i86 



NATURE 



[August ii, 1910 



are unrhymed, and have no pronounced rhythm, except 

 such as is imparted by the singer ; and tliey consist for 

 the most part of repetitions of some simple idea, but are 

 saved from monotony by a tricky use of synonym and 

 metaphor. As the vocabulary is limited, the Munda poet 

 uses the utmost freedom in detaching a required word 

 from its associations ; for instance, in order to harp upon 

 the idea of the perfume of flowers, the v/orA that in 

 ordinary conversation implies an ancient and fish-like smell 

 may be used as a synonym with perfect propriety. But 

 this poetic licence never breaks the bounds of decorum : 

 " Of the hundreds of songs which, after the day's work, 

 resound over the whole country, evening after evening, not 

 one is defiled by a lewd expression, or even by an indecent 

 allusion." 



No. 8 of these Memoirs is entitled " A Monograph of 

 Sea-snakes," and its author would have done better had 

 he considered that in this very fallible world nothing is 

 ever gained by labouring to expose the mistakes — or sup- 

 posed mistakes— of fellow-workers. To read this pre- 

 tentious " monograph," one might suppose that the British 

 Museum Catalogue of Snakes, the author of which is per- 

 sistently gleeked and galled at throughout, was hardly 

 worth the paper it is printed on. No doubt there may be 

 errors in the catalogue, as there are in all the works of 

 mortal men ; but even were the errors great and manifold — 

 and no one who uses the catalogue considers this to be 

 the case — the work would still stand out as a compre- 

 hensive and critical account of our knowledge of the 

 Ophidia, and a well-arranged storehouse of fact, to which 

 all after-workers must be indebted, whether they choose 

 to acknowledge their debt or not. So that when tlie author 

 of this monograph states that his " views are substantially 

 different from those held by ' Professor ' Boulenger " (the 

 distinguished begetter of the British Museum Catalogue), 

 and further solemnly announces that " there are dis- 

 crepancies between Mr. Boulenger's work and mine affect- 

 ing questions of actual fact," the most easy-going critic is 

 roused to attention. 



The shattering " discrepancy of fact " turns in the 

 main upon the question whether the posterior maxillary 

 teeth of certain sea-snakes are grooved or not. The British 

 Museum Catalogue recognises the genus Hydrophis as 

 distinct from the genus Distira, because in the former 

 genus the posterior maxillary teeth are not grooved as they 

 are in the latter genus ; but to the author of this mono- 

 graph, using " a new lens of the very highest power and 

 quality specially recommended for this work," it " became 

 clearly revealed " that the posterior maxillary teeth in 

 Hydrophis are " all grooved." In any case, the matter 

 is of no very great importance, as every naturalist under- 

 stands that the limits between species and genera are often 

 not very sharply defined ; but to test the case we removed 

 the poison-fang and one of the posterior maxillary teeth 

 of a well-preserved and authentic spirit-specimen of 

 Hydrapliis latifascialus, and examined them side bv side, 

 not indeed with any " patent double million magnifyin' gas 

 microscopes of hextra power" such as Mr. Sam Weller 

 demanded in order to see through a flight of stairs and a 

 deal door, but with an ordinary microscope. In the 

 poison-fang the poison-canal is as plain as a diagram ; in 

 the small posterior tooth there is no trace whatever of 

 any groove. 



If, instead of holding up the British Museum Catalogue 

 to reprobation, and adding grievous burdens to termin- 

 ology, the author had given us some facts about the 

 anatomv of sea-snakes, and had summarised what is known 

 about the habits, food, and enemies of these animals, and 

 the nature and mode of action of their venom, his work 

 might have approached the standard of a monograph. As 

 it stands, it is merely what is known as a revision of the 

 subfamily — and an incomplete revision, because, among 

 other things, the several genera are not fully defined, and 

 are not properly referred to their respective authors. 



We cannot leave these Memoirs without n short refer- 

 ence to No. 0, which contains a " Polyglot List of Birds 

 in Turki, Manchu, and Chinese," by Dr. E. D. Ross. The 

 author disclaims any acquaintance with ornithology, and 

 apologises for undertaking such work " with nothing but 

 linguistic equipment." The paper, which, with indices, 

 occupies more than ion pages, is divided into " Part i., 



NO. 2128, VOL. 84] 



Large Birds," for which the "generic" name is Qus, 

 and " Section ii., Small Birds," for which the general 

 name is Qucqac ; 360 birds are included ; some of them 

 are specifically identified, others are identified in a general 

 way, while others are merely treated after the manner of 

 the commentator. An illustration of each of the three 

 methods will show how far this dish of literary minutalia 

 is likely to be of service to an ornithologist. 



"30. Qu : ? The Cormorant: Manchu, Kotan; Chinese, 

 Tao Ho. The ' Mirror ' says : ' It somewhat resembles the 

 wild swan and is grey in colour. Its beak is wide and 

 its crop large. It fills its crop with water which it pours 

 into rat-holes, and having thus driven out the rats eats 

 them.' I am in doubt whether the swan or cormorant is 

 intended here. Ou is the common Turki name for a 

 swan." 



"179. Aqis Cikdaci : The Chough: Pyrrhocorax 

 i^racidus : Manchu, Ciiijiri; Chinese, Liao ko [Giles's 

 Diet., the blue grackle]. The ' Mirror ' says : ' Coloura- 

 tion violet ; red beak parting on the top of the head. A 

 skilful singer with a very clear voice.' " 



"336. Ding-ding Qucqac : A species of wagtail: Manchu, 

 Tuhiycri cecike ; Chinese, Yao t'un ch'iao. The 

 ' Mirror ' says : ' Over the eyelids are long ash-coloured 

 feathers looking like eyebrovs's ; short tail ; always struts 

 when walking." 



Many other fearful wildfowl are exhibited, and all are 

 fitted with tags of comment and reference, some of which 

 call to mind the notes to Thackeray's delightful paradoy 

 " Timbuctoo. " 



AUSTRALIAN AND ARGENTINE BIOLOGY. 

 T^HE third number of the Memoirs of the National 

 Museum of Melbour;i-", is devoted to descriptions by 

 Messrs. Baldwin Spencer and J. A. Kershaw of remains 

 of subfossil emeus and marsupials from King Island, Bass 

 Strait, and, in a second paper, to a review of the existing 

 species of wombat. As regards emeus, the authors find 

 that Kangaroo Island, King Island, and Tasmania were 

 severally inhabited by species distinct from Droinaeus 

 novac-hoUaiidiae of the mainland. Both the Kangaroo 

 Island D. peroiii (ater) and the King Island D. minor 

 were darker than the mainland bird, the first being dis- 

 tinguished from the second by its less robust build. The 

 Tasmanian emeu, which survived in numbers until at least 

 as late as 1840, is still insufficiently described, but appears 

 to have dilTered in colour from each of the other three 

 species, and also laid eggs of a distinctive character. 



With the exception of a Dasyurus, the marsupials from 

 King Island are identified with existing species. 



Turning -to w^ombats, the authors state that the first 

 specimen known to Europeans was secured on Clarke 

 Island, Bass Strait, in 1797 (not by Bass), and taken alive 

 to Sydney, this forming the type of Shaw's Didelphys 

 ursina. .All the early examples of wombats came, in fact, 

 from the islands in Bass Strait, and the identification of 

 the Tasmanian animal with the Bass Strait Phascolotnys 

 itrsinus is shown to be erroneous. In addition to skulls 

 and bones, it appears to be now represented in collections 

 only by a couple of skins recently secured on Flinders 

 Island, where it still survives. The Tasmanian species, for 

 which the authors propose the name P. tasmanicnsis, is 

 intermediate in size between the large mitcheUi and the 

 smaller ur^iiiux, but agrees in shape with the forr.-er ; its 

 genera! colour is grizzled grey, with light hairs inside the 

 ears. 



In the course of a long paper on the birds of the East 

 Murrhison district, published in the .April number (vol. ix., 

 part iv.) of the Emu, Mr. F. L. Whitlock gives an account 

 of his discovery of the playing-grounds and nests of the 

 yellow-spotted bower-bird (Chlamydodera guttata), illus- 

 trated by photographs. A peculiar feature of the species 

 is that at the commencement of the breeding season several 

 individuals soinetimes resort to the same play-ground, 

 where the adult males make a nuptial display. The 

 dimensions of one play-ground were 7 by 5 feet. The 

 foundation was a mass of twigs, which raised the floor of 

 the inverted arch about 6 or 8 inches above the general 

 level of the ground, the walls of the arch being some 



