NALURE 
G2 
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 1, 1885 
NORTH AMERICAN WATER-BIRDS 
The Water-Birds of North America. By S. F. Baird, 
T. M. Brewer, and R. Ridgway. Two Vols., 4to. 
(Boston: Little, Brown, and Co., 1884.) 
XPECTATION was roused some years since when 
tidings came that the “ North American Birds” of 
Prof. Baird, Dr. Brewer, and Mr. Ridgway, of which 
three volumes had been brought out in 1874, was in pro- 
cess of completion, and at last there appeared two quartos 
of goodly size under the title of “The Water-Birds of 
North America,” which are not only the sequel to the 
work just named, but are also issued in continuation of 
the publications of the Geological Survey of California, 
of which a single volume on the land-birds of that State, 
edited by Prof. Baird from the notes of Dr. J. G. Cooper, 
saw the light in 1870. But, to complicate the matter 
further, the two quartos now before us form vols. xii. and 
xiii. of the “ Memoirs of the Museum of Comparative 
Zoology ” at Harvard. How all this came about is ex- 
plained in the introduction by Prof. Whitney, the Cali- 
fornian State Geologist ; but the only part that need 
concern us is the not surprising but still much-to-be- 
regretted fact that the cost of bringing out the volumes 
treating of the land-birds of North America was so great 
as to deter the publishers from continuing the work at 
their own risk. Most fortunately, then, the combination 
just mentioned was effected with the result we now see ; 
but it still remains a reproach and humiliation to those 
interested in birds—not only in North America alone 
but all the world over—that so excellent a performance 
was not more encouraged by them. The obstinacy of the 
public in preferring a bad book to a good one is perhaps 
observable in almost every science, but that this obstinacyis 
nowhere more marked than in the case of natural history, 
and of ornithology in particular may be because it is one 
of the most popular branches of science, and because nine- 
tenths of those who pursue it hardly realise the fact that 
it is capable of serious study. Howbeit we may be sure 
that the old adage, “ Populus vult decifiz,” was not first 
uttered by a man without worldly knowledge, and to this 
day experience tells us that it is as true as ever. It will take 
a long time yet to persuade people that they had better 
be well informed by an author who writes a book be- 
cause he knows his subject, than by a badly-informed 
one who gets up his subject in order to write a book 
about it—though even this is perhaps saying too much, 
for many an author, on ornithology at least, has never 
taken the trouble to learn the rudiments of what he pre- 
tends to teach, and if he have but enough self-assurance 
he will get his claim to instruct allowed by those who are 
more ignorant than he is. 
To all who have been concerned in the production of 
the text of the two volumes before us we must offer our 
hearty congratulations, as it is impossible for us to ap- 
portion to each anything like his proper share of merit. 
Besides the naturalists already named, Frof. Whitney 
states, in his introduction, that in revising the not wholly 
completed manuscript he has had the assistance of Mr. 
Allen, so long known as head of the ornithological ! 
VOL. XXxII.—NO. 831 
department of the Harvard Museum, and that gentleman is 
therefore entitled to our thanks as much as any one of the 
others ; but moreover it is also advisable to look back to 
the original preface of Prof. Baird, in which he states that 
“the most productive source” of the new information 
published in this work “has been the great amount of 
manuscript contained in the archives of the Smithsonian 
Institution in the form of correspondence, elaborate 
reports and the field-notes of collectors and travellers.” 
The most important of these, he goes on to say, are those 
by the iate Mr. Kennicott, and several residents in the 
then Hudson’s Bay Company’s Territory—Messrs. Mac- 
Farlane, Ross, Lawrence Clark, Strachan Jones, and 
others—besides Messrs. Dale, Bannister, and Henry 
Elliott in regard to Alaska and its islands. Now this 
being the case with respect to the former volume, which 
treated of the land-birds only, the importance of .the 
labours of these gentlemen ought to be far more manifest 
in the present volumes, which deal with the water-birds, 
since an overwhelming majority of them have their home 
in the vast northern regions of the continent, and are 
only winter-visitants to most of the States and Territories 
of the Union. A good deal to our disappointment we 
find it otherwise. It may be that the late Dr. Brewer, 
who is believed to have been responsible for the “ bio- 
graphical ” portion of these as of the former volumes, had 
not at his death completed the examination of the unpub- 
lished materials at his disposal ; but certainly there is not 
so much information from American sources as we had 
hoped or even expected. On the other hand, European 
authors are freely, not to say redundantly, laid under 
contribution for such species as are common to the two 
continents, which it is needless to say are many. Of this we 
do not complain, though we confess we should rather have 
learned how these species behave themselves on the other 
side of the Atlantic ; but there is a want of discrimination 
as to the opportunities possessed by the different observers 
quoted, and a lack of proportion as to the value of their 
observations. We do not say that this is not pardonable, 
perhaps it was unavoidable; but it is unfortunately no 
less a drawback ; and, to make it worse, several instances 
might be cited in which absolutely contradictory asser- 
tions are reprinted without any attempt to indicate which 
is thought to be the more worthy of belief ; while a good 
many of the statements to which this objection does not 
apply are but vain repetitions. 
Passing to the descriptive part of the work, we do not 
hesitate to declare that, so far as we have been able to 
test it, it is excellent. The “specific characters” given 
seem really to deserve their name, since they indicate the 
species, and are not, as has lately become so common, 
drawn from an individual example. Moreover, they are 
sufficiently brief to be useful, for we have unfortunately 
entered upon days when specimens are described at a 
length that absolutely precludes the practical application 
of the description. Nothing marks more distinctly the 
difference between a naturalist and a book-maker than 
the being able to perceive and to tersely express the 
characters that are essential to the differentiation of a 
species. Among ornithologists, merely to cite the 
example of one who is gone, it seems to have been this 
faculty that gave the late Mr. Gould such a wonder- 
ful pre-eminence among his contemporaries. Others 
Z 
