2 l6



Correspondence, Notes, etc.



errors in the monograph on the Wild Canary, but I must ask to be allowed

to comment on one remark of “Onlooker’s.” He says that he “ offered

(through a mutual friend) to reply in his own journal to Dr. Creswell, but

received no answer.” The truth is that a proposal was made through a

gentleman then officially connected with Bird Notes, that a letter (which

was specified as one of unfriendly criticism from “Onlooker”) should be

published in that journal with the proviso that the name of the writer was

not to be disclosed to the Editor, and furthermore a threat was held out that

capital would be made out of it if it was refused. I question whether any

Editor in the Kingdom would accept contributions on such terms, and the

suggestion was very properly ignored, Horatio R. Fieemer.


[That fresh air is of more importance to birds than warmth has been

long known to most aviculturists, and we fail to see that any new discovery

has been made in this direction, but of course it is ridiculous to suppose

that delicate birds from tropical countries can enjoy life in our bleak

climate without artificial warmth. An Englishman might as well expect to

live and enjoy himself at the North Pole in the winter, with the same

costume he wears at home during summer-time.


As to whether cage-birds suffer from tuberculosis, or whether what

has generally been taken to be tuberculosis is really septicaemia must be

left for the pathologists to decide between themselves; but we are strongly

of opinion that the alleged harmfulness of yolk of egg as a food for birds

has not yet been proved. We have used it largely for rearing young birds

and have not found it harmful. To take the case of young ground-birds

such as Quails, Hemipodes and Tinamous, which we have reared in some

numbers. Unless living animal food can be obtained, the yolk of eggs is

the only food these young birds will touch. Some will not even touch this,

but others eat it readily and, instead of dying from septicaemia, grow up to be

healthy and sturdy birds; (preserved ants’ cocoons, dried flies and suchlike

are never touched). Why then should we discard the use of this valuable

substance ? It is not for aviculturists, who do not profess to be patholo¬

gists, to prove that Dr. Creswell and his supporters are wrong, it is for

these latter gentlemen to prove that the}' are right, and so far we fail to see

that they have done so. Ed.]


THE VERNACULAR NAMES OF BIRDS.


The following note appears in the Auk for October last:


An article in a recent number of the ‘ Avicultural Magazine’ entitled ‘The Breeding'

of Song-Sparrows,’ records the mating of a male Pileated Song-Sparrow with a female

White-eyebrowed Song-Sparrow, and their successful rearing of young, of course ill an

aviary. While the fact is in itself of interest, we greatly question whether any readers of

‘The Auk ’ would be able to recognize in the “White-eyebrowed Song-Sparrow ” our well-

known White-crowned Sparrow without the aid of the technical name, Zonotrichia leu-

cophrys, which fortunately accompanies the ‘English’ name. We have often wondered

why it is that English writers so persistently and methodically ignore the American ver¬

nacular names of American birds, when they have occasion to refer to them. It is a



