778 



SCIENCE. 



[N. S. Vol. III. No. 73. 



have escaped Dr. Shufeldt's notice, so greatly 

 is lie shocked by the lack of taxonomic revis- 

 ion. 



In all Check Lists of North American Birds, 

 from Baird's, published in 1858, down to Ridg- 

 way's and Coues' lists of 1880 and 1882, the 

 species are numbered in an orderly sequence ; 

 and the numbers serve an important function, 

 they being often used in the place of the names, 

 not only in labeling specimens, particularly 

 eggs, but extensively in correspondence be- 

 tween collectors, the number serving as a con- 

 venient symbol for the name. Hence it is im- 

 portant that they be given the greatest possible 

 permanency. The A. O. U. Committee recog- 

 nized this fact in preparing the Check List, and 

 devised a scheme whereby any number of in- 

 terpolations could be made without disturbing 

 the notation of species already in the list. Of 

 course, a transposition of groups would necessi- 

 tate a new notation and create endless confu- 

 sion and inconvenience, for which the Commit- 

 tee would receive condemnation compared with 

 which Dr. Shufeldt's strictures can be easily 

 borne, particularly since his views on several 

 points are not extensively shared by other 

 equally competent taxonomers. 



The greater part of Dr. Shufeldt's paper con- 

 sists of a detailed comparison of the two edi- 

 tions of the check list, with an analysis, taking 

 the birds by ordinal or family groups, of the 

 changes introduced in the 1895 edition. This 

 is a useful statistical resume for those interested 

 in the subject. 



It is, however, not free from typographical 

 errors, nor from others that by no stretch of 

 courtesy can be placed in that category. For 

 example, Megascops flammeola idahoensis is re- 

 corded (p. 361) as M. a[_sio']. idahoensis; the 

 subgenus Burrica is mentioned (p. 365) as Bar- 

 rica; it is said (p. 366), 'subgenus Parus in- 

 serted ' in the 1895 edition, whereas it is given 

 in the 1886 edition as well; on p. 368 the state- 

 ment about the Swallow-tailed Gull is the 

 exact reverse of the truth. His method of 

 noting changes in the status of species or sub- 

 species tends to a wrong conception of the facts 

 in the case. Under ' species omitted ' and 

 ' species added,' etc., he places not only species 

 omitted or added, as the case may be, but forms 



whose status has merely been changed from 

 species to subspecies, or the reverse. Thus, 

 as in the case of Zonotrichia intermedia, for ex- 

 ample, where the change is from specific to 

 subspeciflc rank, the change could have been 

 easily and correctly indicated by a formula like 

 the following : Zonotrichia intermedia (1886) = 

 Z. leuco]3hrys intermedia (1895). In place of this 

 Z. intermedia is placed under ' species omitted ' 

 and Z. leucophrys intermedia in the list of ' sub- 

 species added ; ' whereas, so far as the number 

 of forms is concerned, there is neither omission 

 nor addition. 



In a footnote to p. 364 we find the following: 

 ' ' The Starling {Sturnus imlgaris) essentially 

 gained a place and recognition in the A. O. U. 

 ' List ' from the fact that it has been success- 

 fully ' introduced ' from abroad. If this be 

 granted, the Committee were guilty of very un- 

 scientific practice when they omitted the English 

 Sparrow {Passer domesticus) from the ' List ' 

 (also Passer montamis), and it can only stand as 

 an examj^le of how far men will allow their 

 prejudices to carry them and blind their scien- 

 tific instincts." If the critic of the A. O. U. 

 Committee had taken the trouble to refer to the 

 1886 edition he would have found that the 

 Starling was introduced in the first edition of 

 the ' Check List ' on the basis of its occurrence 

 in Greenland, and that his presumptuous criti- 

 cism and moralizing about ' prejudices ' were 

 wholly without cause. Since the publication 

 of the first edition the species has been ' intro- 

 duced, by importation in numbers from Europe, 

 and appears to have obtained a permanent foot- 

 hold here — a fact it seemed worth while to 

 mention in the second edition of the ' Check 

 List.' No 'introduced' species has been intro- 

 duced in the Check List, which is intended to 

 be what its name purports — a list of North 

 American birds. Of late years many species of 

 foreign birds have been ' turned out ' in various 

 parts of the United States and Canada, but with 

 what results it is impossible as yet to deter- 

 mine. Dr. Shufeldt will find, however, in the 

 'Abridged Edition' of the 'Check List,' pub- 

 lished in 1889, a list of 'Introduced Species," 

 ten in number, which at that time were known 

 to breed in this countr5' in a wild state. But 

 this list forms no part of the Check List proper. 



