138 THE OBNITHOLOGIST. 



Snipe's eggs brought from Lapland by Mr. Wheelwright, there was a clutch 

 of this variety, and we have one in our cabinet which we should have been 

 glad to have lent to Mr. Poynting. Some of the eggs figured are exceed- 

 ingly rare, and only exist in the wealthy collection of the Smithsonian 

 Institute in America. These were drawn for Mr. Poynting by Mr. J. L. 

 Ridgway, and consist of the eggs of the Yellow-shank, some of the eggs 

 given of the Grey Plover, with those of the American Golden Plover, the 

 Pectoral Sandpiper, the Buff-breasted Sandpiper, Pied-breasted Snipe, Sander- 

 ling, Bonaparte's Sandpiper, American Stint, and Eskimo Curlew. Specimens 

 of these eggs are very unlikely to find their way into the cabinets of English 

 collectors, so that they are fortunate in having these beautiful figures 

 within their reach. The eggs of four species remain unillustrated, un- 

 doubted specimens never having been yet secured ; these are the Sharp-tailed 

 Sandpiper, the Curlew Sandpiper, the Knot, and the Solitary Sandpiper. 



The letter-press is excellent. Mr. Poynting's object has been, "as far 

 as possible, to quote authorities who write from personal observation." He 

 has succeeded in obtaining all the up-to-date information which can be 

 gleaned from the most recent accounts of ornithological discovery and 

 exploration. 



In conclusion, we have to state that the work is very handsomely printed 



on the best paper. 



Murray A. Mathew. 



OBSERVATIONS AND QUERIES. 



On Sub-species. — Mr. W. Ruskin Butterfield has made some remarks 

 contra sub-species, Ornithologist, vol. i., p. 94. There he declares 

 that nobody has ever, to his knowledge, explained with much show of 

 success what a sub-species is. Therefore, he declares it an arbitrary thing 

 and condemns sub-specific names as "valueless," "arbitrary," and "mis- 

 leading," followed by "bewilderment and chaos," &c. That article, to 

 my mind, clearly showed that the writer was not then acquainted with the 

 idea involved in the use of the word sub-species, or the literature relating 

 to it. In the Ornithologist, vol. i., p. 116, the same author expresses 

 his fear that he was misunderstood ; and he shows that now he has troubled 

 about the meaning of the word sub-species, and he most graciously admits 

 the existeuce of sub-species, and now his only objections to its use in 

 ornithology are, that it is difficult to draw the line between a species 

 and a sub-species, and that British ornithologists have not yet generally 

 adopted the recognition of sub-species. May I ask all true ornithologists 



