94 Recently published Ornithological Works. 
students look for arguments, not opinions ; what they want 
are facts, and they will be grateful to any writer who pro¬ 
vides them. - ” 
Without entering upon matters of detail, we may remark 
that the last two parts of Mr. Seebohnr’s work show some 
signs of haste. Errors in proper names (Mr. Seebohm is 
no respecter of persons) and inaccuracies in descriptions of 
localities are not unfrequent; while some of the generaliza¬ 
tions appear to be rather rash. As an instance of the latter, 
Mr. Seebohm says that “ the slightly spotted egg of the 
Puffin is an exception to the almost universal rule that 
eggs laid in holes are unspotted white; but the faintness of 
the spots suggests the idea that the bird has comparatively 
recently adopted the habit of breeding in a hole, and is 
consequently gradually losing its power of depositing 
coloured spots on its eggs. The colour-glands are pro¬ 
bably disappearing, according to the well-known law of ‘ de¬ 
gradation from disuse/ ” This is extremely hypothetical, 
and the modern student wants “ facts, not opinions.” The 
richly marked eggs of the Black Guillemot are frequently 
deposited in crevices beyond the reach of light; so are, in a 
somewhat less degree, those of the Razorbill. And, again, the 
remark as to the eggs of the Puffin would apply still more 
forcibly to those of the Little Auk, about which Mr. Seebohm 
makes no similar remarks. All the Procellariidse lay eggs of a 
pure white, with, at most, a few minute reddish freckles, and, 
except in size and thickness of shell, there is no difference in 
this respect between the egg of the little Storm-Petrel and the 
gigantic White Albatross ; but the former is hidden in holes, 
the latter placed on a raised open nest. What idea does this 
suggest to Mr. Seebohm ? He has been unfortunate in his as¬ 
sertions that “the young in first plumage of the Fulmar Petrel 
appear to have been undescribed,” and that “it is not very 
creditable to British ornithologists that such should be the 
case”; for this plumage was distinctly described in the fourth 
edition of f YarrelFs British Birds 9 (vol. iv. p. 5), a year before 
Mr. Seebohm wrote the above. Nor is it quite correct to say 
that the only regular British breeding-place of the Fulmar is in 
