose final office we here 
usurp at his own instance, and agreeing cordially with the tenor of his 
reviews, we may confine ourselves in the remarks which follow to con- 
sideration of Part IV, which carries the alphabet from Skheathdill to 
Zygodactyli—why not to Zygoma being explicableas above. It would be 
unnecessary, even were it reasonably practicable within the limits of a 
review, to scrutinize the list of entries in detail; especially as there is 
much we wish to say regarding the ‘ Introduction’. Suffice it to observe 
no falling off, whether in fullness, accuracy, or elegance of treatment, 
from the high standard of excellence set in the beginning, but rather the 
reverse; for, as is usual in similar cases — we cannot say, in such cases, 
because this one stands alone —the work cresczt ewndo, and many of its 
most notable articles fall in the latter part of the alphabet. Opening Part 
IV at random, we happen upon Toucan, p. 976, followed by Zouraco, 
PP- 979-982, both being among the longer articles. These two words have 
histories which go back in the one case to 1668 at least, in the other 
beyond 1743; the birds themselves have been known still longer under 
other names; and each belongs to a notable family. Their treatment is a 
fair sample of Professor Newton’s conspicuous ability in so handling 
subjects, both historically and ornithologically, as to convey the most 
