fy i sas al lh dl dl coe EE ta 
SUPERINDE ag rd 
1894.] Recent Literature. 593 
inserted. I did not see proof and the error was noticed too late for 
correction. 
The fact that not only the names of orders but also those of families 
are wanting after * Macrochires” and “ Trochilide,” should, I think, 
have suggested to so practiced a reviewer that there was a lapsus some- 
where. 
It is certainly bad enough to be accused of trying to classify all but 
the Passeries in one order, but when it logically follows—and in this 
case it does—that one is also accused of attempting to crowd the. same 
heterogeneous assemblage into the family Frochilid I must, in justice 
to myself, plead not guilty. 
Very truly yours, 
| RANK M. CHAPMAN. 
American Museum Natural History, New York City. May 24, 
1894. 
Annual Report Minnesota Natural History Survey for 
1892.'—The important papers incorporated with this report are as 
follows: The Geology of Kekequabie Lake with special reference to 
an augite-soda granite, by Mr. U. S. Grant ; Report of a reconnoisance 
in northwestern Minnesota in 1892, J. E. Todd ; and Field Observa- 
tions of N. H. Winchell in 1892. A feature of general interest is a 
table of comparative nomenclature prepared by the State Geologist. 
This table gives the Minnesota Strata in order; the stratigraphy of the 
Wisconsin reports issued under the direction of Prof. Chamberlain ; 
the terms used by the present Michigan survey; and the general 
terms used by the United States and Cananian geological surveys. 
These separate series are arranged so that one can see at a glance the 
supposed equivalents. 
1The Geological and Natural History Survey of Minnesota. The Twenty-first 
Report, for the year 1892. N. H. Winchell, State Geologist. Minneapolis, 1893. 
