98 Bartramian Names in Ornithology. [ February, 
pares the chirp of the European species to the note of Hyla ar- 
borea. 
Although belonging to the saltatorial Orthoptera, this insect, 
like the other species of its genus, is a poor leaper; inepte salit, 
says Fischer of its European congener. But on the other hand, 
it can run backward quite as easily as forward, — a fortunate 
gift, as the greater part of its burrow is too narrow for it to turn 
in. — Psyche, Cambridge, Mass. 
REPLY TO MR. J. A. ALLEN’S “AVAILABILITY OF 
CERTAIN BARTRAMIAN NAMES IN ORNITHOLOGY.”! 
BY DR. ELLIOTT COUES, U. S. A. 
M* reply to Mr. Allen must not be considered controversial, for 
4"4 two reasons. In the first place, my original article stated 
the whole case, from my point of view, so carefully, so completely, 
and so explicitly, that I am left without ground for further argu- 
ment. Secondly, nothing that Mr. Allen adduces in his critique 
invalidates the principle I established, most of his criticism being 
irrelevant to the main point at issue, namely, that if any of Bar- 
train’s identifiable, described, and binomially named species were 
entitled to recognition, then all such of his were equally so en- 
titled. Mr. Allen himself admits this, the whole point and pur- 
pose of my article, his protest being simply against the painful 
necessity of so doing ; out of ten Bartramian species which “ Dr. 
Coues proceeds to newly ‘set up,’” he acknowledges the right- 
ful claim of “ six or seven ” to be so dealt with, thereby yield- 
ing the-very point he wished to refute. In short, the only actual 
disagreement between Mr. Allen and myself is that he is able 
to identify satisfactorily rather fewer of Bartram’s species than 
I succeeded in doing. But this last is a matter to which I gently © 
alluded in my article when I said in substance that ornitholog- 
ical experts would of course identify Bartram’s species accord- 
ing to their respective ability. 
But Mr. Allen’s article is so courteous, so temperate, and writ- 
ten with such evident intention and desire to be perfectly just to 
all concerned, and yet misses the mark so widely, that I feel called 
upon to examine it further; in doing which, I trust I may not fall - 
behind my critic in the amenities; surely I hope not to. No seri- 
E An article in The American Naturalist for January, 1876, x. 21-29, criticising MY 
article “ Fasti Ornithologie redivivi, No. 1,” in Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, 
September, 1875, pp. 338-358 
. 
