Published on 01 March 1912 in Letters

SIRS,–I have no desire to prolong a discussion on this subject, b u t I do not like t o see my views misrepresented as they are in your editorial note to my last letter. The ” inconsistency ” with which I am credited is based on the assumption that, while deprecating the constant changes which are being made in Latin names, I am approving changes in English ones. But that is n o t so. I propose no new English names. My critics have failed to note the essential difference between substituting one Latin word for another and spelling an English word properly. How the latter course (for which I have quoted precedents) can ” make ornithology more confusing,” I fail to see. This really is the gist of the matter, and I need say no more. J. E. HASTING. SIBS,–I hold no brief for Mr. Harting, and being no philologist I am content t o leave t h e elucidation of such matters to others, b u t in our arguments let us a t least be logical. You, Sirs, are n o w ‘ ‘ sticklers for priority ” as regards scientific names, b u t y e t when it is proposed to carry out similar ideas for English names you are a t once most strongly against such a proposal. In the case of English names, no confusion from the change can possibly arise, as there is no transference of name from one species to

Click here to download the full article.