No. 469] 



FLYING-FISH FLIGHT 



2. That we know of no parallel case in 

 justify the assumption that the possession by 

 such increasetl winjx-arca would ot necessity 

 long distances — (a) liorizoiitallx , or do- 

 (the sea), or (c) in ddian.v of tlu' .li.vctioi, <.f 

 all three (a), (h), and id coml.inr.l. a^ th<-v co- 



3. That their connnon tli-lit exadlv wl 

 of flyers holdin,^, as tliev do, xvry low wir 



