The following fact may in a measure illustrate this. A pair of Phasianus Versicolor were brought to England from Japan, and 
[daced in the menagerie of the Earl of Derby at Knowsley. Before any offspring were produced, the female died, and the male was 
then mated with a hen of Phasianus ColcMcus. By judicious breeding, their descendants, (which proved fertile, as is often the case 
when birds are semi-domesticated,) were gradually brought back to the likeness of the Japanese species, until it was impossible to 
distinguish them from the imported birds, — the foreign stain which was introduced, having been apparently entirely expunged.* 
Varieties, descendants of sexes of the same species, as understood by the definition already given of that term, would, of course, 
be the result of different causes than those in the foregoing illustration ; but whatever these shall have been, whether physical or 
otherwise, it may safely be asserted that, should they not be continued in the same degree as when they originated the differences 
exhibited by the subject, the variety would be unable to transmit its peculiarities to its descendants, and would not be a disturbing 
element to its race. 
Magnifying casual differences and bestowing upon slight variations specific values, does not advance the science of Ornithology, but 
confuses and perplexes the student, who meets on the threshold of his investigations so-called species, between which and other forms 
lie is unable to detect any difference, and attributes the reason— not always correctly — to his own want of discrimination. 
The emulation to be first, which in many instances is so commendable, should, in the description of species, be tempered with 
moderation, and the desire for the fullest research greater than that of publishing incomplete investigations, as sometimes seems to be 
the case, lest a more expeditious contemporary, with perhaps no more knowledge of the subject, should take the precedence. 
Festixa Lente, must of necessity be the motto of all disciples of nature, who seek only to learn the truth through their studies, 
and desire to gather up the productive grains which so often lie hidden in the chaff. 
The Furor Specificus, even more than the Furor Genericus, so prevalent in these later days, is to be deplored, as tending more to 
embarrass and perplex, than to throw the much needed light upon the subject, which those imbued with the passion doubtless intended. 
But if the definition of a species already given, be not the correct one, what may we consider the true explanation of the term ? 
If to possess specific value does not necessarily require an animal to have characters radically distinct from all others, and a 
few slight and imperfectly defined variations are alone sufficient for the establishment of such a rank, then, indeed must naturalists be 
at fault, dependent upon the variable and oft changed opinions of every writer. A bird which requires a closely written page of 
explanation, in order that the slight difference it may possess from other forms, may be understood and seen, is ofttimes more likely to 
have undergone changes from its parent form produced by local effects, than to be an independent species, but, at all events, is hardly 
entitled to the same rank with that one which bears the mark of its separate origin distinctly upon it, and which can be recognized 
at once. Physical causes, such as food, climate and soil, produce greater alterations than they are usually accredited with, not only in 
the shapes of the body and its auxiliaries, but also in the color of plumage, and many a so-called species is only a local race, changed 
from the parent form by the force of circumstances. 
It will bo acknowledged by every naturalist, that all variations, no matter how trivial they may appear, which may be detected in 
any specimen, should be noticed and reported. To omit this would indeed be to lessen materially the value of scientific labors; but at 
the same time it may with equal force be asserted that to elevate these individuals which present such slight variations from allied forms, 
into a separate, distinctive rank, is far more likely to be pregnant with evil, than would be to omit mentioning the differences 
perceived, altogether. 
Should a well-balanced restraint be placed upon the desire to describe as distinct those examples which so often carry with them 
the conviction of only being offshoots from other forms, from which they vary in no important characters; — should a difference in shade 
of color or a slight alteration in size, not be considered entirely sufficient in itself to establish specific rank, — and a patient Avaitiug for 
knowledge to confirm a supposition, take the place of the habit which is sadly prevalent, of announcing as a definite conclusion a 
judgment arrived at from suspicions frequently made on a most imperfect basis; avo might assuredly hope that, although species (!) 
would not multiply so fast, yet our knowledge of Ornithological science would increase as rapidly, investigations Avould be carried on Avith 
equal earnestness, fewer errors would arise to baffle and perplex, and more real progress eventually be made. 
It is apparent in these later days, that there is an inclination among some, to classify as distinct every specimen which may differ 
in any degree from others, and on a critical examination of the birds contained in this work, I find some to Avhich it seems unAvise to 
consider even as local races, Avhile others do not appear to possess sufficient claims for separation, which should entitle them to any 
consideration. 
Yery many have been the systems of classification for birds, nearly all of Avhich have contained some commendable points, but no 
one of Avhich has been sufficiently perfect to cause its adoption .to the exclusion of the rest. Indeed, in this, like the belief as for that 
Avhich may be necessary to constitute a species, it would seem that naturalists have their individual opinions, and arrange the groups 
of their respective branches according to their own ideas. In Ornithology, the practice has universally been, until lately, to place the 
birds of prey, on account of their strength and power of flight, at the head of the system. Might may make right, but it assuredly 
does not intellect, or that which, in the dumb animal, is its substitute, and possessing which in a greater or less degree, elevates or 
lowers the subject; therefore it seems far more plausible to give the first rank to those birds which are most sensitive to outward 
impressions, Avhose abilities to express their feelings of joy and sorrow, greatest and easiest of comprehension, and whose nervous 
organization is most delicate and perfect. 
The heavy and cowardly eagle, the repulsive and sluggish vulture, whose food is carrion, and whose custom is to gorge itself until 
incapable of locomotion, and then remain stupidly inactive until relieved by nature, certainly are not fit subjects to outrank those 
species whose active life is a delight to all Avho meet with them, whose instinct and ingenuity approach closely to reason, and Avhose 
courage, that God-like virtue, fails not even unto death. 
All indeed, accomplish that for which they Avere summoned into shape ; but if there is any classification in nature, and avc arc not 
simply, in aid of our own lack of knowledge, fashioning one to enable us to comprehend each other, then, assuredly, it would seem most 
proper that the dull, inert, and stupid, should not take precedence of all that is gay, and bright, and joyous. 
The system which has been mainly accepted in the folloAving arrangement, and Avhich has very deservedly found great favor Avith 
Ornithologists is the one proposed by Prof. Lilljeborg of Upsala. He, in his synopsis, preferring the progressive method, as more in 
correspondence Avith the physiological and geological development, commences with the lowest forms and finishes with the highest. 
Uhl 
* Sclater. Wolf. Zool. Sketches. Vo). I. Vide P. Versicolor. 
