THURSDAY, MAY 19, 1887. LOCAL NAMES OF BRITISH BIRDS. Provincial Names and Folk-Lore of British Birds. By the Rev. Charles Swainson, M.A. Published for the English Dialect Society. (London, 1885 [sic]). The Folk-Lore and Provincial Names of British Birds. By the Rev. Charles Swainson, M.A. Published for the Folk-Lore Society. (London, 1886.) I' NEPTITUDE for the performance of a literary task has long been held by some publishers to be no bar to a man's undertaking it; but we believe that hitherto this opinion has not been shared by publishing Societies. These bodies may not always have been fortunate in the selection of editors or authors; but in a general way it may be asserted that a grave mistake is seldom made. Such a mistake, however, it is our unhappy lot now to record, and it is the more marked in that it is common to two of them-the English Dialect Society and the Folk Lore Society. Most of the publications of the former are everywhere recognized as possessing high value-some naturally are better than others; but each of them has reflected credit upon the Committee of that Society, formed as it is of some of the best English scholars, and its work has undeniably been of great use. With the publications of the latter the present writer must avow himself inadequately acquainted, though he is willing to accord to them a reputation not inferior to that which those of the sister Society enjoy. By what perverse fate, then, these two Societies have combined to intrust a subject so exceedingly interesting, and of which it was possible to make so much, as the "Provincial Names and Folk-Lore of British Birds," to a gentleman whose knowledge of it is obviously inadequate, is beyond the reviewer's power to explain. Perhaps it may be only one of those well-known results of divided responsibility which are almost invariably exhibited in statesmanship, generalship, and editorship. A more unsatisfactory work than that of which the double title stands above has seldom appeared on the counter of a careless publisher, and of this fact the Committee of the English Dialect Society seems, when too late, to have become aware; since its thirteenth Report, read at the annual meeting on February 14 last, contains what cannot be looked upon as otherwise than an apology for the course into which it was led. Here we read "Mr. Swainson's' Provincial Names of British Birds' has been published in conjunction with the Folk-Lore Society, at whose instance it was undertaken. . . . The work is interesting, and the list of local names is the best yet published; but it is only right to point out that, in the catalogue given by Mr. Swainson of the books which he has consulted for the purposes of his compilation-about one hundred in all-not a single publication of the English Dialect Society is mentioned. This means, of course, that the words used in almost fifty counties or districts have been entirely overlooked and neglected. Several recent monographs on the ornithology of English counties, most of which contain the local names of the birds, are also omitted from Mr. Swainson's list. . . . It is obvious, therefore, that the Dialect Society, whilst acknowledging their indebtedness to Mr. Swainson for the work he has done, can only regard it as a partial VOL. XXXVI.-No. 9i5. and temporary treatment of the subject; and they will be pleased if they could induce Mr. Swainson or some other member to attempt the compilation of an exhaustive and final list of local bird-names." This free acknowledgement goes far to exonerate the Committee from their offence, into committing which they would seem to have been dragged by the Folk-Lore Society. Whether the Council of the latter body has expressed itself in any corresponding terms, the present writer is not aware; but that some explanation is due to its members, if they are above caring for anything more than a parcel of old wives' fables indifferently told, is very clear. That the compiler of a successful list of provincial names of birds should be somewhat of a philologist and somewhat of an ornithologist would seem to be obvious. There is little evidence to show that Mr. Charles Swainson is either one or the other, and a good deal to make us suspect that he is neither. Moreover, we cannot free ourselves from an uncomfortable thought that he has not personally consulted some of the works he quotes, for he certainly "makes hay" with their authors' names and the titles of the books, while he is not above citing a passage at second-hand from a popular author who may or may not have correctly reproduced the original passage—a passage that may or may not occur in any very rare or recondite volume. Furthermore, besides the omissions noticed in the Report just cited, there is a considerable amount of material available which has been wholly passed by. The earlier volumes of the Zoologist contain several lists of the local names of birds that seem to be unknown to him, and from those lists, and others there collected, it was many years ago fondly hoped that a gentleman--the Rev. J. C. Atkinson-who, by his later labours, has proved his efficiency, would have compiled a work having the same scope as that now before us. It does not appear to have occurred to Mr. Swainson that a name has not only a locality, but a history, and that, though information concerning the locality in which it is used is very desirable, information concerning its history is more important still. In regard to the former, what he tells us is generally little enough; and in regard to the latter, what he tells us is generally nothing at all. More than this, the source of such information on either subject as he does vouchsafe is very rarely indicated—still more rarely than is done by M. Rolland, whose Populaire de France" (a very good book in its way, but one capable of great improvement) is confessedly the model which the work before us tries to copy. "Faune To take the first species in Mr. Swainson's list (p. 1), which species, by the way, he calls by the corruptly abbreviated name "Missel Thrush." He writes of "the fondness of this bird for the berries of the mistletoe, holly, and holm." If he had looked at the careful "Dictionary of PlantNames" of Messrs. Britten and Holland (published by this same English Dialect Society), or almost any British Flora, he might have seen that holly and holm are synonyms, instead of being, as he would have them, the names of different trees. He also tells us that among the names which this bird has received, from the harsh note it utters when alarmed, is that of "Screech"; but he gives not a hint to connect that word with its undoubted parent form, the Anglo-Saxon Scric, which is rendered turdus in D the older vocabularies, and is, there can be little question, the early form also of "Shrike," though that was by one of Turner's friends applied to a wholly different kind of bird, which since 1544 has borne it, in books at any rate. Indeed this last species (Lanius excubitor) has a very doubtful claim to any English vernacular name at all, though its common congener may rejoice in that of Butcher-bird. But even under "Shrikes" we have no reference to the Anglo-Saxon Scric, and we may remark that here (p. 47) we find a passage, some four or five lines in length, inclosed in inverted commas, as though a quotation, and followed by "(Yarrell.)," as if the naturalist of that name were its author. Truth compels us to say that search in all the editions of Yarrell's classical work has failed to show that the so-printed quotation is anything but a paraphrase, and a very inadequate one, of the passage Yarrell wrote. ing," we may remark that the name seems to have been first applied to the young birds in their downy clothing, which, when salted and dried, were held in some estimation as an article of food, and were described by Gesner in 1555 ("Hist. Avium," pp. 110, 768), from an account furnished to him by Caius, as wanting true feathers, and being covered only with a sort of woolly black plumage— natural “powder-puffs," in fact. It is true that Caius himself, fifteen years later ("Rarior. Animal. Libellus," fol. 21) declared that the name is derived "a naturali voce pupin"; but that assertion will not be confirmed by those who know the bird in life. Mr. Swainson would no doubt have mentioned these particulars had he known them, and he might easily have found them out by searching for the earliest record of the species; but, as before remarked, investigation is a quality in which he appears to be singularly deficient. There may be readers who will condone such blemishes as those of which we have given some half dozen instances out of-we should be sorry to say how many that we could notice. Several far more flagrant than those we have particularized have attracted attention elsewhere,1 and are therefore purposely passed over by us; but before we leave the subject we should like to say a few words on the distinction which exists between real and what we may perhaps call book names--a distinction in no way heeded by our author. To use the phrase of Sir Hugh Evans, these last are "affectations." They may or may not be needful, they may or may not be apposite, and they may or may not be adopted into our language; but they are artificial grafts, and not its natural outgrowth. Consequently, from the linguistic and philological point of view, the difference between the two classes of names should be always most carefully drawn, and the more carefully since, in some cases, the child of adoption puts on an appearance amazingly like that of the child of generation. To show this difference an investigation of the history of names is needed; but that is not attempted by Mr. Swainson. Few persons would suspect that the name Coming to Mr. Swainson's second species, the SongThrush (p. 3), we find no attempt to trace the nice distinction which runs through more than one Teutonic tongue between Thrush and Throstle-the latter being the diminutive of the former, as Prof. Skeat's Dictionary" shows, and our author is content to quote Macgillivray at second-hand from Mr. Harting, whereby an accidental error (slight, but enough to give the passage a wrong meaning) is repeated. Space fails us to criticize what else Mr. Swainson says of these two species alone, and of course it would be impossible to go through the whole of his volume in this way, even if we wished to do so. Suffice it to say that there is scarcely a page to which exception of one kind or another could not be taken, and now let us turn to the very end of the book. Here (p. 217) in what he says of the last but three of the species in his list we find the astounding statement that from the French word Guillemot (corresponding with the same in English) comes the Welsh Guillem! This is enough to make any patriotic inhabitant of the principality go off his head, for though doubtless the words have a common origin, the derivation, if such there be, must be the other way, and the modern French1 Guillemot be the off-"Dipper," which of late years has in common use almost spring of the Cymric and probably Breton Gwillim, or Gwylym as Pennant wrote it. On the next page, Mr. Swainson gives us a piece of information as curious and, we fear, unwarranted, telling us that the names Greenland Dove and the like (applied to what in books is called the Black-but here by accident misprinted "Lack"Guillemot) are bestowed on account of "the great attachment shown to each other by the male and female, thus resembling the dove." Ornithologists knew that in one of its plumages the Tysty is very dove-like, but we think they did not know, and, if they believe it, will doubtless be thankful to Mr. Swainson for the news, that it is remarkable for conjugal affection! We should doubt whether the Rotch, or Little Auk, was ever called by Icelanders "álka," for by that name, when properly spelt, they mean the Razorbill; and, arriving at the last bird in the list, we are concerned to find that the Puffin is "so called either from its puffed-out appearance, or from its swelling beak." Setting aside the fact that no one who has ever examined the compressed coulterneb" of the Puffin could reasonably apply thereto the epithet "swellIn older French, Guillemot was applied to a Plover, as by Belon in 555. wholly ousted the Water-Ousel, Water-Crow, or WaterPyot of former days, was not of very ancient origin, and referred to that bird's habit of diving below the surface of a stream in quest of its prey, as indeed is stated by Mr. Swainson (p. 30). Yet, directly we inquire into the history of the name, we shall be unable to trace it beyond 1804, when it was apparently introduced by the writer of the work known as "Bewick," and also find that it was applied because the bird "may be seen perched on the top of a stone in the midst of the torrent, in a continual dipping motion, or short courtesy often repeated." Here the need of explanation is all the greater, because this particular sense of the word "dip" or "dipping"-though familiar enough to our forefathers, has become almost obsolete, and, indeed, is passed over by Prof. Skeat. “Dipper," therefore, is nothing but a book-name. Then, again, under "Hedge-Sparrow"-a name which must last so long as Shakespeare is read-we have, amid half a dozen genuine local synonyms, "Hedge-warbler, Hedge-accentor, Hedge-chanter" brought in, as if they were ever employed except by a few crotchety writers, who tried to confine the use of the word Sparrow in 1 Athenæum, March 19, 1887, pp. 386-327. a way that not many English words will brook, and certainly not a word of such wide meaning and acceptance as this. In the same way the book-names of the StoneCurlew-Thickknee, Norfolk Plover, and the rest, to the number of half a dozen-are gravely printed as if they were "provincial"; and here we may remark that Mr. Swainson applies (p. 200) the Arabic name of this species "Karrawan" (as he prints it) to its namesake the Longbilled Curlew or Whaup, which must be wholly unknown to most of the descendants of Ishmael. We very much regret that we have to express ourselves in such terms of this book. We doubt not that the author has done the best that in him lies, and we are especially sorry to find from his preface that the delay in its appearance (for it had been long looked for) is due to his ill health. It is on this last account that we are indisposed to drive home many charges of carelessness which might easily be established, and we part from him trusting that in another edition he may have the opportunity of justifying his selection by these two learned Societies for the duties that we strongly suspect he must already regret having undertaken; but to do this he should acquire some knowledge of the ways and looks of birds, and learn the rudiments of etymology. RECENT WORKS ON THE THEORY OF Our insular way of doing things, however, is so different from that of the Germans that it may be fairly questioned whether we are any the worse for the deficiency. It would certainly be very erroneous to conclude that the advance of the theory of determinants in the two countries during the period referred to has shown the same marked contrast. Gordan's "Vorlesungen" is a book on the lines of Salmon's "Modern Higher Algebra." The theory of determinants is consequently not taken up in its entirety, the design having been to give the main propositions regarding general determinants and to include the discussion of only those special forms which are connected with the chief subject of the work-to give, in fact, such a knowledge of determinants as would enable the student to prosecute investigation in the theory of invariants. It is nevertheless a very full exposition-much fuller than Salmon's, and much more methodical. The section on Permutation and Substitution should be carefully noted: although in essence it dates from the time of Cauchy, it will be none the less fresh to many readers. "Beiträge" is rather a misnomer for the remaining German work on our list. The book is nothing more nor less than an ordinary, or very ordinary, text-book, containing three chapters, the first on determinants in general, the second on the adjugate determinant, and the third on determinants of special form. The author attaches considerable importance to a new notation which he introduces and uses throughout, and to various new theorems which he enunciates and proves; indeed, the title-page bears the intimation, " Neue Sätze und eine neue BezeichVon nung." The said new notation is obtained by placing the lengthy but excellent umbral notation Primeiros Principios da Theoria dos Determinantes. Por Die Determinanten in genetischer Behandlung. THR HREE of these works are introductory text-books of from fifty to eighty pages, and may consequently be dismissed in a few lines. The first is a skilfully arranged and well-written manual, furnished with suitable exercises, and ought to be found exceedingly serviceable in the secondary schools of Portugal. That by Prof. Mansion, of Ghent, has already been referred to in NATURE; the fact that it is now in the fourth French edition and second German edition is sufficient proof of its value. The third, by Gymnasial-Professor Sickenberger, is the largest and yet the most elementary, having been intended (not very wisely, we are disposed to think) for pupils very imperfectly prepared in algebra. Twelve pages, including a collection of thirty exercises, are devoted to determinants of the second order, thirty-eight pages to those of the third order, and the remaining thirty pages to determinants in general, the whole being prepared with endless pains and much preceptorial skill. Introductory works of this kind have for a number of years been appearing in Germany at the rate of 1.3.... per annum : in England we have not had one since 1875. It is a little hard to see that this piling of Pelion on Ossa results in "grössere Einfachheit." As for the new theorems, we are satisfied that the author will change his mind in regard to them as his range of reading widens. All the results on pp. 98-111, for example, are perfectly well known in England and America: indeed, the whole of them which concern alternants of the third order are included in a single theorem of Prof. Woolsey Johnson's. None the less credit, however, is due to the author for the work he has done; and we trust that, having examined the literature of his subject, he will continue his investigations and attain a more enduring success. The new American text-book stands out in marked contrast with the preceding. First of all, it is a book of good outward appearance; paper, printing, and binding being unexceptionable. In the second place, the author makes no pretensions to originality: in his preface he enumerates a few manuals, English and Continental, to which he is indebted, and frankly states that he has used them all freely. Some of them, we should say, he has used more freely than others, but, on the whole, with good judgment, and in such a way as to show that he this very theorem itself being employed in the proof. Mr. Hanus will doubtless yet come to see that the book in which this originally appeared requires to be perused in a spirit of scepticism rather than of faith. We may note also that the identity (5) on p. 37 is exactly the same as (3) on the preceding page, that the footnote on p. 196 is misleading, and that the investigations referred to on p. 199 might with advantage have been further drawn upon. These latter, however, are small points which can be attended to in the second edition. The book, on the whole, is trustworthy, and well adapted for College use. On this account, and as being the first American text-book on the subject, it deserves a cordial welcome both in America and in Britain. THOMAS MUIR. OUR BOOK SHELF. The A B C of Modern Photography. 22nd Edition. (London: The London Stereoscopic and Photographic Company, 1887.) ALTHOUGH this is called a new edition, it is really a new book, having been reconstructed and much new matter added. Those who are about to begin photography cannot do better than study and carry out the instructions which are here clearly stated. The book is divided into two parts. In Part I. the beginner is taken through the whole process—exposing, developing, printing, &c.—and this is followed by tables of weights and measures. Part II. contains good accounts of all the advanced parts of the art, such as re-touching, portraiture, &c., together with chapters on photo-micrography, instantaneous photography. One of the latest developments of photography is shown in the "detective book camera," which has the appearance of an octavo book of a thickness corresponding to about 200 pages. The new method of taking negatives on paper is fully described. Lastly, under the headings of New Apparatus and Processes," Rayment's patent tripod top is mentioned, which allows the camera to be pointed in any direction, and also the patent photographic Gladstone bag, which is fitted up so as to contain a complete photographic outfit. We must not omit to say that the book is fully illustrated, the frontispiece being a photo-mezzotype taken by a pupil of the Stereoscopic Company. Newcastle-upon-Tyne Public Libraries. Supplementary Catalogue of Books added to the Lending Department. (London: G. Norman and Son, 1887.) IN this supplement the compiler has given nearly as much space to 10,000 volumes as was occupied by twice that number in the catalogue published in 1880 (see NATURE, vol. xxiii. p. 262). Most of the works have been published since 1880, but some earlier books have also been added. The rapid accumulation of knowledge makes it extremely difficult to provide adequate references to the subjects of pamphlets and of articles in treatises and serial publications. The compiler has, however, recognized the importance of this part of his work, and the results of the labour he has devoted to it will be of real service to students who may have occasion to consult the supplementary catalogue. I Do not see that Prof. Max Müller's theory of the inseparability of thought from language, whether true or erroneous, has any important bearing on the origin of man, whether by evolution or otherwise. It is a question at all events to be studied by itself, and to be tested by such experiments as we can make by introspection, or by such facts as can be ascertained by outward observation. My own opinion is strongly in favour of the conclusion urged by Mr. F. Galton. It seems to me quite certain that we can and do constantly think of things without thinking of any sound, or word, as designating them. Language seems to me to be necessary to the progress of thought, but not at all necessary to the mere act of thinking. It is a product of thought; an expression of it; a vehicle for the communication of it; a channel for the conveyance of it; and an embodiment which is essential to its growth and continuity. But it seems to me to be altogether erroneous to represent it as any inseparable part of cogitation. Monkeys and dogs are without true thought not because they are speechless; but they are speechless because they have no abstract ideas, and no true reasoning powers. In parrots the power of mere articulation exists sometimes in wonderful perfection. But parrots are no cleverer than many other birds which have no such power. Man's vocal organs are correlated with his brain. Both are equally mysterious because they are co-operative, and yet separable, parts of one "plan." ARGYLL. Argyll Lodge, Kensington, May 12. HAVING much of the same experience as Mr. Galton, I nevertheless prefer dealing with a larger group of facts. I have often referred to the mutes of the seraglio at Constantinople, who cannot be charged with thinking in words. They have their own sign conversation among themselves, and which has no necessary reference to words. Even the names of individuals are suppressed among themselves, though they sometimes use lip reading to an outsider to make him understand a name. Anyone having a knowledge of sign language is aware that it is independent of words. The tenses of verbs, &c., are supplied by gestures. The mutes are not deficient in intelligence. They take a great interest in politics, and have the earliest news. It is true this is obtained by hearing, though they are supposed to be deaf-mutes, but among themselves everything is transmitted by signs. HYDE CLARKE. 32 St. George's Square, S. W., May 12. I THINK that all who are engaged in mechanical work and planning will fully indorse what Mr. Francis Galton says as to thought being unaccompanied by words in the mental processes gone through. Having been all my life since school-days engaged in the practice of architecture and civil engineering, I can assure Prof. Max Müller that designing and invention are done entirely by mental pictures. It is, I find, the same with original geological thought-words are only an incumbrance. For the conveyance and accumulation of knowledge some sort of symbols are required, but it appears to me that spoken language or written words are not absolutely necessary, as other means of representing ideas could be contrived. In fact, words are in many cases so cumbersome that other methods have been devised for imparting knowledge. In mechanics the graphic method, for instance. T. MELLARD Reade. ON reading Mr. Galton's letter, I cannot help asking how Prof. Max Müller would account for early processes of thought in a deaf-mute does he deny them? S. F. M. Q. Scorpion Virus. I AM much obliged to Sir J. Fayrer for pointing out a mistake in my paper on this subject in the Proceedings of the Royal Society of January 6, 1887. In referring to his experiments I remarked, "They show conclusively that the cobra poison will not affect a cobra, and will not even affect the viperine plyas." Ptyas" was written by mistake for "Daboia." I take the opportunity of recording an observation with regard to the slight power scorpions possess of withstanding the heat of the sun's rays. If a scorpion is placed in an open pie-dish in the sun (the experiments were tried in Madras on an averagely hot day), it will run violently round and round, lash its sting about, and then gradually become torpid; this happens in from seven to ten minutes. If then removed into the shade, it will gradually recover; but if left for longer in the sun, it dies. the scorpion is an inhabitant of hot countries, this sensitiveness to the sun's rays is very remarkable. A. G. BOURNE. Madras, April 13. Weight and Mass. As I FIND it convenient to distinguish in writing between mass and weight by using the symbols gr. or kgr. or lb. to denote masses, and reserving capital letters Gr., Kgr., &c., where weights, or forces in gravitation measure, are understood; say, 50 kg. of stone, or wood, or iron-1000 Kgr. denoting a stress in some structure or the like. Some agreement in these notations would be desirable. Lemberg, May 14. Dynamical Units. ac W. OUR attention has been drawn to a letter in NATURE, vol. XXXV. p. 583, written by Mr. Lewis Wright. He makes the statement that we supplied him with a sample of zirconia as “pure,” which, upon examination, he found to contain silica, as well as some soda, rendering the sample quite useless for the purpose for which it was required. We trust you will allow us to correct this statement. We sold the zirconia as 'impure," and when Mr. Wright asked us to purify it further for him, declined to do so. We told him that it was an article obtained as a residue produced during the preparation of another body, and was sold, in consequence, at a price far lower than the usual price at which the article can be produced in a pure state. HOPKIN AND WILLIAMS. 16 Cross Street, Hatton Garden, London, E. C. If we would IN reference to this subject may I remark that the proposed term "cel" is etymologically incorrect for the meaning intended to be conveyed? It might stand as a contraction for “celerity," i.e. velocity, but not for the rate of increase of velocity. The essential distinction between velocity and acceleration is wholly expressed in the prefix "ac. must cut all our words down to one syllable, the " really have in it more correct meaning than the "cel." Early in 1886, Prof. D. H. Marshall, of King's University, Kingston, published a book on dynamics, in which he uses the word "tach" to mean unit velocity of one centimetre per second. He has no special name for the unit of acceleration, but the unit of momentum he calls a "gramtach," and the unit rate of doing work a "dyntach." The unit pressure-intensity of one degree per square centimetre he calls a prem." I would like to suggest that names for the units might be formed syste natically by the addition to the ordinary name for the quantity of the invariable affix "on," which is the root part of the word "one." Thus as unit names we would employ "velociton" or " velon " ; "acceleron or "accelon"; momenton ; presson ; tenson," &c., &c. For the sake of uniformity we might change "radian" into "radion." Birmingham, May 4. ROBERT H. SMITH. So many people have expressed their surprise at hearing that I constantly saw monkeys breaking open oysters with a stone on the islands off South Burmah, that it may be of interest to give a short description of their method of using such a tool. The low-water rocks of the islands of the Mergui Archipelago are covered with oysters, large and small. A monkey, probably Macacus cynomolgus, which infests these islands, prowls about the shore when the tide is low, opening the rock-oysters with a stone by striking the base of the upper valve until it dislocates and breaks up. He then extracts the oyster with his finger and thumb, occasionally putting his mouth straight to the broken shell. On disturbing them, I generally found that they had selected a stone more apparently for convenience in handling than for its value as a hammer, and it was smaller in proportion to what a human being would have selected for a proportionate amount of work. In short, it was usually a stone they could get their fingers round. As the rocks crop up through the low-water mud, the stone had to be brought from high-water mark, this distance varying from 10 to 80 yards. This monkey has chosen the easiest way to open the rock-oyster, viz. to dislocate the valves by a blow on the base of the upper one, and to break the 726 2 I 1526 The mean daily area of these seven days, the only days in the month showing spots, was only 7 millionths, and for the month as a whole, 16 millionths. The exceptional character of the month will be better seen when it is remembered that the Greenwich results give 24 millionths as the mean daily area for 1878, the year of minimum; whilst at maximum, as in 1883, the mean daily area was 1155. With reference to the "six days" which Dr. Veeder quotes from the note on "Solar Activity in 1886," appearing in the Astronomical Column of NATURE, vol. xxxv. p. 445, the assertion was based on a record which was defective for three or four days. The group he describes as making its first appearance on December 8 was not seen here until December 10, and had only become important by December 12. Since the appearance of Dr. Veeder's letter, I have been privileged to inspect the series of photographs taken in India and in the Mauritius, under the auspices of the Solar Physics Committee. These show that the group had not come into view at the east limb until after the photographs on December 8 had been taken, so that, for Europe and Asia, December 9, which was cloudy here, was practically the first day of the spot. THE WRITER OF THE NOTE. "The Game of Logic." "Game of IN the course of a review of Lewis Carroll's Logic" (p. 3), Mr. A. Sidgwick says incidentally that "In Mr. Venn's scheme propositions either tell us that a compartment is empty or tell us nothing about it.' This is not quite correct; he should have confined his statement to univer sal propositions. It is quite true that on the schemes of Boole and Jevons nothing is recognized but o and I; nothing but the excision of a combination and the letting it stand; and they both make the attempt to express particular propositions with such resources. But I have taken particular pains to show that such a scheme of dichotomy will not suffice to represent affirmatives and negatives, universals and particulars; and that for this purpose, when we are dealing with logic on the compartmental |