Mar., 1918 



PUBLICATIONS REVIEWED 



97 



however, attention may be called to the cap- 

 tion explanatory of fig. 21 (opposite p. 610), 

 where there is evidently a mix-up of some 

 sort. Then too, as regards the sentence at 

 the foot of page 178, summing up the evi- 

 dence in a peculiarly interesting line of ar- 

 gument, while the point the author wishes 

 to make is evident enough, the wording is 

 so vague as to bear an interpretation al- 

 most contrary to the meaning that it is in- 

 tended to convey. — H. S. Swakth. 



Robert 'Cushman Murphy's "Natural 

 History Observations from the Mexican 

 Portion of the Colorado Desert" (Abstract 

 of Proceedings, Linnaean Society of New 

 York, nos. 24-25, 1917, pp. 43-101, pis. i-vi) 

 is well worth the reading by anyone who is 

 interested in the desert, be he traveller or 

 naturalist. Murphy's "Narrative" of his 

 month's trip south from Calexico in search 

 of antelope for the Brooklyn Museum will 

 furnish much information of value to the 

 prospective visitor to that or any similar 

 region; while the more or less blase fre- 

 quenter of desert country will have his 

 memories pleasingly vivified by the accu- 

 rate and lively description of day-by-day ex- 

 periences. Some of the comments, such as 

 those upon the psychology of the burro, and 

 the fearsomeness of rattlesnakes, verge 

 upon the naive, but usually save themselves 

 by reason of refreshing allusions, often of 

 keen aptness. One's first experience in a 

 new land is certainly the one to take ad- 

 vantage of in recording impressions, and 

 Murphy proves himself to have realized this 

 to good purpose — aided by a ready pen. 



Ornithologically, we find that there are 

 many good field observations scattered 

 through the narrative, as also in the "An- 

 notated List of the Birds" (pp. 80-100); for 

 example,, upon the apparent ability of the 

 Desert Quail to go entirely without water. 

 This seems to be a really new idea, and 

 should be followed up by others in a posi- 

 tion to ascertain the facts. The "List" num- 

 bers 134 species and is based not only upon 

 the author's own observations but also on 

 a previous paper by Stone and Rhoads 

 (Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci., Phila., 1905, pp. 676- 

 690). The only serious criticism we can 

 make of Murphy's work is that he should 

 have taken Rhoads' sight determinations at 

 face value and thus perpetuated a lot of ex- 

 ceedingly doubtful records (see Condor, 

 viii, 1906, p. 78). Also why not as well 

 have taken into account W. W. Price's ar- 

 ticle on "Some Winter Birds of the Lower 

 Colorado Valley" (Bull. Cooper Orn. Club, i, 



1899, pp. 89-93), which covered nearly the 



same region? — J. Gbinnell. 



Birds of America; Editor-in-Chief, T. Gil- 

 bert Pearson, National Association of Audu- 

 bon Societies. Consulting Editor, John Bur- 

 roughs. Managing Editor, George Gladden. 

 Associate Editor, J. Ellis Burdick. Special 

 Contributors, Edward H. Forbush, William 

 L. Finley, Herbert K. Job, L. Nelson Nichols. 

 Artists, L. A. Fuertes, R. B. Horsfall, R. I. 

 Brasher, Henry Thurston. Nature Lovers 

 Library [vols. i-m]. The University Soci- 

 ety Inc.; New York [1917]; 4to, vol. i, pp. 

 xviii+272; vol. n, pp. xiv+271; vol. in, pp. 

 xviii+289; pis. five + 106, numerous half- 

 tone illustrations and some line drawings, 

 all these being scattered throughout the 

 three volumes. Issued about November 1. 

 1917. 



I suppose there is no copyright on the title 

 "Birds of America". Even so, it seems a 

 sacrilege that this distinctive title, once 

 used with authority, should be now appro- 

 priated for a work which falls far behind 

 what such a title ought to cover. In the 

 first place, the present book deals with any 

 approach to adequacy only with birds of the 

 eastern half of North America north of the 

 Mexican line; and in the second place, the 

 treatment is at best, save pictorially, super- 

 ficial and far from "complete", though this 

 word is used rather blatantly in the claims 

 for the work set forth in the Preface, In- 

 troduction, and announcements. From a 

 strictly scientific point of view I believe 

 that this work, instead of advancing the pre- 

 vious standard of ornithological output, or 

 even maintaining it, tends to lower it. 



It is from the western viewpoint that the 

 book here under review is most seriously 

 at fault. The text, almost wherever it deals 

 with exclusively Californian or western 

 birds, is characterized by inconsequential 

 verbiage where it is not actually misleading 

 or even erroneous. I will cite some specific 

 illustrations. 



The Mountain Chickadee, so widespread 

 from the Rocky Mountains westwardly, is 

 dismissed (vol. in, p. 212) with one para- 

 graph as "very similar" to its "eastern rel- 

 ative"! The account of our common Cali- 

 fornia Brown Towhee (vol. in, p. 61, under 

 "Canon Towhee") is simply nonsense. The 

 Abert Towhee (same volume, p. 62) is ac- 

 corded just six lines of 10-point comment, 

 the first sentence of which is: "Despite the 

 fact that the Abert's Towhee is the largest 

 of the plain Towhees he is extremely shy." 



