402 
Miscellanea 
to German fanciers is equally at fault, for ' hochgelb ' and ' weissgelb ' mean undoubtedly jonque 
and mealy (yellow and buff). In support of this let me give a note received on Dec. 1st, 1908, 
from that well-known fancier and scientific writer C. L. W. Noorduijn* of Groningen : — 
" I mean by buff-yellow, light or whitish yellow (mealy) (weissgelb), in contra-distinction to 
clear or orange yellow (hochgelb)." 
But even if we allow Dr Davenport to have his use of the term yellow, the mere fact that 
his matings take no account of the rudimentary distinction between the jonques and mealies, is 
amply sufficient to seriously detract from their value. 
The following statements on Davenport's pages 6 and 7 must also be corrected : — 
(1) That Hervieux in 1713 gives only 10 varieties (p. 7). 
(2) That during the first half of the eighteenth century, the number of colour varieties was 
greatly increased, since Hervieux, in his edition of 1766, recorded 29 colour varieties (p. 7). 
And (3) that the first edition of Hervieux was published in 1705 (p. 6). 
The facts are as given in my " Canary Bi'eeding " : — 
(1) That there is no 1705 edition — the first one appearing in 1709. 
(2) That in the 1709 edition, 28 varieties are mentioned. 
This list also dis^Jroves the conjecture " that the frizzled characteristic is probably relatively 
recent, as it is relatively uncommon" for it occurs among the 1709 varieties. 
It is perhaps superfluous to refer to the meaning of the word "frequently" ; suffice it to say 
that the occurrence of 1 clear mule in 526 (see table on p. 4 of my " Canary Breeding ") cannot 
be included under that category. 
In the original draft of my paper, I found fault with Dr Davenport for translating the French 
word "gris" as green in his memoir (p. 7). This grumble was found wanting in the proof 
sheets, and I now refer to it only because in the Rejoinder the author finds fault with me for 
translating the same word " litei-ally gray " instead of " technically green." The technicalities 
of science are worthy of reverence, but when they transform the colour grey into green, then 
there is something wrong, which should be corrected. 
In reply to a query in the Rejoinder, I may state that grey and cinnamon sports are stated 
to be closely allied by me, because of my experience in keeping and breeding them — as may be 
seen throughout my paper (e.g. greenfinch family, p. 32). 
With regard to the statement that I have not defined imperfect crest, it should not be 
necessary for me to refer to a whole paragraph on p. 2, where this is fully explained, nor to 
a special engraving on p. 24, which beautifully illustrates the modern crest of various degrees of 
perfection. 
My " unanalytical grouping " of the progeny of double-crests (2 crests to 1 crest-bred plain- 
head) is due to the fact that I could not assume the existence of homozygous crests which I had 
not found. 
Dr Davenport's tirade against pure-breeding is extraoi'dinary as coming from the pen of 
an ultra-Mendelian, and from a follower of the great Blakston, who devotes the whole of 
Chapter XIII. to the discussion and praise of Pedigree breeding. 
Let me again quote from the Rejoinder. "A few fanciers mean by 'pure-bred' birds, birds 
having a characteristic a all of whose ancestors for several generations have the same character- 
* Noorduijn discredits Davenport's Mottling Theory, criticizes adversely his inferences from 
Hervieux and Euss, and completes the similarity to my own position by showing that the frilled 
canary is not "probably relatively recent, as it is relatively uncommon"; he likewise disagrees 
with Davenport's crested experiments. (Kritische Besprechungen und Referate. Archiv filr Rassen- 
und Gcsellschafts-Biulogic, Jahrg. 1909, S. 394.) 
