/ ■ 
COOPER’S HAWK. 3 
have divided mankind from the beginning of the world, may 
perhaps after all be considered as merely a dispute about words. 
Admitting, however, as seems to be done by all parties, that 
this great genus may be subdivided with propriety, we look upon 
it as altogether a secondary question, whether we shall call the 
minor groups genera, subgenera, or sections; and we deem it of 
still less consequence, in a philosophical view, whether the names 
by which these groups are designated, be taken from a learned, or 
a vernacular language. It is our intention to pursue a middle 
course. We are convinced of the necessity of employing nume¬ 
rous subdivisions, not only in this, but also in its allied genus 
Strix. These, however, we cannot agree to admit as genera, 
preferring to call them subgenera, and giving them a name; but 
when having occasion to mention a species belonging to any of 
them, to employ the name of the great genus. 
The desire of avoiding too great a multiplication of groups, has 
caused some, even of the first ornithologists of our time, to 
employ sections that are not natural, and with false or inapplicable 
characters ; and, as if they would compel nature to conform to 
their preconceived and narrow views, after having assigned de¬ 
cided limits to their groups, to force into them species not only 
widely different, but that do not even possess the artificial cha¬ 
racter proposed. We shall not imitate this irrational example. 
It shall rather be our object to compose natural groups, and, 
in obedience to this principle, whenever we meet with a group, 
or even a single species, clearly insulated, it shall at least be 
pointed out; not so much regarding the number of our subgenera, 
as the characters that unite the species of which they are re¬ 
spectively composed. 
It is objected to the numerous subdivisions that have been 
proposed in our day, that they pass into, and blend insensibly 
with each other. This is no doubt true; but is it not the same 
