1883 -] 
Recent Literature. 
i6 5 
similar to those of the house wren;” that the Black-throated Blue Warbler 
“breeds usually in trees;” that the Chestnut-sided Warbler “breeds on 
trees ;” thatWilson’s Black-capWarbler is “only a migrant through Maine ;” 
that the American Goldfinch habitually lays spotted eggs ; that the Great 
Crested Flycatcher “breeds usually on high trees” ; etc. A similar and 
still more curious case of blundering is that of his general overstatement 
of the number of eggs laid by the smaller birds. For instance, the Vi- 
reos, which rarely if ever lay more than four eggs, are in all cases where 
the number is mentioned, accredited with clutches of “four or five.” 
But such points are trivial compared with certain really important state- 
ments which we have reasons for believing equally mistaken. Among these 
is a record of the breeding of the White-eyed Vireo in Maine, made on the 
strength of the author’s observation of a pair which “once nested upon 
one of the upper branches of a maple tree” within a few feet of a chamber 
window in the heart of the city of Portland. Now every one who is at 
all familiar with this Vireo, knows that it is a frequenter of retired, 
swampy thickets and that its nest is rarely if ever placed at a greater 
height than five or six feet. It is of course dangerous to assume 
that any exceptional action on the part of a bird is impossible, 
but a case of nesting so unlikely as the above should not be accepted 
without the most positive proofs of identification. These our author 
does not furnish, and the way in which he describes the affair shows 
that he did not appreciate its importance. 
Scarcely more satisfactory is the note on the supposed Boat-tailed Grack- 
les seen at Second Lake in Washington County; and we are even inclined 
to doubt the identification of the Wood Thrush shot by Mr. Smith in 
1865 ; while the Barn Owl collected in 1866, is apparently the notorious 
specimen which we have Mr. Brown’s excellent authority * for now dis- 
crediting. 
Other cases might be instanced, but such scrutiny is hardly more profit- 
able than gracious. A dubious record is easily made, with difficulty dis- 
proved. The most unsubstantial positive statement will stand the shock 
of much negative testimony. Hence we are often forced to judge an 
author by the insight that intuition and a few demonstrable cases give 
us into the general character of his methods. Granted that such judg- 
ment is ex parte and unjust, it is none the less unavoidable. When will 
ornithologists learn to rate accuracy at its full value? 
Passing to water birds it is gratifying to find a better quality of 
work. Mr. Smith is evidently at home here, and proofs of the general 
accuracy of his information and judgment are numerous and unmistak- 
able. In fact, with the exception of one or two unsatisfactory notes we 
fail to detect anything of importance which is open to serious question. 
Doubtless there are occasional trifling inaccuracies or misconceptions, 
but on the whole this portion of the list seems to form a really trustworthy 
presentation of the subject — one of the best, perhaps, that has so far 
appeared. 
* See this Bulletin, Vol, VII, p. 58. 
