alone been reprinted, the Antiquities being altogether omitted. This is the case with the one now offered to the public, to which are annexed as many notes, mostly new, as the subject, in reference to the present advanced state of the science, seemed to require. What White's "idea" was, in regard to collections for a Natural History of his own parish is sufficiently apparent from the whole tenor of his book, and from some passages in it especially. It was his opinion that "Faunists are too apt to acquiesce in bare descriptions, and a few synonyms;" and he adds, " the reason is plain; because all that may be done at home in a man's study, but the investigation of the life and conversation of animals is a concern of much more trouble and difficulty, and is not to be attained but by the active and inquisitive, and by those that reside much in the country." Thus it was his complaint against Scopoli, that he was "not so full with regard to the manners of his indigenous birds as might be wished;" though in other respects he seems to have thought favourably of his work, which he alludes to in several places. Anxious to avoid this error, White paid the most scrupulous attention to the habits of the animals that fell under his notice. At the opening of his correspondence with Daines Barrington, he professes to be "an out-door naturalist," or, as he explains it, "one that takes his observations from the subject itself, and not from the writings of others." And though he considered it " no small undertaking for a man unsupported and alone to begin a Natural History from his own autopsia," yet he was not discouraged, either by the circumstance of having no neighbours of similar pursuits, (as we find him complaining in one part of his work,) to quicken his industry and sharpen his attention," or by the reflection, that "all that he could collect in many years would go into a very narrow compass." His closeness and accuracy of observation, particularly in regard to the notes of birds, and the times of the first appearance of the migratory species, are attested by the tables contained in his first two letters to the gentleman above-mentioned. He calls them his "little methodus of birds." And, in reference to its punctuality," he says, "for many months I carried a list in my pocket of the birds that were to be remarked, and, as I rode or walked about my business, I noted each day the continuance or omission of each bird's song; so that I am as sure of the certainty of my facts as a man can be of any transaction whatsoever." Even if he went on a visit to other parts of the country, he was not idle. When at Ringmer, in Sussex, from which place a few of his letters are dated, he tells us he was still "keeping a sharp look-out," in the hope that he might discover some new facts, more especially with respect to the periodic movements of the summer short-winged birds of passage," in which he was so deeply interested. in Also the kind of observations which he made in other matters indicate his inquisitive turn of mind. His noticing the manner in which the fly-catcher takes its food, that in which the hedge-hog eats the roots of the plantain, and the different way which pigeons drink from other birds; his minuting the owl with his watch, each time that it returned with food to its young; his remarking that the train of the peacock was not its tail, as is so often imagined; his availing himself of gold and silver fishes kept in a glass bowl, to see the manner in which fishes die; and we may add his two letters to Daines Barrington upon the motions and notes of birds; these, and numberless other little points, many of which had never attracted attention, nor . elicited a remark from any previous observer, show the assiduity with which he watched nature, and his eagerness to glean all that could be learnt with respect to the ways and habits of his favourite animals. White was no systematist: neither was his work intended as a complete list of the animals found in his neighbourhood arranged in a scientific manner. That he was, however, as well qualified as any naturalist of his day for such a task, had he undertaken it, there can be no doubt. The new species which he was the first to discover in this country, amongst which are two quadrupeds, the harvestmouse and the great bat; and others which had been previously confounded, till he first pointed out the differences between them,-sufficiently attest his skill in judging of the distinguishing characters of animals. He showed also a degree of caution in this respect, which it would be well if naturalists of the present day oftener imitated. He knew how necessary it was, in the case of nearly-allied species. to have recourse to actual comparison, in order to establish their identity or not. It was not till he - had the three willow-wrens (Letter XIX. to Pennant,) all actually lying before him, that he finally pronounced upon their distinctness; and he elsewhere alleges it as "the bane of science the comparing one animal to another by memory," for want of caution in which respect naturalists often fell into errors. He knew, also, the fallaciousness of names, which not unfrequently mislead, and cause writers to attribute to one species the habits and peculiarities of another. White's work, which is of much value to the naturalist for that originality and accuracy of research above alluded to, possesses also great interest for the general reader from its elegance and simplicity of style. It is embodied in the form of letters to Thomas Pennant Esq., and the Hon. Daines Barrington. The former of these individuals is well known to the public by his numerous works on Natural History, especially the "British Zoology," which was indebted to White for many important contributions. The latter was also distinguished for his literary and scientific attainments, and was the author of several memoirs on Natural History and other subjects, published in the Philosophical Transactions and elsewhere, many of which were after |