44 
ZOOLOGICAL LITERATURE. 
AYES 
BY 
Alfred Newton^ M.A., F.L.S., etc. 
The extent of tlie literature of Ornitliology for tlie year 1806 
appears to have been fully as great as for its two immediate pre- 
decessors. The number of really valuable treatises is very eon- 
siderablCj though we have not to record the publication of any 
works likely to be followed by the same important effects on the 
progress of the science as those of Dr. J erdon and Mr. Gould on 
the Birds of India and Australia respectively. But the year will 
be for ever memorable in the annals of Ornithology as being that 
in which Mr. Clarkes discovery of the Dodoes remains bore fruit. 
The new systematic classification set forth by Professor Lillje- 
borg has attracted no small attention from some high authori- 
ties j butj unfortunately for us, we are unable to appreciate its 
advantages. A pleasing feature of the year also is the increasing 
punctuality of appearance on the part of different journals, and 
on this score we have now scarcely any complaint to make. 
Our thanks, however, are not the less due to many of our fellow 
labourers who have supplied us with separately printed copies of, 
we believe, nearly all the more important communications ; and 
we trust that few works of real merit have escaped our notice. 
BIBLIOGBAPHY. 
Hartlaub, Gustav. Bericht fiber die Leistungen in derNatur- 
geschichte der Vogel wahrend des Jahres 1865. Archiv 
ffir Naturg. Jahrg. xxxii. Band ii. pp. 34. Berlin: 1866. 
With his accustomed skill Dr. Hartlaub has executed his 
Tiventieth Annual Eeport on the progress of Ornithology, de- 
lineating in a concise manner the general features of this branch 
of science as exhibited during 1865. Of the principal works 
published in that year we are glad to find our own opinion cor- 
roborated by that of a judge with so much experience, though it 
is to be observed that he does not think so highly of Mr. Gould's 
‘ Handbook' as we did (Zool. Becord, ii. p. 74). Dr. Hartlaub 
has abandoned his former classification in favour of that of 
Prof. Lilljeborg [vide infra), a change which, we would humbly 
submit, is not an improvement. 
