i8i


FOOD FOR vSOFT-BILLED BIRDS.


Sir, — Ornithological classification is a fine field for controversy, for

no two writers agree, and each is persuaded that he alone is right and

everyone else wrong. No doubt Dr. Butler and I could go on for a good

many months with this very pretty dispute as to whether or not it is more

improper to call a Nightingale a Warbler than to call a Tanager a Finch ;

and he ought to get the best of it, for is he not a big scientific man, and I

only a little aviculturist ? No doubt for every " authority " I could quote

it vsrould be easy for him to cite two on the opposite side— such is the

charming finality of this puzzling branch of science.

" But scientists, who ought to know,


Assure us that they must be so.


Oh ! let us never, never doubt


What nobod}^ is sure about ! "


I will therefore content myself with asking a few questions, and then

leave the matter, (i) Are not the Sylviidce according to Dr. Sliarpe,

Mr. Howard Saunders, and Dr. Btitler himself, included in the family

Turdida ? (2) Are not the Tanagridce placed in a separate family by Dr. Sharpe

and most modern ornithologists, none of whom include them in the

FringillidcE ? (3) Are not birds in the same family presumably more nearly

related than those in different families ? {4) If all these questions be

answered in the afiRrmative, as I think they must be, how does Dr. Butler

justify his statement that the Nightingale "is about as nearly related to

the Warblers as the Tanagers are " } (ej


I could only think, for the moment, of two Foreign cage-birds which

would reqiiire treatment similar to that of our Nightingale, and Dr. Butler

very properly reminds me that one of these belongs to the British list —

tliiis strengthening mj' argument that nearly all the foreign soft-billed birds

imported are frugivorous rather than sti'ictly insectivorous. I am glad that

Dr. Butler is disposed to admit that there may be a better food for

Nightingales than the mixture of Abrahams' Food, preserved &^%. potato,

and bread, which I understand he prescribes for all other birds, and I hope

that he will continue his experiments, and in course of time come to the

conclusion, which most of lis have come to long ago, that there is no such

thing as a universal food for soft-billed birds, but that every group requires

different treatment. So long as he sticks to the idea that all soft-billed

birds will thrive on the same food, whether it be xlbrahams' Food or some-

body else's, he must pardon me for drawing a distinction, in ni}' own mind,

between the avicultiire of a scientist and "scientific aviculture." I learn

from a recent letter of his in the Feathered World that he uses six to eight

large tins of Abrahams' Food per month. Has it never struck him that he

is paying rather dearly for the ^^g and ants' eggs contained in it }


Septimus Perkins.



This discussion has been the means of eliciting much useful informa-

tion, and I am ver}' grateful to those who have given us the benefit of their

experience. I am sorry to find that it seems now in danger of degenerating

into a rather personal controversy on points which have little or nothing to


(e) Birds in the same family are often far less nearly related than those in different

families. The Frini^illidie and Ploceidce differ chiefly in their manner of building-.— A. G. B.



