34 
meaning is to attach to the word “ sparrow,” if it is to signify a particular form 
among the feathered race, surely those species ought alone to be called sparrow 
which exhibit the characters briefly denoted under that name. To apply it to 
birds of other form occasions only unnecessary confusion. If a new species were 
to be denominated- sparrow , we should, of course, expect it to pertain to 
the genus Passer; and why, therefore, do some naturalists persist in using erro¬ 
neous appellations, merely because, in some districts, they happen to be popular ? 
I say some districts only, because there are really very few names which are in 
general use throughout the country ; consequently a classical and systematic nomen¬ 
clature is doubly needed. In the south of England, for instance, what terms appear 
to be more universally accepted than Goldfinch , Tomtit , and Kingfisher ? Yet 
the first applies, in Yorkshire, to the Yellow Bunting, the second, in the same 
county, to the common Wren, and the third, in Sutherlandshire, invariably 
denotes the Dipper. Not long ago, I heard a ludicrous dispute between a 
Yorkshireman and a native of Surrey, respecting which bird was the “ Tomtit,” 
the former insisting that the southron's Tomtit meant the Blue-cap ! What 
we in Surrey term the Goldfinch , is, in Yorkshire, better known as the Thistle- 
finch ; in Suffolk and Norfolk it is as popularly designated King Harry , and in 
Scotland it is the Gooldie , or Gould-speuk , of our northern neighbours. But 
while I advocate a well-digested and temperate reformation of the vernacular names 
to objects of Natural History, let me by no means be understood to adopt every 
ill-sounding name which some nomenclators, in their great enthusiasm, have 
proposed. At some future time I shall probably take the subject in hand myself, 
and hope that whatever new names I shall then have to offer, will not only possess 
the merit of propriety and exclusiveness of application, but will, also, not offend 
the more fastidious, by their want of euphony. It will, also, be my object to 
introduce as few new terms as possible, as I see no occasion for substituting 
“ Goldwing” for Sickin , as the vernacular for Carduelis , “ Treeling” for Petty- 
chaps , &c., as some have done. 
But to return to what in Surrey is called the Reed -sparrow. Our naturalists 
are mistaken in supposing that people in general (that is to say, unscientific ob¬ 
servers of discrimination) ordinarily confuse, as professed naturalists have done,* 
the Sedge Reedling with the Reed Bunting. I have generally found that both 
birds were well known, and their respective notes also. I believe they will be 
found everywhere to be distinguished by separate names, and in Surrey the Reed 
Bunting is called “ Blackheaded Bunting . as good a name, without reference to 
its foreign congeners, as the more exclusive one now judiciously employed by all 
our naturalists. 
The Fen Reedling, however, about which the present paper is professed to be 
* Witness the various accounts of the Reed Bunting’s song. 
