November, 1902. 
THE CONDOR 
147 
bition. Beings who love and mate, who build 
homes with infinite labor and pains, with mar- 
velous wisdom and skill, these are hunted, 
robbed and killed, without any consideration 
of their rights. 
If these beings, wearing feathers, were any- 
thing but innocent, beautiful, useful, wonder- 
fully gifted with .intelligence and the power of 
flight; if they were injurious, enemies and not 
friends of that conceited being, man, he might 
be justified perhaps in taking no account of 
their rights to “life, liberty and the pursuit of 
happiness.’’ 
And it would seem that the representative 
ornithologist ought to have some regard for 
their rights, and a degree of sympathy with 
birds as living beings. But to paraphrase a 
very bad popular saying concerning Indians, 
they seem to consider that the only good bird 
is a dead bird. 
In the September-October number of the 
CoxDOR, there is an interesting and excellent- 
ly written article on the rufous-crowned spar 
row, the description of a social colony on a 
little hillside opposite a schoolhouse, where the 
birds obtained a part of their living no doubt 
from the scraps remaining of the childrens’ 
lunches. If the teacher was up to date she 
taught the children to be lovers and protectors 
of these “feathered friends.” But the ornith- 
ologist went across the road, and “eighteen 
specimens were taken within an area of two or 
three acres.” 
The writers handle their English deftly. 
They never sa}' killed, slaughtered or murdered 
but “taken” or some such gentle word. For 
example, on a succeeding visit to the same 
field, after finding a nest, the mother bird ap- 
peared, “but was extremely wary. She flew 
past the bush and alighted but would not go to 
the nest. Then she flew up the hill again 
when I collected \\Qx." 
Now I should like to say seriously, whv one 
dozen birds should not have been sufficient, 
leaving six at least to enjoy life; also whv the 
bright little mother should have been “collect- 
ed” merely for dissection to show that her nest 
of eggs was complete. 
.■\nd the writer is “looking forward to furth- 
er investigation of this sage brush home with 
renewed interest.” 
Among general news notes, we observed that 
Messrs. and have returned from an 
extended trip with “a host of interesting and 
valuable material”— a soft name for dead 
birds. 
In pleasing contrast, to me at least, with 
these polite allusions to destructive bird study, 
is the beautiful article of a lady in Berkeley, 
on the Black-headed Grosbeak. Here is the 
sympathetic study of a living .sentiment being 
with a voice of harmony: a life and a voice to 
be loved and described without the '"collection'' 
of its owner. 
I believe in the motto of Bird-Lore, albeit 
the editor was once a collector himself: 
"A bird in the bush is ivorth two in the hand." 
I hope no one will be offended by my plain 
speaking. It seems to me that the time has 
come to emphasize more the study of the living 
and less the study of the dead. Young people 
are taking notes of us, and if very many of 
them get the impression that ornithology 
means merely the collection of eggs, nests and 
skins, it will be a sorry time for the birds. 
The better trend of thought I believe, is to- 
ward a kind regard for, and sympathetic inter- 
est in the native citizens of the earth and air. 
Yours truly, 
G.^rrf.tt Newkirk. 
Pasadena. 
PUBLICATIONS REVIEWED. 
Brewster on Lower C.\liforni,v Birds* — 
This paper of nearly 250 pages is much more 
than the unpretentious title would indicate. 
We are accustomed to see mere nominal lists of 
species bearing such titles as that of Mr. Brew- 
ster’s paper. But his is something out of the 
ordinary. The reader fails to properly realize 
its scope until he has perused its many pages 
and studied some one of the monographs which 
the accounts of several species actually are. 
Mr. Brewster’s paper is in reality a compen- 
dium of all that is known of the 255 species 
found in the region dealt with. 
The paper is based primarily on the collec- 
tions made by Mr. M. Abbott F'razar who spent 
nine months in Lower California in 1887 in Mr. 
Brewster’s interests. The collection numbered 
4,400 birds which have already afforded several 
novelties as well as series of certain species 
previous’}' known only from one or two speci- 
mens. iNIr. Frazar also kept field-notes to some 
extent, and these, with extended critical re- 
marks on specimens, constitute the new mater- 
ial offered in the present paper. Four new 
forms are described as new, namel}', Tolatius 
inelanoleucHS frazari. Megascops xantusi, 
Bubo virgi nianus elachistiis and Tachycineta 
thalassina brachyptera. These are all confined 
so far as known to southern I.ower California. 
Thirty-six species are newly accredited to the 
region. 
A useful feature of the paper is a carefully 
compiled Bibliography, and synonymies are en- 
tered complete for each of the birds peculiar to 
*Birdsofthe Cape Region of Lower California. By 
William Brewster. — Bull. Mus. Conp. Zool. XVI. Sep* 
teml er 1902, pji 1—242, with one ina]). 
