In the introductory part, Mr. Jennings has very properly corrected some of the mistakes of the Hon. Daines Barrington, in his well-known paper in the Philosophical Transactions, on the Singing of Birds; a paper which is far from accurate, either in its facts or its reasonings. Take the following as an instance: "Mr. Barrington thinks that the reason why females do not sing is, because, if they did, when sitting on their eggs, they would be discovered. This is by no means a conclusive reason; for I once discovered a thrush's nest, by hearing the parent bird sing while sitting on the eggs. Besides, as the cock and hen of many species frequently sit on the eggs in turn, the female's not singing could be no security to the nest, while the cock was sitting and singing there." (p. 65.) We confess we are disposed to doubt the fact of either cock or hen singing while sitting on their eggs, notwithstanding the solitary instance given by Mr. Jennings, on his own observation. It would be difficult, indeed, to prove the negative; but it is clearly contrary to the uniform instinctive care exhibited by all birds in concealing their nests. In the case of canaries, and other birds which breed in cages, we have never observed an instance of any bird singing in the act of incubation. Mr. Barrington, however, is altogether wrong in asserting that hen birds never sing. He ought to have been certain of the fact before speculating upon it. We have repeatedly heard hen birds sing; and Mr. Sweet, the wellknown author of The British Warblers, makes the qualified statement, that "females seldom sing; I had a female redstart which sang a little; and female bull-finches sing as frequently as the males." Again, Mr. Sweet says, Again, Mr. Sweet says, "I have had several female birds which never attempted to sing; but now I have two that sing frequently: one is a female black-cap; she sings a note peculiar to herself, and not the least like the male, or any other bird with which I am acquainted. I kept her several years before she began to sing. I have also a female willow wren, that sings nearly as much as the cock: this bird was bred up from the nest, and did not sing at all the first year. Her note is quite different from that of the male, but resembles it sufficiently to indicate that it belongs to the same species." Mr. Jennings appears to have a leaning towards a very unfounded notion, at which we rather wonder, since he appears to be acquainted with the American Ornithology of Wilson. "The mocking-bird," he says, "forms a striking exception to what is generally esteemed the character of the birds of the new world, where the rich, lively, and brilliant hues of the feathered race are very often accompanied with harsh, monotonous, and disagreeable notes." (p. 374.) On the contrary, it would appear from Wilson's admirable descriptions, that the American song-birds are infinitely more numerous than those of Europe, and many of them superior to our most celebrated songsters. From the first four volumes, alone, we made out a table of no fewer than twenty-two American songbirds, which we may probably insert in a future page. In speaking of the wood thrush (Turdus melòdus), Wilson remarks that it "serenades the woods, with notes as clear as those of the nightingale. Previous naturalists deny it to have any song but a single scream, confounding it with the Turdus mínimus of Catesby, and affording the disciples of Buffon an argument for his absurd theory of its being the Turdus musicus of Europe, degenerated by food and climate, and by living in a savage country, where the cries of all birds are harsh and unpleasant!" (American Ornithology, vol. iii. p. 34.) Our author adverts, very briefly, to the great rapidity remarkable in the flight of some species of birds. The most extraordinary fact which has come to our knowledge on the subject, is given on the high authority of our intelligent correspondent, Mr. Audubon, respecting the passenger pigeon of America (Colúmba migratòria). He has shot that bird, he says, during his hunting excursions through the forests; and, on dissection, found its stomach full of fresh rice, which, to have resisted the digestive process, must have been swallowed not many hours preceding its death, but could not have been obtained within 800 miles of the place where it was killed. Our notices have been hitherto chiefly taken from the prose portion of the work, but it would be injustice to the author not to give a fair specimen of his poetry, of which the merit is almost as various as the measures. We select Before concluding, we must enter a decided protest against the introduction of the harsh-sounding terms which Mr. Jennings has Anglicised from the Greek and Latin of Mr. Vigors. We put it to the good taste of our author, whether he does not lose much more than he gains, by calling the cuckoo a Cuculid, the nightingale a Sylviad, the vulture a Vulturid, the parrot a Psittacid, the swallow a Hirundirid, &c. To call a pigeon or a partridge a Rasor, a woodpecker a Scansor, a thrush a Dentirost, or a kingfisher a Fissirost, is to our ears most grating and repulsive. The following lines, referring to the nightingale and the cuckoo, require no comment: "What though there no Luscinian Sylvia's sweet throat, * Nor of Cuculid, Scansor canorous, the note; Yet the warblers abound." Page 303. The chief merit of the book, we conceive, lies in the variety of facts which the author has selected, both from his reading and from his own portfolio. It cannot fail to be a useful present to the young naturalist. ART. II. R. I. Lepidoptera Britannica. Autore A. H. HAWORTH. Pars IV. Londini, Wood, 428. Strand, 1828. We have hitherto omitted to announce the publication of the fourth and concluding part of Haworth's Lepidoptera Britannica, of which the first part was given to the public so long ago as 1803. The work, we happen to know, would have been completed long before now, had it not been for the unfortunate failure of the printer to whom the copy was consigned, and who afterwards, owing to some unaccountable misunderstanding, refused either to print the remaining sheets, or to give back the manuscript to the author. However, “it is better late than never:" the concluding part at length made its appearance in the spring of the present year, to the no small satisfaction of many an entomologist, who previously possessed only an imperfect portion of a very useful work. The author has declined to introduce into this last part the more modern alterations and discoveries in entomological science, and has printed it in all respects uniformly with the preceding parts, just as it was originally written many years With all deference to Mr. Vigors, on whose authority, we presume, Mr. Jennings calls the cuckoo a scansor, or climber, we hesitate not to affirm that cuckoos do not climb, though their feet have two toes before and two behind, like the parrots and creepers. - Rev. ago. In doing this, he has judged, we think, wisely; for, otherwise, the work would not have been all of a piece, and would, perhaps, have brought to our recollection the opening lines of Horace's Art of Poetry, "Humano capiti cervicem pictor equinam We rejoice, however, to learn, by the postscript, that Mr. Haworth contemplates a new edition and entire revision of the whole. The science of entomology has undergone great alterations as to its nomenclature, divisions of genera, &c., since the earlier parts were printed. It has become much more popular, and more extensively studied. The original work, too, though not free from errors and omissions (as the author candidly acknowledges), is yet invaluable to the British lepidopterist, and has become exceedingly scarce. The impression was a small one, and the earlier parts have long been out of print. The new discoveries also made in this department of natural history, since the year 1803, are numerous, and highly interesting. In short, a revised edition of the work, or a new work on a similar plan, is required by the present more advanced state of the science. No one (we speak advisedly in saying this) is better qualified for such an undertaking than Mr. Haworth, who, in addition to long practical experience, possesses an extensive and profound knowledge of entomology, a most accurate and discriminating eye, and a dexterous facility in describing that most beautiful order of insects of which he treats. We sincerely hope he will put his intended plan in execution, and without delay. There can be little doubt but that such a work as he contemplates would meet with more encouragement from the public of the present day, than fell to the lot of Lepidoptera Británnica in 1803. It is almost unnecessary to add that, as vast alterations in the nomenclature have taken place since that period, there should be in the new work a constant reference to the old. The glossary, also, of entomological terms, together with a set of explanatory figures, which, though never executed, formed a part of the original design, should by no means be omitted. The present part contains a description of ten genera of minute moths, viz. Ermínea, Capillària, Dasýcerus, Chelària,. Gracillària, Porrectària, Ypsólophus, Recurvària, Incurvària, and Tínea; the whole comprehending about 247 species. It is unnecessary to say more on this concluding part, as no doubt it will be in the hands of every entomologist who possesses or can procure the preceding volumes. A. R. Y. ART. III. Floral Emblems. By HENRY PHILLIPS, F.L.S. and F.H.S., Author of Pomarium Británnicum. 17. 10s.; plain 17. 1s. Sir, I COULD wish that you had desired my opinion of any other work, rather than of that you have sent me. For several reasons I could wish this: first, because I admire that maxim, which recommends us, where we cannot say any thing favourable, not to say any thing at all; next, because it is awkward to point out the defects of others, while we are probably exhibiting our own at the same moment; and, lastly, because I am so naturally disposed to think well of, and to feel kindly towards, any person whose mind is accustomed to dwell among flowers and trees, that it is doing a personal unkindness to myself to speak as, in this instance, sincerity compels me to speak. I From the title of the work, Floral Emblems, I expected to see a neat little pocket volume, light as the subject of which it treated; or a thin quarto, with finely coloured plates, brought out altogether in a costly and album-like style, and adapted to take its place among the elegant knick-knacks of a lady of fashion. I expected to have found in it the figures of such plants as have, either in this or any other country, been generally or poetically associated with certain ideas; together with some account of each, explaining where or with whom such associations originated; interspersed with appropriate quotations, and, occasionally, with interesting anecdotes. fancied how agreeably many young ladies, who have more leisure than they know how to enjoy, would amuse themselves in tying up sentimental bouquets, and painting pretty devices; but when I saw the book, and when I read it (with very much more attention than I should have done, had you not desired my opinion of it), I was led to doubt whether there was any one class of persons with whom it was likely to become a favourite. Those ladies for whom it would seem the best adapted, and who might be supposed to welcome the sort of employment into which it might lure them, would, I suspect, find it troublesome to refer so frequently to its pages, to ascertain the signification of the various flowers; for many of them are so arbitrary and vague, that there is nothing to assist the memory in retaining them. They might receive the rose as the emblem of beauty; the lily, of innocence; the violet, of modesty or humility; the holly, of Christmas merriment; or the mistletoe, of a stolen kiss: these would be familiar to them. The author might reasonably expect them to receive, as importations from |