288 
A COMMENTARY ON NUMBERS VII. AND VIII. OF 
“ THE NATURALIST.” 
By Edward Blyth. 
The Lemurs’ Mode of taking their Food.—On Specific Distinctions.—On the Fitchet and Ermine 
Weasels.—The occurrence Papilio podalirius in Britain.—On removing the Pigeon family 
from the Rasores, and general Observations on Classification.—The Skua mentioned at p. 86, 
probably L. Richardsonii, and not L. parasiticus _Distribution of the Corn Bunting in Britain. 
—Does the Locustell (or “Grasshopper Warbler”) run ox hop 9 —The Difference between 
Biuhjtes Jlava anA. B. neglecta —Song of the Crossbill.—Occurrence of the Yellow-rimmed 
Albatross near Gainsborough.—Hawking with the Golden Eagle, Erne, &c.—Missel Thrush 
Singing on the Wing.—Blackcapt Fauvet darting into the Air after Insects.—Origin of the 
name “ Stock Pigeon.” 
As I highly approve of the suggestion of your correspondent H. E. H. (at 
p. 89), and conceive that an occasional chapter devoted to retrospective com¬ 
mentary would be joroductive of beneficial results, in eliciting a variety of 
interesting particulars, which would otherwise be overlooked or imperfectly 
estimated, I venture to avail myself of this as an apology for offering the 
following observations, in compliance with the hint ” of your correspondent. 
In reference, therefore, to a remark at p. 7, relative to the mode in which the 
Lemurs take up their food, it may be mentioned, that an Ateles (or Spider-mon¬ 
key), if presented with a saucer'^of bread soaked in milk, invariably stoops, and 
seemingly with some difficulty, or at least awkwardly, to take up pieces with 
its mouth, which it thence transfers to one of its hands, never dipping the latter 
into the mess; a circumstance which I have repeatedly witnessed with a degree 
of surprise. 
To proceed to Mr. Rylands's paper (p. 20), I may take occasion to remark^ 
that I am by no means prepared to accede to a proposition for which he in¬ 
cidentally contends, to the effect, that species must be necessarily id^ticfi/l, 
merely because we happen to be unable to appreciate their distinfelnesM'i^iRe- 
garding this question independently of the case of Poiitia rapce and P. 
as it must be admitted, that every grade exists between the species that are 
obviously distinct and such as are doubtfully so, it must therefore be conceived,, 
I presume, that the closest similarity does not of necessity imply specific 
identity; a consideration of momentous import to the zoologist, who would infer 
the cotemporaneous deposition of geographically distant beds, on the plea of 
the assumed identity of a small portion of their included fossils. At the same 
time, in urging this, it would be absurd to undervalue the established datum 
* Here, however, I must beg to differ from your correspondent, considering that the claims of 
these to be separately recognized are far from being annulled by the occasional occurrence of 
aberrant specimens, which it may be found difficult to refer correctly. 
