1836,] Anthropology. 671 
to secure the coveted prey. I have often seen these birds dart down 
into the grass from those heights and seize an insect with such pre- 
cision that it must have been plainly visible from where the start 
was made. This would indicate that they possess a faculty of 
sight, developed by ages of practice, altogether above that of the 
human race, and most useful in their struggle for existence. But 
the late Robert Kennicott (quoted by Baird, Brewer and Ridg- 
way in their great work on the Birds of North America) states 
that a pair of a wrens will capture 1000 insects per day during 
the breeding season, and this fact of itself would indicate the 
sharpest vision and wonderful celerity of movement—Charles 
Aldrich, Webster City, lowa, Fune rst, 1886. 
ANTHROPOLOGY. 
THE Davenrort Acapemy has just issued Vol. 1v of its Pro- 
ceedings, nearly the whole of which is occupied with anthropol- 
ogy. € papers of Dr. Hoffman and Mr. Holmes have been 
some months in print and have been previously noticed. An 
appendix of nearly one hundred pages is by the president of the 
se and entitled “ Elephant pipes and inscribed tablets in 
lowa 
follows: 
1. A defence of the separate nationality of the Mound-builders against the theory of 
their identity with modern Indians 
2, A de 
ipe 
The contents of this appendix may be tabulated as 
in 
Ethnology and the endorsement of the director of the bureau. 
n argument against centralization of ethnological work in the Smithsonian In- 
stitution and the Bureau of Ethnology. ; 
4. A series of letters from friends of the Davenport Academy in sympathy with a 
former vindication. 
5. Extracts from scientific journals in relation to the same subject. 
__ Whether the Mound-builders were succeeded in the Missis- 
Sipp! valley by their immediate descendants, the Indians living 
there when the whites made their appearance three centuries and 
More ago, is an open question, though some archzologists have 
declared the argument closed. Dr. Carr, Dr. Brinton, the direc- 
wat ity the archeologist of the Bureau of Ethnology, and m 
Pu 
utnam and many other eminent archeologists hold the contrary 
e museum of the Academy of Natural Sciences, Davenport, - 
are in favor of the identity. Squier-and Davis, President | 
view, maintaining that the Mound-builders exhibited traits of 2 
bh tion which set them far above their modern successors on 
Same soil. The appendix to the Davenport Proceedings is 2 
= able summary of the arguments in favor of the higher civili- 
_ tation of the Mound-builders. | It seems to us that Pay sina ei : . 
: ty review of what can be said for and against this th 
ed Judicial mind would be exceedingly timely. 
Edited by Prof. Ors T. Mason, National Museum, Washington, D. C. 
