CORRESPONDENCE. 
BIRDS OF THE GALAPAGOS ARCHIPELAGO.! 
Editor American Naturalist. 
Sir :—The September number of the American Naturalist con- 
tains a criticism of my “ Birds of the Galapagos Archipelago ” which I 
have not answered sooner from want of time. I would gladly pass 
it by were it not that certain erroneous quotations and important 
misconstructions contained in Dr. Baur’s “criticism” should not be 
allowed to stand uncorrected. 
Regarding a certain missing box of specimens from the southern 
part of Albemarle Island, Charles Island, etc., Dr. Baur says: “I 
shall now make a few remarks about the birds from Charles, Hood, 
Barrington, and South Albemarle, which were contained in a box 
which disappeared in Guayaquil. The loss is not quite so unfortu- 
nate as stated by Mr. Ridgway. He remarks that it contained more 
than forty land birds from the southern part of Albemarle Island, 
but this statement, as will be seen from the list which I now give, is 
not correct.” 
In a letter (now in my possession) dated Oct. 12, 1891, Dr. Baur 
wrote me: “That Creagrus is a very common bird you probably 
have heard already from Mr. Adams; also, that we got over forty 
species of birds from S. Albemarle.’ In another dated March 1, 
1892, he wrote: “ One box containing other small birds has unfor- 
tunately been lost on the way, probably at Panama, and so far no 
trace of it has been found ” ; while in still another, dated April 29, 
1894, he says: “ It is a great loss that one box with small birds was 
stolen at Guayaquil. I see now that it contained the specimens 
from Charles, Hood, Barrington, and South Albemarle.” 
Since Dr. Baur distinctly wrote me, as quoted above, that he and 
Mr. Adams collected more than forty species of birds on South 
Albemarle, and later twice informed me they were smal birds, it 
will be seen that I was justified, from the knowledge in my posses- 
1 With Mr. Ridgway’s kind consent, his letter written Nov. 19, 1897, has been 
withheld from publication on account of the unfortunate illness of Dr. Baur, 
which prevented us from submitting the letter to him for comment or reply. Dr. 
Baur, being in Europe at present, is still ignorant of this letter, but it does not 
seem wise or fair to Mr. Ridgway to delay its publication any longer. — EDITOR. 
