ARE GUERNSEY BIRDS BRITISH ? 



300 



insect collectors would be only too glad of the chance to 

 enlarge their collections till they equalled all other European 

 collections together, from the rich stores to be found in an 

 area so comparatively small as that of the Channel Islands 

 instead of having to go all over Europe for the purpose. 

 She thanked Mr. Pickard-C ambridge for his solution of the 

 vexed question, " Are Guernsey Birds British ? " which she 

 considered the right one, viz., that British Naturalists should 

 include these islands in their works and title them as 

 of Great Britain, Ireland and the Channel Islands, including 

 the Isle of Man. This, she believed, was the way the Acts 

 of Parliament put it, and added, " Here we are put before the 

 Isle of Man which nobody doubts to be British." 



The lengthy correspondence ended in this number of the 

 Magazine (December, page 3,324) with the Editor's pro- 

 nouncement on the subject as follows : — 



" The question introduced to our notice by Miss Carey has gradually 

 assumed a wider range, until Mr. Bii chall in the November Zoologist 

 has totally altered it, in this manner, * Are the Channel Islands British ? ' 

 and has charged me with giving ' a qualified assent to the affirmative.' 

 My friend has also chosen insects, instead of birds, as the branch of 

 Natural History for enforcing his views. However numerous the lines 

 of argument opened up by these deviations from the original propo- 

 sition, I believe they will all be comprehended in the following 

 formula: — 'Seeing that a 11 our botanists include the Channel Islands 

 in the British Flora, ought we, or ou^ht we nut, to include them in our 

 British Fauna.' My own opinion has not been very strongly in favour 

 of either course ; but I have felt a leaning towards a uniformity of 

 practice, a leaning which has increased, and has become more decided 

 with each successive expression of opinion, until Mr. Birchall, the last 

 in order of time, settles the nutter to my entire satisfaction, and I am 

 fully prepared to include the Channel Islands in the British Fauna, or 

 more correctly speaking, in the Fauna of the United Kingdom. . . . 

 Should the extension of our Fauna to the Channel Islands . . . 

 induce our entomologists to adopt a uniform nomenclature, that alone 

 would be a sufficient re ^ son for adopting the course suggested. But 

 there is another good that is certain to result. We have a multitude 

 of young entomologists who possess abundant means, and who are 

 anxious to obtain species that they have failed to capture on English 

 soil. I will particularly mention two, Daplidice [Bath White] and 

 Lathonia [Queen of Spain Fritillary] : they willingly give 25s. or 30s. 

 apiece for specimens of either of these, provided the dealer will assert 

 that they are 'British'; and there aie swarms of dealers who will 

 gladly supply any number of specimens on the required terms and 

 conditions. I cannot take upon myself to read a moral lecture to the 

 impostors or the dupes. I fancy it would be hard to resist the tempta- 

 tion of selling copies of the Zoologist at two pounds each if there weie 

 buyers foolish enough to give such a price, even supposing I were 

 disposed to assert there were some fancied superiority in the coveted 

 copy. I italicise the word fancied, because there is no real difference 

 between one copy and another of the Zoologist, or between English and 

 European specimens of the butterflies in question. Let us suppose 

 Guernsey Daplidices, by the amended usage, become British. Why 



