with regard to natural groups of evei^ denomination ? It is this
fact whibh has induced us to> consider them as subgenera, and
not as distinct genera. We are told, however, by the advocates
for numerous genera, that in giving a name we adopt a genus;
but we do not see' that this- necessarily follows.
There are, we confess, other grounds bn which we might be
attacked with more advantage. We may perhaps be charged with
inconsistency in refusing to admit as the foundation of generic
groups in the Rapaces, characters, which are allowed, not only by
ourselves, but by some of those who are mqst strenuously opposed
to the multiplication of genera, to have quite sufficient importance
for such distinction in other families. With what propriety, it
might be asked, can we admit Hydrobatès (Fuligula, Nob.lmts
distinct from Jlnas, and the various genera that have been; dià1
membered from Lomus, at the same time that we reject, as genera,
the different groups of Hawks? To this we can only reply, that
we are ourselves entirely convinced,, that all the sub genera
adopted in our Synopsis among t i e Falcones of North America,
are quite as distinct from each other as Coccyxus ànd Giiculus, or
Corvus and Garrulus. The latter genus we have'admitted after
Temminck, who is opposed tô new genera among the Hawks ;
though Jlstur and Elanus certainly require to he separated, no
less than the two genera that Temminck himself has established
in the old genus Vultur. .
No living naturalist, (with the exception of those, who, through
a sort of , pseudo-religious Reeling, will only admit as genera,
groups indicated as such by Linné)- has adhered longer than
ourselves, to large genera; at the same time that we èould not
deny the existence of. subordinate natural groups. We will not
pretend tb deny that thèse are of equal rank with sotne recog-
nized as genera in other families; and we can only say, that we
consider it doubtful, in the present unsettled state of the science,
what thi§ rank oughttjrhes We therefore, in the instances above
quoted, consider it of little importance, whether these groups be
considered £^s genera or subgenera,/
But what is certainly-of great. importance, is, tbi preserve uniformity
in all such’cases; to rnakpieo'^bydinate divisibus> and give
corresponding titles to groups, of equal value. ■ This uniformity,
however, desirable; cannot, in the actual state of-ornithology, be
easily: attained; and iwe have decided, after much hesitation, to
continue to employ, subgepera. In doing this, we, are moreover
influenceckby the great difficulty that is met with, iff. some cases',
in determining «the proper place of a species partaking Of the
pharacters of >. severaL groimSpiyet not in the least deserving to be
isolated; such &s Falco borealis* whicjr is almost, as much an JLstur
as a Buteo, and has been: placed by authors, according to their
different views,, in both these groups.
An, extensive reform is evidently needed in the department of
classification thatarelatps to genera; and (wet 'propose, with'this
view,- to undertake at, some future period a general work, when,
e|eeting our system on a more. philqsdpnical basis^though we
may restrict Spme, and enlarge other „ genera, wje shall in the
instances toiwhich'we have alluded, asjwel-lyas in a multitude of
others, at least, place them all on an equal footing..
Among-the iseveral - groups intp which the Falcon tribe^js
divided!' we come to» one composed' of about sixty species, well
marked, and, if kept within its proper bounds, very naturally to
which authors have variously applied the name of Jlccipiter, Spar-
vius, and Jlstur, which last we have adopted.
Found in all parts of the globe, and destroying every where
great numbers of birds and small quadrupeds, the Hawks, - (by
Which English name we proppse to distinguish this group more
particularlyclosely- resemble each other, in colour and changes
of plumage, especially^ t^e -North American and European species'.
- VOL. II.— B