Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 61.djvu/48

 his brother Benjamin, the publisher of Pennant's works, made Pennant's personal acquaintance (cf. his first letter to him 4 Aug. 1767, first printed by Bell, i. '27, in 1877). Pennant, having in hand a new edition of his 'British Zoology' (1768-1770), was naturally pleased at falling in with an observer who had so much valuable information to impart, and a correspondence sprang up between them which lasted until the completion of the new (so-called fourth) edition (1776), the proofs of which were revised by White. Unfortunately Pennant's letters are not forthcoming, though White's, being subsequently returned to him, form the basis of the celebrated 'Natural History of Selborne.' There cannot be a doubt that they were originally written merely for Pennant's own use, without any thought of separate publication. Certain writers have been ready to depreciate Pennant, both as a zoologist and as an antiquary; but with him White found himself on the best of terms, praising his candour. He did, indeed, complain to his brother John in February 1776 of the state of the proof-sheets sent for revision, and at another time he contrasted Lever's generous conduct with that of Pennant, to the advantage of the former, though it was the latter who gave him the much-esteemed Scopoli (ib. ii. 41). White was very ceremonious in his correspondence. Mulso, who always wrote to him 'My dear Gil,' often protested against being addressed, in the letters now unhappily destroyed, 'My dear Sir,' and White frequently began his letters to his nephew in the same formal style; yet, in 1769, in an unpublished letter, sold by Messrs. Sotheby & Co. in April 1896, he gently rallied Pennant on the honour, of which the latter was very proud, of being elected to the Academy of Sciences of Drontheim (Trondhjem), humorously suggesting that henceforth he would be bound to believe in Bishop Pontoppidan's Kraken and Sea-Serpent under pain of expulsion. Bell (vol. i. p. xli) complains of Pennant's scant recognition of White's discoveries, but ignores the fact that White in correcting the proofs of the fourth edition of the 'British Zoology,' and making additions thereto, would naturally not introduce his own name on every occasion. In the preface Pennant generally but fully acknowledges White's services.

White's personal acquaintance with Dailies Barrington did not begin until May 1769, when they met in London, though more than a year before the latter had sent him a copy of the 'Naturalist's Journal' (an invention of Barrington's) through his brother Benjamin, who published it. Thereupon followed a series of letters which, continued until 1787, form the second part of the 'Natural History of Selborne,' though some 'letters' appear, as in the former part consisting of Pennant's letters, to have been subsequently added by way of completing the work. With his usual perversity Barrington chose to disbelieve in the migration of the swallow-kind, and, with his usual casuistry, attempted to defend the position he took up. It seems to have been his influence that from time to time disturbed White's mind on the subject, sending him to search for torpid swallows among the shrubs and holes of Selborne Hanger (Letters li. and lvii. to Barrington;, Gleanings in Natural History, 2nd ser. p. 151); and, when he had actually seen their migration in progress (Letter xxiii. to Pennant), causing him to ignore the significance of his observation. The hold that this uncertainty had upon him lasted to the end, for in a letter to Marsham (, ii. 302) only a few days before his death he repudiated the supposition that he had written in the 'Gentleman's Magazine' against the torpidity of swallows, as it would not 'be consistent with what I have sometimes asserted so to do.' This is the more extraordinary, since through one brother he had positive assurance of the migration of swallows in southern Spain, and through another brother, the bookseller, he had opportunities (of which he certainly availed himself) of knowing what was published on the subject. He could hardly have been unaware of the 'Essays upon Natural History' brought out by (1694-1773) [q. v.] in 1770, one of which contains views on migration, which are mostly sound, though possibly the remarkable 'Discourse on the Emigration of British Birds' printed ten years later by John Legg (Salisbury, 1780), being a local publication and anonymous, may have escaped White's notice.

It is certain that during his annual visits to London White made other scientific acquaintances. He is found writing to (Sir) [q. v.] (, ii. 241) in fulfilment of a promise so early as the spring of 1768. A few months later that intrepid naturalist sailed with Cook on his memorable voyage in the success of which White took the greatest interest (ib. vol. i. pp. xlivxlviii), while subsequently he knew [q. v.], Banks's companion; the elder Forster, the naturalist of Cook's second voyage, as well as [q. v.] the entomologist and botanist (ib. ii. 17); Sir [q. v.], who formed the enormous museum known by his name; and (1735-1788) [q. v.] of