HOW TO NAME THE BIRDS.
of the birds, and that of the order and family to which they belong; then you must buy a good manual to answer all further queries, either Ridgway's,[1] Coues's,[2] or Chapman's[3] will serve your purpose. Ridgway's follows the modern method, Coues's is both modern and charming, Chapman's is both modern, simple, and comprehensive. It is the same as when beginning the study of history: you first wish to learn the name of a character, for what he was famous, and how he appeared; then with a distinet realization of the man's personality in your mind, you take an interest which, at first, would have been impossible, in looking into his ancestry, and finding precisely what union of races and families pro. duced his particular type.
Inverted evolution, or working from effect to cause, is the simplest way to interest popular attention in any branch of science. If people accept a tangible fact and go no further, they have at least gained some information; if they possess the thinking-faculty, and desire to find the causes, they are one step on the right road. Of course this method, if method it can be called, lies open to the charge of superficiality, and to the saying that " when science and sentiment meet, sentiment loses its case." There is, of course, a species of maudlin sentiment that is the proverbial cloak of inaccu-racy, the variety that weaves touching but perfectly impossible tales and fables about natural facts. This is the sentiment that originated the story of the self-sacrifice of the Pelican in feeding its young from the blood of its own breast. Whereas the Pelican belongs to a class of birds who, after taking their food into the crop and partly digesting it, bring it up again to feed their offspring. The act of pressing the bill against the distended crop to dislodge the food, sometimes irritates the skin; hence the conclusion was drawn that it drew its own blood.
38
