"local," "BRITISH," AND "FOREIGN." 325 



"Britisli" bird, and that every "Britlsli" bird is a "foreign" 

 one;* and that eacli of these imaginary divisions is being con- 

 stantly recruited from the division immediately above it. For 

 instance, the golden eagle is not a " local " bird, but it may be so 

 to-morrow, should one stray from North Britain, as they some- 

 times do, and be shot by some person within the boundary 

 of the county. It then becomes "local"! This bird, which is 

 as distinctly " foreign " — being found in Europe, North Africa, 

 America, &c. — as it is "British"! Put this in, or leave it out 

 of the " local " division, and what does it teach ? 



Arguing per contra, the osprey has been killed in our 

 own county more than once; it is thus "local;" it is also 

 " British," nesting in North Britain ; it is also distinctly 

 " foreign," being found positively in every quarter of the globe 

 — in Australia even — sharing with the common barn owl the 

 distinction of being actually cosmopolitan. In which division 

 are we to place this? It is "local," and yet cannot be 

 mounted in that division, with its nest and young, because 

 it has never bred in the Midlands; but it has bred in 

 North Britain, and might be shown in the " British " division 

 fully displayed ; but, says this contention, which I have 

 called " Scheme A," no " British " specimens shall be mounted 

 with nest and young ! Being " foreign," it should also come 

 in the " Foreign " division. "What, then, can this teach ? 

 Either the bird must be repeated in all three divisions, or it 

 must, according to the foregoing, appear only in the "local" 

 division, thus acting an ornithological lie, and leading the 

 unlearned to believe that it is a very rare bird, peculiar only 

 to Leicestershire. These examples might be repeated ad 

 nauseam. The sparrow, the swallow, the kingfisher, the heron, 

 the wild duck, the wood-pigeon, the pheasant, the coot, the 

 woodcock, the terns, the gnlls, &c., are some common forms 

 which occur to me. 



Again, there are five orders of birds not represented in 

 Leicestershire, nor in England even. These contain nearly 

 five hundred species. Are these to be entirely eliminated from 



* There are but two birds belonging: to the Paridse (Titmice), which are claimed as being 

 peculiar to Britain ; and these merely on the ground of being climatio varieties— hardly 

 sufficient to warrant the founding of new "species." 



