er 7 OLD SERIES, CONTINUATION OF THE § NEw SERIES, VoL. XXII BULLETIN OF THE NUTTALL ORNITHOLOGICAL CLuB. | VoL. XIV ‘The Auk 4 Quarterly Journal of Oriithology EDITOR i A. ALLEN ASSOCIATE EDITOR FRANK M. CHAPMAN \\ YA) WAZ SS hl, D pall QO VOLUME XIV PUBLISHED FOR The American Ornithologists’ Union NEW YORK as HOS LHR sy) 1897S CONTENTS OF VOLUME XIV. NUMBER I. PAGE Novres oN A CAPTIVE HERMIT THRUSH. By Daniel E. Owen I RECENT INVESTIGATIONS OF THE FOOD OF EUROPEAN Birps. By I, JB, Th ISO : F , : é : ; ‘ : o SomE NOTES ON THE NESTING HABITS OF THE WHITE-TAILED KirE. By Chester Barlow ; ; F : ; : ; 5 Wil REPORT OF THE A. O. U. COMMITTEE ON PROTECTION OF NORTH AMERICAN Birps. By William Dutcher é : : ee EVIDENCE SUGGESTIVE OF THE OCCURRENCE OF ‘ INDIVIDUAL DICHROMATISM’ IN Megascops asio. By Arthur P. Chadbourne, M.D. (Pilate I.) : : : é “ c 33 ZAMELODIA AGAINST HaAsia. By Dr. Elliott Coues : : 39 PRELIMINARY DESCRIPTIONS OF NEW Brirps From MEXICO AND GUATEMALA IN THE COLLECTION OF THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. By £. W. Nelson . ~ 42 DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SUBSPECIES OF Dendroica. By Harry C. Oberholser . : . : : : : 5 6 . 5 5. 7S) ON THE NOMENCLATURE OF CERTAIN FORMS OF THE Downy WOODPECKER (Dryobates pubescens). By William Brewster So FOURTEENTH CONGRESS OF THE AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISLS’ Union. By John H. Sage . 82 GENERAL NOTES. The Nostrils in Young Cormorants, 87; Labrador Duck, 87; Nesting of the Larger White-cheeked Goose (Branta canadensis occiden- talis) in Okanogan County, Washington, 87; A New Bird for the Virginias, 88; Asarcia spinosa, 88; The Passenger Pigeon (Ectopistes migratortus) in Lewis County, N. Y., 88; AMelopelia leucoptera in Osceola County, Florida, 88; The California Vul- ture in Alberta, 89; Golden Eagle (Aguzla chrysaétos) taken near New Haven, Conn., 89; Abundance of Owls on the Coast of Brit- ish Columbia, 89; The Cuculide of the A. O. U. List, 90; Broad- tailed Hummingbird in California, 91; Authority for the Name Mytarchus mexicanus, 92; Hepburn’s Leucosticte (Lezcosticte tephrocotis littoralis) in Summer in Okanogan County, Wash- ington, 92; Ammodramus (Passerculus) sanctorum, 92; Occur- rence of Baird’s Sparrow (Ammodramus batrdi?) in Washington, 93; Acadian Sparrow in Yates County, N. Y., 93; Note on Funco annectens Baird and F. r¢dgwayi Mearns, 94; Rectifications of Synonymy of the Genus Funco, 94; Spiza americana near King- ston, N. Y., 95; Correct Nomenclature of the Texas Cardinal, 95. Natural Breeding Haunts of the Barn Swallow (Chelidon ery- iv Contents of Volume XIV. throgaster), 95; Characters of Dendrota cerulescens carnst, 96 ; Dendroica cwrulea vs. Dendroica rara, 97; Note on the Genus Lucar of Bartram, 97; Breeding of the Carolina ae (Thry- othorus ludovictanus) on Long Island, N. Y., 97; A remarkable Nest of the Tufted Titmouse (Parus bicolor), 98 ; The Whistled Call of Parus atricapillus common to both Sexes, 99; Passer domesticus at Archer, Fla., and other Florida Notes, 99; Records of Two Birds rare on Long Island, N. Y., 99; Waneadl Visits of Birds in Western Massachusetts during 1896, 106; The Michigan Ornithological Club, tor. RECENT LITERATURE. Sharpe’s Catalogue of the Limicolz, 102; Bendire’s ‘ Life Histories of North American Birds,” 104; Bird-Nesting with a Camera, 106; Thompson’s Art Anatomy, 106; Miss Merriam’s ‘A-Birding on a Bronco’, 107; ‘Papers Presented to the World’s Congress of Ornithology’, 108; The Revised New Nuttall, 109; Millais on Change to Spring Plumage without a Moult, 1og; Wintle’s ‘Birds of Montreal,’ rr2; Oberholser’s Birds of Wayne County, Ohio, 112; Publications Received, 113. NOTES AND NEWS. Obituary, Howard Gardiner Nichols, 115; Amendments to the A. O. U. By-Laws, 115; New Publications, 115; Velocity of Flight of Ducks, 116; A. O. U. Committee on Bird Protection, 116. NUMBER II. THE SPRING PLUMAGE OF THE BOBOLINK, WITH REMARKS ON “CoLor-CHANGE’ AND ‘ MOULTING.’ Bee. Chadbourne, VED a Celatealia) is". . : 137 REMARKS ON THE SPRING PLUMAGE OF THE Bosonre By Frank M. Chapman. s . 149 DESCRIPTIONS OF TEN NEW Scene OF ‘Bins Discov ERED BY Dr. W. L. ABBOTT IN THE KILIMANJARO REGION oF EAST Arrica. By Charles W. Richmond. : ; - 154 NEw BirDS FROM THE ISLANDS AND PENINSULA OF Low ER CALIFORNIA. By A. W. Anthony. . ‘ 164 A PRELIMINARY LIST OF THE BIRDS OF Ox ANOGAN County, WASHINGTON. By Welliam Leon Dawson. . 168 DESCRIPTION OF A NEW PINE GROSBEAK FROM Carona By Wilitam W. Price . 182 CRITICAL REMARKS ON Cistothorus palustr 7s (Wits. ya AND ITS Ww EST- ERN ALLIES. By Harry C. Oberholser. : 186 THE UNusuAL OccuRENCE OF BRUNNICH’s MURRE (Ure za lomvia) FAR INLAND, WITH NOTES ON OTHER RARE Birps. By A. W. Butler. 197 DESCRIPTION OF A NEW Sanense OF GuILLEMor FROM THE KR IsLANpDs. By Leonhard Stejneger. : ; : : : - 200 | re Contents of Volume XIV. GENERAL NOTES. Murres in Western New York, 202; Unusual Occurrence of Briinnich’s Murre at Beverly, New Jersey, 202; Britinnich’s Murre (Uria lomvia) at Newberne, N. C., 202; Briinnich’s Murre and King Eider at Cape Charles, Virginia, 202; Urra lomvia in South Carolina, 203; The Terns of Dyer’ s and Weepecket Islands, 203 ; The Nostrils of Young Cormorants, 205; The Canvas-back Duck in Massachusetts, 206; Type Locality of Fudrgula collaris, 206; Dapilula, a new Subgenus, 206; The Lesser Snow Goose in Nee England, 207; Branta bernicla glaucogastra, 207; The Wood Ibis in Virginia and Maryland, 208; A North American Snipe New to the A. O. U. List, 209; The Occurrence of Tr ‘yngttes subruficolits in the New England States, 209; Status of Helodro- mas ochropus in the A. O. U. List, 210; Status of the Redshank as a North American Bird, 211; The Avocet (Recurvtrostra americana) at Ipswich, Mass., 212; The 1896 Migration of Charadrius dominicus and Numenius borealis in Massachusetts, 212; Validity of the Genus Lophortyx, 214; Notes on the Mexican Ground Dove, 2 215; Another Golden Eagle in Connecticut, 215; Northern Hawks in Massachusetts, 217; Swainson’s Hawk in Michigan, 216; Note on Llanus glaucus, 216; The Roadrunner as a Destroyer of Caterpillars, 217; How the Chimney Swift secures Twigs for its Nest, 217; Probable First Description of Empidonax flaviventris, 218; Two New Birds for Maine, 219; The Redpollin Maryland, 219; Bachman’s Sparrow in Maryland, 219; The Seaside Sparrow (Ammodramus maritimus) at Middle- town, R.I., 219; Henslow’s Bunting (Ammodramus henslow?) found Breeding at Plymouth, Michigan, 220; Occurrence of Zonotrichta albicolits in California, 221; How about the Genus Pipilo now? 221; The Bahaman Swallow in Florida, 221; Geo- thiyprs agtl’s a possible Breeder in Die Minnesota, 222; Utenability of the Genus Sylvania Nutt., 223; The Carolina Wren (Tkryothorus ladovicianus) at Inwood-on-Hudson, New York City, 224; The Mockingbird: at Portland, Maine. in Winter, 224; Turdus lawrencit Coues, 225; Some New Records for ental New York, 226; Lake Michigan Bird Notes, 227; Sun- dry Notes, 228; The most General Fault of the A. O.U. Check- List, 220. RECENT LITERATURE: Ridgway’s ‘ Manual of North American Birds,’ Second Edition, 232; Goode’s ‘The Published Writings of Philip Lutley Sclater,’ 233; Newton’s Dictionary of Birds: Part IV, 234; Bates’s ‘ The Game Birds of North America,’ 244; Butler on a Century of Changes in the Aspects of Nature in Indiana, 245; Elliot’s Cata- logue of a Collection of Birds from Somali-Land, 245: Ander- son’s Birds of Winnebago and Hancock Counties, Iowa, 246; Ricker’s Notes on the Birds of Hull, Mass., 246; Howe’s Birds of Brookline, Mass., 246; Tegetmeier’s ‘ Pheasants,’ 246; Bird- Nesting with a Camera, 247; A List of the Birds of Florida, 247; Cory’s ‘List of the Birds of Eastern North America, 248; Scha- low’s the Published Writings of Anton Reichenow, 248; Publica- tions Received, 248. vi Contents of Volume XIV. CORRESPONDENCE. Captive Wild Birds, 251; A Desirable Substitute for Carbon Disul- phide as an Insecticide, 251. NOTES AND NEWS. Obituary, Charles E. Bendire, 353; Heinrich Gatke, 254; Platte M. Thorne, 254; New Publications, 255; Protection of Birds, 257; Errata, 258. NUMBER III. A STUDY OF THE PHILADELPHIA VIREO (Vireo cee ttees): By Jonathan Dwight, fr., M.D. (Plate II.) : THE TURKEY QUESTION. By Dr. Elliott Coues Some ABNORMAL COLOR MARKINGS. By Gerrit S. Miller, Ee : THE TERNS OF PENIKESE ae MASSACHUSETTS. Fc Geor tq ah Mackay A List oF THE SPECIES OF ANSERES, PALUDICOL. £, AND Limcot 2 OCCURRING IN THE STATE OF LOUISIANA. By &. A. Mclihenny NESTING OF THE PARULA WARBLER (Comfpsothlypis americana) IN Care May County, NEw JERSEY. By Mark L. C. Wilde DESCRIPTION OF A NEw TOWHEE FROM CALIFORNIA. By Foseph Grinnell ; , ‘ : , AN ADDITION TO NORTH ‘AMERIC AN PETRELS. By William Palmer. DeEscrIPTION OF A NEw Emfpiédonax, witH NOTES ON Toh LO) dificilis. By Harry C. Oberholser A NoTewortTHy PLUMAGE OBSERVED IN THE " AMERICAN EIDER DRAKE (Somateria dresser’). By Arthur H. Norton : THE SUMMER HOME OF BACHMAN’S WARBLER NO LONGER UN- KNOWN. By O. Widmann ; : ; ; : PRELIMINARY DESCRIPTIONS OF New BrirDS FROM MEXICO AND ARIZONA. By Frank M. Chapman GENERAL NOTES. The Proper Generic Name of the Loons, 312; Ura lomvia, an Addition to the Avifauna Columbiana, 312; Note on Pagophila alba, 313; Arrival of Terns at Penikese Island in 1897, 313; Onychoprion, not Haliplana, 314; Remarks on certain Procella- riidz, 314; Rectrices of Cormorants, 316; Concordance of Wer- ganser americanus, 316; The Scarlet Ibis in Colorado, 316; Little Blue Heron in New Hampshire, 316; Bob-white in North- western New York, 316; Additional Records of the Passenger Pigeon (Ectopistes migratorius), 316; Aguila chrysaétos in OF }92) . 310 Contents of Volume XIV. Vii Central Minnesota, 317; Breeding of the Goshawk in Pennsyl- vania, 317; Peculiar Nest of the “Great Horned Owl, 318; Dis- gorgement among Song Birds, 318; An Unusual Song of the Red- winged Blackbird, 319; Spring Moult in Spinus prnus, 320; An earlier name for Ammodramus lecontezt, 320; The Seaside Sparrow (Ammodramus maritimus) in Massachusetts, 320; What is Fringilla macgtllivrayz, Aud? 320; The Seaside Spar- row (Ammodramus maritimus) at Middletown, Re 33223) breed- ing of the Seaside Sparrow in Massachusetts, 322; Bachman’s Sparrow in Virginia, 322; Breeding of the Rose-breasted Gros- beak at Beverly, N. J., 323; On the Status of Lanins robustus Baird as a North eaeniGan Bird, 323; Vtreo flavoviridis in Nebraska —a correction, 323; Reappearance of the Mocking- bird at Portland, Maine, 324; A Mockingbird at Worcester, Mass., 324; Breeding of Sztta canadensis in Pennsylvania 324; A Novel Idea of a Tufted Titmouse, 325; Absence of Turdus aonalaschke pallastt at Tadousac, Quebec, in 1896, 3253 A Great Flight of Robins in Florida, 325; Rare Birds in the V icinity of Philadelphia, 326; A Few Notes on the Avifauna Colum- biana, 326; Northern New Jersey Notes, 326; Bird Notes from Massachusetts, 326; Three Birds rare in Framingham, Mass., 327; Biblographical Note, 327. RECENT LITERATURE. Ridgway’s Birds of the Galapagos Archipelago, 329; Cooke’s Birds of Colorado, 331; Miller on Construction of Scientific Names, 332; Chapman’s Notes on Birds observed in Yucatan, 333; ‘Upon the Tree-Tops,’ 333; The Sharp-tailed Sparrows of Maine, 334; The Story of the Pee 334; Bird-Nesting with a Camera, 335; Birds of Wellesley, 3 35; Nehrling’s Birds, Wolo Mls Bae 6 Chapman’ s ‘ Bird-Life,’ 336; Publications Received, 340. CORRESPONDENCE. ‘ ‘ dhe AO) Uz Check-List; 340. NOTES AND NEWS. Obituary: Robert Hoe Lawrence, 342; Bird Protection, 342. NUMBER IV. THE WESTERN FIELD SPARROW (Sf7zella pusilla arenacea CHAD- BOURNE). By Charles W. Richmond. (Plate III.) : 5) evils NoTES ON THE BirpDS OF ForRT SHERMAN, IDAHO. By /. C. “Mer- rill, Major and Surgeon, U.S. Army. ; . 347 BIRDS OBSERVED ON A COLLECTING TRIP TO BERMUDEZ, VENE- ZUELA. By William Henry Phelpfs. WitTH CRITICAL NOTES AND DESCRIPTIONS OF Two New SPEcIEs, by Frank M. Chap- Man . . . » 357 THe HORNED LARKS OF - MAINE. “By O. W. Knight : sae viil Contents of Volume XIV. NOTES ON THE AMERICAN BARN OWL IN EASTERN PENNSYLVANIA. By J. Harris Reed ; Tue TERNS OF MUSKEGET IsLAND, MASSACHUSETTS, Part IIL. By George H. Mackay : Criticat Notes on THE Genus AURIPARUS. By Harry C. Ober- holser . : : : : DirecTIVE CoLoRATION oF Birps. By Ernest Seton Thompson. (Plate IV.) : : ; New Race oF SAznus tristis FROM THE PactrFic Coast. By Joseph Grinnell : ; 4 : : THE SITKAN KINGLET. By William Palmer GENERAL NOTES. Early notice of Gavia adamsz, 402; The Least Tern Breeding on Martha’s Vineyard Island, Massachusetts, 4o2; The Terns of Penikese —a correction, 402; Capture of the Little Blue Heron in Connecticut, 402; #galiti’s ntvosa in Florida, 402; Buteo albicaudatus in Arizona, 403; Additional Records of the Flam- mulated Owl (Megascofs fammeola) in Colorado, 403; Nesting of the Short-eared Owl in Southern California, 404; Partnership Nesting of Valley Partridge and Long-tailed Chat, 404; Nesting Habits of Empzdonax insulicola, 405; The White-throated Spar- row Breeding at Hubbardston, Mass., 406; Henslow’s Sparrow in Michigan —a Correction, 406; Nesting of Cardinalis cardinalts at Nyack, N. Y., 406; Notes on the Moult and Certain Plumage Phases of Prranga rubra, 406; Purple Martins (Progne subis) Breeding in Electric Arc-light Caps, 407; The Tree Swallow Breeding in Virginia, 408; Rough-winged Swallows (Stelgidof- teryx serripennis) in Greene and Ulster Counties, N. Y., 408; Peculiar Nesting of the Maryland Yellow-throat, 408; The Names of two Mexican Wrens, 409; Rare Birds in the Vicinity of Philadelphia, 410; Notes on Some Ontario Birds, 410; Rare Birds taken in Toronto and Vicinity, 411; Disgorgement among Song-birds, 412; Disgorgement of Cherry Stones again Noted, 412; Birds’ Tongues in Pictures, 413. RECENT LITERATURE. ‘Citizen Bird,’ 413; Birds of Maine, 414; Winge on Birds at the Danish Lighthouses, 415; Cory’s Shore Birds of North America, 418; Chapman’s ‘Handbook,’ 4th Edition, 419; Hartert on the Podargide, Caprimulgide and Macropterygide, 419; Mearns on the ‘ Ornithological Vocabulary of the Moki Indians,’ 420; Papers on Economic Ornitholog gy, 420; Whitlock’s Review of Herr Gatke’s Views on the Migration of Birds, 422; Suchetet on Hybrids among Wild Birds, 424; Publications Received, 425. CORRESPONDENCE. The Treatment of ‘ Nomina Nuda,’ 427. NOTES AND NEWS. Meeting of the Fifteenth Congress of the A. O. U., 430; Obituary, Sir Edward Newton, 431; Memorial to Henry D. Minot, 431; Audubon Monument Association of New Orleans, 432: The Col- lection of Birds Eggs in the British Museum, 432. - 376 . 383 390 3395 391 1399 idee OFFICERS AND COMMITTEES OF THE AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’ UNION. 1896-97. Expiration of Term. BREWSTER, WIELYAM, Preszdent.c.scce ose terres +> - November, MerRIAM, C. HART : ; : 4 \ Vace-Preszdents = 00) = -)-1- = és RipGway, ROBERT, SAGE JOHN] El. SCCTELEIYS ca =.c-0inio\e cre m'cie svi ojen epee s oe ce DURCHER, WIELWAM. Precsurer: «cscs cscs cecclcs «niece Be ADDITIONAL MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL. JNTET. EN le Nise ata\nileteloys’ hen JOM ABe se soc a5 so bdo Gadp odeaGoon so. November, CHAPMAN, FRANK M., Assoctate Editor....... ea cccuelatotoe ce COMMITTEES. Committee on Publications. BREWSTER, WILLIAM, Chairman. ALLEN, J. A. SAGE, JOHN H., Secrezary. CHAPMAN, FRANK M DUTCHER, WILLIAM. Committee of Arrangements for the Meeting of 1897. BREWSTER, WILLIAM, Chatrman. DuTCHER, WILLIAM. SAGE, JOHN H., Secretary. DwiGuHT, JONATHAN, Jr. CHAPMAN, FRANK M. 1897. 1897. 1897. 1897- 1897. 1897. 1897. 1897. 1897. 1897. 1897. 1897. 1897. 1897. 1897. 1897. x Active Members. MEMBERS! OF THE AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’ UNION. DECEMBER, 1895. |. ACTIVE MEMBERS. [Omission of date indicates a Founder. ] Date of Election. ALDRICH, Hon. CHARLES, Boone, Lowa... ..60-..s2c0cccececcsccscs — ALLEN, Dr. J. A., Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York City...........- — AntTuHony, A. W., 1929 Front St., San Diego, Cala................. 1895 Barrows, Prof. W. B., Agricultural College, Ingham Co., Mich....1883 BATCHELDER, CHARLES Foster, Cambridge, Mass.......---+-++-+--- = BELDING, LYMAN, San Diego, Cala-....- 22222202 ssccscecccssncces 1883 BENDIRE, Maj. CHARLES E., U. S. A., Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D. C..-... eee eee ece rece ee ce cc ecce see ecc cece = BICKNELL, EUGENE P., P. O. Box 2958, New York City.............. — *BREWSTER, WILLIAM, Cambridge, Mass........-+seeeesseececces = Brown, NATHAN CLIFFORD, 85 Vaughan St., Portland, Me......... = BRYANT, WALTER E., 1352 Franklin St., Oakland, Cala..-.......... 1888 CHADBOURNE, Dr. ARTHUR P., 225 Marlborough St., Boston, Mass..1889 CHAMBERLAIN, MonTaGue, Harvard College, Cambridge, Mass.... — CHAPMAN, FRANK M., Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York City...... 1888 Cooke, Prof. W. W., State Agricultural College, Fort Collins, Colo. 1884 = CORWALOLARICE Siam OStOM am VilaisSionstefetelels eferelate eve/o1 o/cle «)oiel'e) !s\sielatel sverelets — *Coues, Dr. ELLIoTT, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D. C... — DEANE, RUTHVEN, 24 Michigan Ave., Chicago, II]...............4.. 1883 DutcHerR, WILLIAM, 525 Manhattan Ave., New York City.......... 1886 Dwieut, Dr. JONATHAN, Jr., 2 East 34th St., New York City......... 1886 ELLioT, DANIEL G., Field Columbian Museum, Chicago, IIl........ — Faxon, Dr. WALTER, Mus. Comp. Zo6l., Cambridge, Mass........- 1896 FisHer, Dr. ALBERT K., Dept. of Agriculture, Washington, D. C.... — Foster, LYMAN S., 35 Pine Street, New York City................s. 1888 GitL, Prof. THEoporE N., Smithsonian Institution, Washington, 1D SEK OOO COO TRIO ERO HIG SOICS SOCIAL ky ok hac one I eae ats 1883 GRINNELL, Dr. GEorGE BirD, ‘Forest and Stream’ Office, New York City...--seeee. a PE avon eae e ere Ue eters Tale tals era's o:-8:0,\0 0. ore & eliakerer ee oer 1883 HeNnsHAw, Henry W., Bureau of Ethnology, Washington, D. C....1883 MANGDON, Drab. W., 65 West 7th st.,.Cincinnati, O.. :. sje. mci elel- 1887 1 Members of the Union and Subscribers to ‘The Auk’ are requested to promptly notify the publisher of ‘the Auk’ of any change of address. * Life Member. Honorary Members. xi LAWRENCE, NEWBOLD T., 51 Liberty St., New York City.......--. 1883 Loomis, Leveretr M., California Acad. Sci., San Francisco, Cala..1892 Lucas, Freperic A., U. S. Nat. Mus., Washington, D. C............1892 NMGCIEWARATRH cE ONMAS se ELariailco tien Oimtatsl Ojsicinalaielel) cielereie!clslelslchelalviersietd = MEARNS, Dr. EpGar A., U.S. A., Fort Myer, Va., via Washington, MD Ge erersreretare pereyaretavste vs, oietate ares chars (erstahe: tnevallsie jave-sisiie' e eyavateveretcneue evelalans = MerrRIAM, Dr. C. Harr, Dept. of Agriculture, Washington, D.C... — AMERRILE, Dir AMES ©.)1U- 5) AL Hort sherman, Udahos eciec «jee 1883 NEHRLING. H., Public Museum, Milwaukee, Wis..........seeeeeees 1883 NELSON, E. W., Dept. of Agriculture, Washington, D. C........... 1883 Purpig, Henry A., Room 36, State House, Boston, Mass.........-. ._— RipGWway, ROBERT, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D. C..... = ROBERES) Dir MHOMAST OS. Nimmeapoliss Militia ecterelelalslel lee sle% elaisis)< «rele 1883 *SAGE, JOHN H->, Portland, Conn.....-.-- 0. ..c.c0csceescecneesecs 1883 SAGINDERS sv VUE rani Heels Onl Gd Omen © mite ial Onjetetelclaicies)slel clcleielclonelelele olelelelaye 1883 *SENNETT, GEORGE B., Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York City........ 1883 SHUFELDT, Dr. RoBperr W., U. S. A., Smithsonian Institution, Wasimimedi@in, IDS (Cacgooo ondnan caunoouodnoopUUDdOUDOD DOUSED — STEJNEGER, Dr. LEONHARD, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, NDC rere patches c eeunstets wvovelerstatetsi ec sicveverauaie satan at erate fe cjetereieiets-slavelayels 1884 STONE, WiTMm_ER, Acad. Nat. Sci., Philadelphia, Pa...........+...-- 1892 *TRUMBULL, GURDON, 970 Asylum Ave., Hartford, Conn.........-.. 1888 WELD NUANNG Oro Ola Onrciand. avon ere cere «es cieje anorerereralsy cus ctoteieterer eis elers 1884 HONORARY MEMBERS. BERLEPSCH, Count Hans von, Miinden, Germany......-.-...-...- 1890 BLANFORD, Dr. WILLIAM T., 72 Bedford Gardens, Kensington, W., London, England.........-.....-- BA OC OEnO a AOCOGaC 1895 BocaGE, Prof. J. V. BARBOZA bu, Royal Museum, Lisbon........... 1883 CaBANIS, Prof. Dr. JEAN, Alte Jacobsstrasse, 103 a, Berlin........... 1883 DresseER, Henry Eeves, Topclyffe Grange, Farnborough, Becken- Naa, MS abies Ja aed BieVeleg oe bacoGe door eoop eso Gneen oo Combe Golo 1883 PiInscH, Dr Orro, Delminhorst, near Bremen... =. <<)... 06106 on 1883 GATKE, HEINRICH, Helgoland, via Bremen «...-.....--.. 2.0.00. 1884 GiGLioLt, Dr. HENry HILLYER, Director Royal Zodlogical Museum, GTO perc Cece rere tere erent whats coe wea ie eis eyo ata cole i cVous: o averete ev etanel Neieie te 1883 IBUNR ney Nos, 1Din, (Guam, IBreinnocagsoboboddnccoo ocenooudodDadcdc 1883 Hume, ALLAN OcraviAN, The Chalet, Kingswood Road, Upper Nor- WOO, ILejavetor, Sq Wcoocccnddouseccnvoccds C6asdONUOOgd O0aC 1883 MILNE-EDWARDS, Prof. ALPHONSE, Rue Cuvier, 57, Paris........... 1883 Newron, Prof. ALFRED, Magdalene College, Cambridge, Eng....... 1883 * Life Member. xii Corresponding Members. ReicHENow, Dr. ANTON, Kénigl. Mus. fiir Naturkunde, Invaliden Str., 43, Berlin..-..--+-+---- gc OUCoUE ORO HOOD Boone pada or -- 1891 Satvaport, Prof. Count Tommaso, Zo6él. Museum, Turin, Italy. -.1883 SaALVIN, OsBert, Hawksfold, Fernhurst, Haslemere, England...---- 1883 Saunpers, Howarp, 7 Radnor Place, Hyde Park, London, W.-.---- 1884 ScLtater, Dr. Puirie Luriey, 3 Hanover Sq., London, W....----- 1883, Suarpr, Dr. RicHarp Bowpter, British Museum (Natural History), Cromwell Road, London, S. W....-ssseeseeees rere ce recess 1883 WaALLace, Prof. ALFRED RussEL, Corfe View, Parkstone, Dorset, Bong lama «66. 2a ein 05 eis ol minnmn) alm slates e'niey ele cininrsi> eininl oie” manieechei i 1883 CORRESPONDING MEMBERS. ALFARO, ANASTASIO, Director National Museum, San José, Costa er id SRS EGO Con COOH aD nom ocr os dno] c006 ddcrotiac 1888 Attrum, Dr. C. A., Eberswalde, Germany..----- cl ote ejalfeleotetunstoNerelei= -- 1884 ANDERSON, Dr. JoHN, India Museum, Calcutta..-.-+++++++++- Spo ooNtstey-l Biasius, Dr. RupotpH, Brunswick, Germany. --+++-++e essere eee cess 1884 Biasius, Dr. WiLHELM, Brunswick, Germany.---++++++++eee eee eee 1884 Brooks; W. Epwin, Mount Forest, Ontario.....-++eeeee cere rece ees 1886 Butter, Sir WaLteR Lawry, Wellington, New Zealand..-..---- - 1883 Bureau, Dr. Lours, Ecole de Médicine, Nantes, France....--+++++- 1884 Burter, Lieut.-Col. E. A., Brettenham Park, Bildeston, Suffolk, PM Gland sie we ean cc econ cee cence Velsinieis senses aes ee selene 1884 BUrrTiKoFER, Dr. J., Leyden, Holland.........----+eeeecssssereccee 1886 Crarke, Wn. EAGLE, Science and Art Museum, Edinburgh.....-- 1889 Cotiett, Prof. RoBert, Zodlogical Museum, Christiania, Norway.1883 Coorrr, Dr. J. G., Haywards, California..-..---++++esseeeeseeeees 1884 CorpEAux, JoHN, Great Cotes, Lincoln, Eimelan dale ciee%2'- = attati=c 1884. DALGLeisH, JouN J., Brankston Grange, Bogside Station, Stirling, SeotlaniG cemeciocwirstm sveiteriersis ss crcl oc Bete aie ea sno iors ioe a iohatet enone 1883 Davin, L’Abbé ARMAND, Rue de Sévres, 95, Paris.-----+++++++-++++ 1883 Dore, SANFORD B., Honolulu, Hawaiian Ids..----+--++ sees eee eee 1888 DuBois, Dr. ALPHONSE, Museum Nat. History, Brussels-..-------- 1854 Ducis, Prof. ALFREDO, Colegio del Estado, Guanajuato, Mexico...-1884 Ecut, ADoLPH BACHOFEN VON, Nussdorf, near Vienna..----+----- 1883 Fatio, Dr. VicTror, Gener aa SmieZOrlAnd css secs os auine ne clots male 1884 FEILDEN, Lieut.-Col. H. W., West House, Wells, Norfolk, Eng...--- 1884 FeRRARI-PEREZ, Prof. FERNANDO, Naturalist Mexican Geol. Expl. Commission, Pueblo, Mexico....-. +--+ .eee-s rece ee sree eens 1885 FreKE, Percy Evans, Rosemount, Dundrum, Co. Dublin, Ireland. .1883 FUGRBRINGER, Dr. Max, Jena, Germany...---++++++++++- Anoddovscocd 1891 Gapow, Dr. Hans, Zoélogical Museum, Cambridge, England...-- 1884 GIrTANNER, Dr. A., St. Galle, Switzerland.... 1.2... esseeeeeeereees 1884 Corresponding Members. xiii Gopman, F. Du Cane, 10 Chandos Street, Cavendish Sq., London. .1883 Gopwin-AusTeEN, Lieut-Col. H. H., Shalford House, Guilford, Eng- lkWVElacboocccacbotcoomconp buon ona dne coe bOacoODOOSoD GOS oo ee 1884 GRANDIDIER, ALFRED, 6 Rond-Point des Champs Elysées, Paris..---1883 GuRNEY, JOHN Henry, Keswick Hall, Norwich, England...-.......- 1883 HarTertT, Ernst, Zoological Museum, Tring, England.........-.-- 1891 HARTING, JAMES EpmMuND, Linnean Society, Burlington House, Pic- cadilly, London......2--..ceeeceee ccc n ween cece cece cece cnes 1883 Harvirz-Brown, JoHn A., Dunipace House, Larbert, Stirlingshire, Syeoennelogoooddooo hood addecd 4 BACH O.OTiO DEIO,.COO Cac Acmroaodas 1883 Hayek, Dr. GUSTAV VON, Vielina..-....ccccere seers ter ec es cnccene 1884 IANS ONP ELAR Van fe LOK OL ATI an cttslete cleleleiciclelsiicielelslaielsleile| sielsieretas/s\e) <\s clolelalcie =ise)elelsler= 1896 ANNIE \o Teles IG ENA TS, AhoyKerMion (Caitosocousosbdoocodasha vobcor 1895 INROIBR, Weng -uy (limits Shen ts NC 5ocoabo0sc coos sugan5oU dono 1888 ARNOLD, EDWARD, 126 Van Buren St., Battle Creek, Mich......... 1894 ATHERTON; FRANK IrvinG, Los Gatos, Cala...-...:...-.2-:+---05 1894 ERKIN Se OEUND Wie, INES WES, EMOTIG arenas miele eieraitelelateteisietslelete ley siare 1887 ATKINSON, GEORGE EpbDGAr, 81 Borden St., Toronto, Can........- 1894 ACE EWATERS Ii. Sal AmMtOmlon muexcasmenctretelstetetsiaieiertentieie tteyerisiers tiers 1891 AsAainits (Ca lxep lpimy lereatelegeyoode, (Combicocdascosonon00bdago On00d000 wr 1885 BABBIED AMES P., Damtoms Mats siecle erasers ele eieteele\e/=/-1e)ele|o/<) 21/165 1891 BACON, CARRINGTON ‘C:, Imboden, Arkansasee siete cecites- e's oe crslele 1890 BAGG WHGBERT, 160 Genesee .at..1 UitlGasmNemypleliyastieciorle icici tach 1883 BAnE CARLETON R., Ioittle dock lowas creer tier cecineretn eo cane 1891 BALE. Miss HELEN AUGUSTA, Wiorcestets Massy cts: a teicieie-1 cs slsie ere ee 1893 BAER V+ VERNON, Blk Raver, Mitrmicr selec ieoye clei sletelcintete rieiesicel cio 1887 BAe. CHARLES: 1., Maldens (Maissiicwiietocteieretteeiereretailaienelerclere) ctoteterciate 1890 BAIEY,, WILLIAM IL., 421 (Chestnut ot., Philadelphia; Pa cater. «61-1 es) 1885 BAKMRE OAR, bes Auburn, Ala anaclescist-tertensp tote che teicneleieiereiorclererelenerevars 1893 BAKER, FRANK CoLtins, Acad. Sci., Lincoln Park, Chicago, Ill...... 1894 BanGs, EDWARD APPLETON, 22 Pemberton Sq., Boston, Mass....... 1884 BANGS, OuTRAM, 22 Pemberton Sq., Boston, Mass......... Srelevela ate 1884 BANKS, JAMES W., St. John, N. B..... aL lorie re rajaraterele bGyesbrevelstaus aie, e/eiete 1887 Bargour, Prof. Erwin H., Univ. of Neb., Lincoln, Nebraska.......1892 BARCLAY, ROBERT COCHRANE, Cazenovia. NamYencee vite cic cic el = cv clare 1896 BARLOW. CHESTER. Santa Clara. G@allavsecjatteiserersienerey-teiicle ce cie/srece tains 1894 BARNARD; JOB, 500 5th St., N: W., Washington, D.\C..-.... 0... 0. . 1886 BARNES lon Rk. Mi. acotis Llli sss scireronnciteriete sus sone ae eistoeien emer 1889 BARNEY. SEVERE DD bl., SOpringtield, Nias S\acteta ste ..1895 BEHR, EDWARD A., 428 Henry St., Brooklyn, N. Y....-........-.-%- 1892 BELLows, Epwarp D., 2154 4th St., Jersey City, N. J---.......s.-. 1889 Benners, Geo. B., 122 Walnut St., Philadelphia, Pa..............-- 1889 BENT, ARTHUR CLEVELAND, Taunton, Mass.......------+..--+-+-- 1889 BERGTOLD, Di.) Weel s2naChamparst, Denver, Colo: ei. el lel): 1889 BERIER, DELAGNEL, Ridgewood, .N. J.----..-..2seeeseseeceeec cece 1885 3IGKLOW, JOSEPH SMITH, Jr., 251 Commonwealth Av., Boston, Mass.1896 BILE CHARLES wis prinet elim MaSSa-leletelelels eclelalele = elalolelallel*/o) =) elelele/e)lal- 1889 BEL GURDON oie fel dae Nass alec let oiaetere «ele cre)aleie alls'<|sle/sie/eloie'ain'aye sire 1896 BIRCHFIELD, Dr. CHARLES EDWARD, St. Joseph, Mich............. 1895 BrisHop, Dr. Louis B., 77 Whitney Ave., New Haven, Conn........ 1885 BLACKWELDER, ELioT, Morgan Park, Cook Co., Ill............... 1895 BLATCHLEY, W. S., State Geologist, Indianapolis, Md.........-...-- 1895 BOARDMANG GEORGE SAGs Calais mV alitd Getto elelele! «/a)s/ets aie) sletelarel alc! eielalelelel als 1883 Bonn, FRANK, Cheyenne, Wyoming.......--.----ese--s eee eens 1887 BOND LUA Revol NUE VG Enlwl © wialeleiestetelsloloiclslalelera isl steln's slot stelaleiclerslel etelens 1890 BOWERS] eIONE) - Columbiay Wancasters Cou Palsictsjc cl\eslcicls clelelete 1894 Bowes, JoHN Hooper, Tacoma, Wash....--.--+.-+--e+eeseseccees 1895 BRACKE DD eb OS TERM. OX! 2140," DOStOM) MIASStn «lel elale\elslelcle ofall 1895 BRADRORDNIGSES: bam loen © ONCOnGs, Mats Sete elerolelectslelsiclelsielcisletaiaienste sta 1889 BRAISLIN, Dr. WILLIAM C., 217 St. James Place, Brooklyn, N. Y....1894 BRANDON, JOHN A., 739 28th St., Milwaukee, Wis.........-........ 1896 BRANDRETH, FRANKLIN, Sing Sing, N. Y.-.22-..eesccccsccccnss eens 1889 BREW SDE Rams eo mn NO UT canny Vill Cinever eyes etsiolelie/eleletalaycleiareils) ste\=pavaier 1893 syndic, (Civiwiswoe Sh, iene IN, (Co ceccoscncssb55G5KD OnonbU COU 1888 BROCK HENRY HERBERT. Ve Dl POrtkainds Mee ciereic olole) «16 elele\e\ ol olele es 1894 SRO RaW aan ee eee iti Elen Minn Gl istepetess tal cbetenad ot sycratensiie\ra\clavars astevetel sisvaveoses oreys 1893 Brooks, EARLE A., Morgantown, Upshur Co., W. Va...........--. 1892 Brown, A. D., Pipestone, Minn......-.-.ecceccecceccccce cscs scenes 1891 Brown, Epwarp J., 820 20th St., N. W., Washington, D. C........ 18g1 BROWNE LER WRG CSOMMmeA IZ Oli aleletsl sialeysielelel ciel cle) cieteleleieteler aie ateietisie 1885 Brown, HusertT H., 70 Collier St., Toronto, Ontario .............. 1889 Brown, JOHN CLIFFORD, 28 W. 37th St., New York City........... 1888 Brown, STEWARDSON, Germantown, Philladephia, Pa.............. 1895 BROWNE Wille MOMmViewm)|[eoan SOM vill ep mIVUa'S Slate) ere! efalels) ofela!o1\clelaelala) = elnls\« 1892 BROWNE, FRANCIS CHARLES, Framingham, Mass.........-.-- 2.006: 1883 BRUCE. MARY, EyMiny,sasthamiptoms | Miasseec i> o\-\e\olsle «1 clelslelele «1 «1210 1894 BrYAN, WILLIAM ALANSON, State College, Ames, Iowa........... 1894 BRYANT, JOHN A., 915 Main St., Kansas City, Mo...........+..-- 1893 BRYANT, Dr. Wm. SAwyER, 53 State St., Boston, Mass.....-........ 1893 BuLLARD, CHARLES, Camalbuid oe we Mais Siereteteie ola aleletetapatalclaleleselaelsiole «+--+ 1896 BUMERYAIMEGINAL DD ble Cantons Onl Ole stetsievelerctstel-letereieisisielicleterevelacrertele 1889 BURDICK AIDING lake © ity, Mimic el aroire el-s-leloler“1-\ollo1o/sfele)alalel =i lcleleletelts/siele 1896 xvi Associate Members. BURNEDD, WILLtam Io. Bort Collins, (O10). sa. 20» oe «« epic 1895 BuRNS, FRANK L., BerWyn, Chester Co., Pa......... Slates scahectelel eee 1891 GRaAtes5, Winton lenin Nein, IN Wossonodncdedud Soppaoppdboooconcs 1895 Burton, H. C., 228 South St., New York City........-----ssee0- 1893 BU PEER APANOS @W too lve wlmdmecccicis selel- vie ele cle) -lele ee cee ee 1885 BuxBauM, Mrs. Ciara E., 2510 Prairie Av., Chicago, Ill.....-...- 1895 Carr, AUBREY, BRENDON, Eeterbono, No Hie. 3... 6. ce «= 0+ «6 sie lela iatels 1894 CAMPBELE, ROBERT ARGYLE, Phenix, Arizona’ «. >.<. » «ls + 0cie)-tlels 1894 CARPENTER, CHARLES KNAPP, Baileyville, Ill.................-s-- 1894 CARRUTH, CHARLES THEODORE, 4 Fayerweather St., Cambridge, IN als Srovovatenetetcnevelebevener Tice anetetete rol oitevarsvorele feito cevelelolie vove/fatepoucteatereneneremtte 1891 Cary, CLINTON DE LA MOoNTAIGNE, 181 W. 135th St., New York Ciliheacobs sdoG.cne monop o6 / Sone Nase DOOO Oe Ooraericnn as eo. ronic 1894 CASE; CripFoRD M.,'54 Babcock St., Hartford, Conn.........--22.0- 1892 (CASE CALPE RINE Sil ee Acy Onleg G@ Ol Maereuetebatelisleia (ol olleie/s'o'e lel.clelciove Gleleiel cle ele 1894 CHAMBERLAIN, CHAUNCY W., 51 Lincoln St., Boston, Mass......... 1885 CHAPIN, Prof. ANciz Ciara, Wellesley, Mass....-...---.02+ 2-2-0. 1896 Case, Mrs. AGNES, 200 Honore St., Chicago, Ill................. 1896 CHASE, VIRGINIUS HIEBER, Wady Petra, .Ill........-.......-.e5--06 1892 CHERRIE, GEORGE K., Field Columbian Museum, Chicago, Ill....-. 1891 CHUBB, SAMUEL H., 8 W. 115th St., New York City.............. 1894 CuurcH, Miss Harriet DuDLEy, South Parsonsfield, Me.......-.-1895 CLARK, HuBertT LyMANn, 906 McCulloh St., Baltimore, Md........ 1886 CLARK, JOHN Wiz eay brook, (COMM ce. .ciricye csc ciciec oilsie o'cssic seems s 1885 CLark, Josiam H., Paterson, Ni. J-.s2- 20s ccwve cer ccccsesccsescece 1895 (Qi, IMMSS Ieluaore 1.4 WWionessiaie, MIRISSc coon soadooDooeGn ooUoDS 1896 CLEARWATERS, Rev. JOHN FRED, Indianola, Ill.........---..-.-.-. 1895 Coase, H. K., 1305 Chamber of Commerce, Chicago, Ill........... 1883 (Corsiois, IDXepnieiny Ae, /Nilznaneely, (CAN. oe Sonb copacuo0oodno cous aodonocE 1895 COoOEBURIN,, ALBERT EE...) MOUunmtRVieTnnOnniINe Wictcislelelc os reise olslelelole «fel 1891 CoLBurRN, W. W.., Springfield, Mass.........-+. 222222202 00ceeeees 1889 Coie, Leon J., Grand Rapids, Mich......... sss seee cece ee ee cece 1896 CoLT, WILLIAM C., 59 Pleasant St., Worcester, Mass.-...----..-..- 1892 CoOEVIN, (WALTER S2, OSaiwatomie sy NansSadSrccisleeiale) ecle cle «= lelale on elelale 1896 COMBS, BERTIE ICAW RENCE WidCO dle xaSieleleleleleie fee + lise elem \-[teroisie 1895 ComMEAU, NAPOLEON A., Godbout, P. Q...---- see cece ee ee ee ence eens 1885 Conpir, Dayton Lorp, St. Anthony Park, Minn........--....... 1894 CoNGDON, E. MORGAN, Ripon, WiS..-..-.-----ccceecscccesseeecocs 1896 ConGpon, HERBERT WHEATON, 194 Clinton St., Brooklyn, N. Y...1893 CONKLIN, CHARLES E., Roslyn, N, Y.----+ sees cece cece cece cee ewes 1892 Cook, ALBERT JOHN, Claremont, Cala......+-+++seeeee ee eeeeeeeeee 1894 Corr, ALBAN, Hartford Gommeecieittretoelclst-i2 lo <6. +. 0c sieresirecetere 1885 Corr, Francis R., Jr., Germantown, Philadelphia, Pa.............- 1892 Coues, Dr. WILLIAM PEARCE, 90 Charles St., Boston, Mass.......-. 1888 Cox, Utyssrs O., State Normal School, Mankato, Minn........... 1894 Cram, R. J., 26 Hancock Ave., W., Detroit, Mich..........--.----- 1893 Assoctate Members. XVil CRANDALL, C. W., Woodside, Queen’s Co., N. Y.----eeeeeeee scenes 1891 CRANDALL, SILas W., 169 LaSalle St., Chicago, Ill...............- 1896 CRONE, JOHN V., Sheridan, Wyoming......-..e--+ esse cece cece eee 1893 CurRIigE, RoLitaA P. 1133 13th St., N. W., Washington, D. C....... 1895 CURRIER, EDMONDE SAMUEL, Keokuk, Iowa.........--+++s-++++-e- 1894 DIARINZ ER: (GuAR TEN s Sta Me Ouse NOs s vies shesiehe sicais)e) sais si sre 'ereiatelelal alle sietols cis 1888 Darrin, W. H., 5000 Franklin St., Philadelphia, Pa...........---- 1892 DAGGETT, FRANK S., Pasadena, Cala....-........--.--2+e+-eeeeeee 1889 DaKIN, J. A., Syracuse, N. Y...-22-.eeese cece ee cece cece cece ee cee 1895 DansBy, DurRwWARD E., Custer City, South Dak...-.....----++------ 1895 DaNniEL, JOHN W., Jr., Lynchburg, Va... -.++ cece ce eee e ee eect cece 1895 Davis, DENNIS BARNES, 816 Colfax St., Toledo, Ohio............. 1894 IDA, GiaORrew FAs. MIE SEOs IN. MW ooonooctou cbonbooUGOUdoU UcODuHauKS 1890 Davis, Minor, Cambridge, Mass...-.-- +--+ eseeee ce eeeececeeeeeeee 1896: Davis, NATHAN L., Brockport, N. Y ..--- esses s cece see cece cee 1893; Davison, J. L., Lockport, Niagara Co., N. Y.--.+ eee eee seen ee ee es 1885 Dawson, WILLIAM LEON, Oberlin, Ohio........-...-.ecesceseeees 1895 Dean, R. H., 918 O St., N. W., Washington, D. C..............-- 1893 DER LUA EN SAA CH NORRTSs eA nmlOTesm baemtstelsisteleretsteralle/e) siete) stale alerelafais 1893 DELAFIELD, JOSEPH L., 475 Fifth Ave., New York City......-.-.... 1888 DENNE, Davip, 100 St. Francois Xavier St., Montreal, Can........ 1890 DETWILLER, Dr. JNo. W., Bethlehem, Pa........--. +--+. ----------e- 18gt Dewey, Miss MARGARET, 168 Pearl St., Springfield, Mass........... 1892 DickINSON, EDWIN, West Springfield, Mass...-...-..--++--++eeeeee 1885 Dickinson, JosepH A., Gresham, Nebr...-..--...eeeee2 sees ee eee 1894 DICKINSON, JoSEPH EDWARD, Rockford, Ill..------.-222 esse eee eee 1894. DICKINSON, W.S., Tarpon Springs, Fla..............-........--.-- 1891 DILLeE, FREDERIC M., 406 McPhee Bldg., Denver, Colo............- +1892 Dionne, C. E., Laval Univ., Quebec, Can. ---............2....-.-. 1893 Dixon, FREDERIC J., Hackensack, N. J... 3----. se eeee eee ee cee e ween 1891 DOERTENBACH, WILLIAM FAUTZ, 226 Main St., Pueblo, Colo....... 1894 DOouGHERTY, Capt. W. E., U. S. A., Hoopa Valley, Cala............. 1890 Douctass, Bert H., Burlington, Kansas ..----.+-.++ esse eee eee eee 1890 IDR, IL WAS MON Aance Were, Wns ocaccoodeccodo0ecndd Gooocone UG 1894 Drake, Mrs. SarAuw TRUE, 10 Hamilton Place, Jersey City, N. J..-.1895 DURFEE, OWEN; Pall River, Mass.c... 6. .0cc< cece ccccss cece se ciccs 1887 Duals, IDPs 1. eles Wis Sie te, Wieislentiovedwoyo, IDs (C@S5Gceccaducucgus- 1886 DY CHE) Profs laa le su dwEemGes IGamSaS\ere cic clei! o/eis/=)s\eleleis ic) biee)=)> ele(el le leis 1886 EaMEs, Dr. Epwin H., Bridgeport, Conn. ..........--++seeeses eee 1888 EASTMAN, Harry D., Framingham, Mass..........0.¢-seseeesesess 1891 Baron, E. H., Canandaigua, N. Y....-.---2----- 2222 eee ee cece ees 1895 Eppy, NEWELL A., 615 North Grant St., Bay City, Mich........... 1885 EpGar, NEWBOLD, 28 E. 39th St., New York City -.........+.+--... 18g Epson, JoHN M., New Whatcom, Washington.... +--+ ..eeee+eeeeeee 1886 EDWARDS, WILLIAM SEyYMouR, Charleston, W. Va.......---+eeee- 1894 ELDON, CHARLES H:, Williamsport, Pa...................:...-.0 1891 Xvill A ssoctate Members. ELRop, Prof. M. J., Illinois Wesleyan Uniy., Bloomington, Ill. ....1892 EMERSON, CHARLES J., Stoneham, Mass.iecesccedesceescvcececnss 1896 EmLen, Anruur Core, Awdury, Germantown, Philadelphia, Pa...1896 Evans, Dr. EvAN M., Englewood, Ni. JucsccsccccvcccecnncesceveeeseI@Q8 EVERMANN, Prof. BARTON W., U.S. Fish Comm., Washington, D. C. 1883 FANNIN, JOHN, Provincial Museum, Victoria, B. C........ oc obs CuReee FANNING, JED FRYE, 216 Spring St., Portland, Me......eeeeeee eee 1895 FARLEY, JOHN A., Newton, Mass..sees cccevese cece ceseceencccenenselSQa FARWELL, ELLEN DRumMMonD, Lake Forest, II]......0....00+0000+1896 FERGUSON, CHAUNCEY COFFIN, Merrimac, Mass........ee0+e 0000001896 FeRNALD, Roperr Heywoop, 26 Cornell St., Cleveland, Ohio......1894 Ferry, JOHN FARWELL, Andover, Mass.....- ewe ances enc wcens easin welod FIncH, Miss ADELAIDE VICTORIA, Lewiston, Me,, .......0000+ e000 ee T8O6 Fisuer, Miss ErizAneruH WILSON, 1502 Pine St., Philadelphia, Pa....1896 FisHerR, WILLIAM H., 1602 Mt. Royal Ave,, Baltimore, Md........1895 Fisner, WILLIAM HusBecL, 12 Wiggins Block, Cincinnati, Ohio,...1883 FLEMING, JAMES H., Toronto, Can. ..ccccceccceccencee sens cree cece 1893 FLint, HArry W., Yale National Bank, New Haven, Conn........1888 FLINT, WILLIAM R,, Oakland, Cala... .scccssseccccee esse eens cese es 1890 FORBUSH, EDWARD H., Malden, Mass...secesesesee cece cence eeeee es L887 Foster, Francis Apruorp, Cambridge, Mass... ...ee.--.. 0.04 e+ ++ 1893 FOWLER, FREDERICK HALL, Fort Logan, Colo. .......ee seen eee ee ee 18Q2 Fow er, Capt. J. L., ad Cavalry U.S. A., Fort Logan, Colo..... .. 1892 Fox, Dr. WriLitAm H., 1826 Jefferson Place, Washington, D. C.......1883 Frost, ALBERT H., 255 W. 74th St., New York City... ..oe cee econ ee 1893 WUBRTES, LOUTS AGASSIZ, Dthaca. Null uns sincerest ane ecweuie sje w +++ T8QI RULLER, CHARLES ANTHONY, Brookline; Masse. ous oven acca cea 1804 GARCELON, FREDERICK ALMONT, Auburn, Me...-. cece eens ee eee e ee T8Y5 GARMAN, Prof. H., State College, Lexington, Ky. ........+..+++ 000-1893 GARNIER, RALPH Lek, 8 Stockton St., Los Angeles, Cala...........1894 Gautt, BENJAMIN T., Glen Ellyn, DuPage Co., Illl.......... oa e0 ee F885 Gitter, Louis BuIss, 131 E. 76th St.. New York City..............1895 GILMAN, ARTHUR Scorr, 5 Waterhouse St., Cambridge, Mass......1895 GLEASON, Rev. HERBERT W., 728 E. 18th St., Minneapolis, Minn..1894 Goopa.e, Dr. Josepu LINCOLN, 3 Fairfield St., Boston, Mass.......1885 GouLD, JOSEPH E., Dennison, ONi0.... ee cece cee eee nee oe eee T88Q GRANGER, WALTER W., Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York City.......1891 Grant, Jno. B., Flushing, N. Y....... ISRO SCO wee eeee sees I8QO GRAY, RALPH W., 5 Gloucester St., Boston, Mass....... wees nee ee 0 T8Q6 GREEN, Morris M., 706 E. Fayette St., Syracuse, N. Y.............. 1886 Greoe, Dr. Wittram H., Port Chester, N. Y.......... av eaneeces s 3 0t883 GRINNELL, JOSEPH, Pasadena, Cala... eeeeceeeeee cence cee eeeeee oe ISQY4 Haun, Rev. BENJAMIN DAviese, 266 Union St., Springfield, Mass...1894 Hainss, Epwin IRVINE, New Rochelle, Ne Yueescescccnecceveces 02 I8Q6 Hates, HENRY, Ridgewood, N. ]..-- Sealine steis Sine teen eee eeee ee eee LSQO Ham, Jupson BAXTER, Lyndon Centre, Vt......ceccnneenncencs +++ 1894 Assoctate Members. xix SUNS iat, Igy (Olen 1 lhovicnan pop noon acno0 Do pa tO Gane Paterno ar 1892 FUMING EORGH ys DOLie len Ome peso) ele slo's pieis ole o.eieie. cle, -/lo.eis'a oie 1893 Hancock, Dr. JoserpH LANE, Michigan Ave., Chicago, IIl........-. 1894 Hareirt, Prof. CHarLtes W., 909 Walnut Ave., Syracuse, N. Y..--.- 1892 UME WT UA WIN STEVE EVLA Ite, sro'riarciete o:o/siielers’ e-e'o\ o!0l'o.p eleliere 6,2 cletn)a Sixy>'> 1883 PAR US HAV LISA MK e LIA mun IN SN erieiereeiersioialels.214 0 sloieicsl oie = ae ain oiele.ors 1894 HarTZELL, Prof. Josepu Curver, Johns Hokpins Univy., Baltimore, Wid Rereselers etree iis Ceiean aa clone aicio wise s atone nic d oars aisle Groene teretolerers 1892 Hassrouck, Dr. Epwin M., 2510 14th St., N. W., Washington, D.C. .1887 Harcu, Jesse Maurice, Escondido, Cala.......eecsseeccsescccecs 1894 HAVEMEYER, H. O., Jr., 244 Madison Av., New York City........-- 1893 HAZARD, Miss MAry PeEAce, Peace Dale, R. I........ niaiaveter soe Merelors 1896 |Siigaryrany, Wea Gas, (eer D Pye es aoaac.ane JA005 Gog nn6 Aon OA OUND one 1885 Heapuy, Dr. LAwrence F., 104 E. 26th St., New York City-...... 1894 HemmstTrREEtT, Dr. T. B., 14 Division St., Troy, N. Y.------20+-.200- 1588 Hectme, Arruur H., Miller’s Place, Suffolk Co., N. Y..-.22.--2.0- 1888 HENpRIcKSON, W. F., 130 12th St., Long Island City, N. Y........- 1885 MMNNINGAe AR TCM RT TZ OOM LOW Als ixl> ot eisiclelcs oie! ale gia cels sole ofelcle cievele aie 1892 Hicks, BENJAMIN D., Old Westbury, N. Y.----+-sceeccceeccevecese 1892 IG GUNS ELE NR Ve LOTTI CUINETALI Ss) UN ele Kistoietolena’e:sicllel oo 1slatolle oleia atatelals(ain i 1892 Hing, J. BRAINARD, East Onondaga, N. Y.------ssees cece cece cceee 1895 HiInE, Mrs. JANE L,, Sedan, Ind...--2 2. 0eccnecvcceccccccsccccovcres 1890 Hircucock, Frank Henry, Dept. of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. 1891 HoaG, JOHN BENJAMIN, Woburn, Mass..-.----eee+. seeee reer eeeene 1896 HopGpon, Miss MAry JOSEPHINE, Nashua, N. H..-...-.--.-.----- 1896 TOMEMANT HAL EE ISEINLONt. IVLAG Gyles ol eleiole\elolelets aJo\12)a14 ole! «'e ie sletricialelin tele 1893 HoLpEN, EDWARD FREEMAN, Melrose, Mass....-..-+++eeseeeees -+++ 18096 FIGEEISTE RIND OE lAV AI a eV d6islelnilcla)e els) ¢\sln\elsie'= «i's grtte ee eeee es - 1894 Houmes, F. H., Berryessa, Cala...-..-.----ececcceccccesscccscsece 1893 HOLZNER, FRANK X., San Diego, Cala.......0+..cccscarosroscence 1893 Homer, F. L., West Farmington, Ohi0.......2+200.+sececesvecces 1893 Hoopes, Jos1aH, West Chester, Pa...-+-.-eeeeeeeeeceeeeeee cece --- 1889 GOVERN VEN LE Re VV seevV elle valle a) Fale ols)ersiels\ eis o wi usio lata)! 0\ele/sis) o]6) = (o)ehs/ere 1895 Hornapay, W. T., 69 Wall St., New York City....--.++..ss--seeeee 1888 HOMGHe OME NIN Issn WuOwW Valles Nie a Norte o)e series ve otc ch el albialefelle/+¥a\e) o\nysley sraiel = 1883 Monn, (Ge la MWariaaetis N\iisconano dona onau OORT OB OtoD OseD,COUna OD 1891 Howe, REGINALD Heser, Jr., Longwood, Mass......-----+-++++-+++- 1895 Howe ct, Arruur H., Dept. of Agriculture, Washington, D. C...... 1885 Hoyt, WILLIAM ADAms, North Brookfield, Mass......-..02. sssscee 1896 JStopvins MAGMA Isle. Shnlioltorel, (Creyiiitaaeroanovn oder Do GOURO OID OOoOOr 1888 HuBBARD, Mrs. SARA A.,39 33rd St., Chicago, Ill........-......... 1891 HuGueEs, Dr. WILLIAM E., 3726 Baring St., Philadelphia, Pa........ 1891 Huy. WALTER B., Box 47, Milwaukee, Wis........--.---+eeceren-s 1889 HuNN, JOHN T. SHARPLESS, Plainfield, N. J.------++eeeeeeeeeee veces 1895 Hunter, Miss Susa~n Morrison, Newport, R. I...-.---++-s.eeeeees 1894 Hvosier, Dr. J. C., Lanesboro, Minn-«.002..--.» socesecvcscvcececs 1885 Xx Associate Members. INGALLS, CHARLES E., East Templeton, Mass.....--.-cceesscocecess 1885 INGERSOLL, ALBERT M., 818 5th St., San Diego, Cala............... 1885 INGERSOLL, JOSEPH CARLETON, Bowie, Md..---- +. +eeeeeeeeeeeeeeees 1895 ING RAEDANA DEM ee eUla litem @ oll OMemerietelslorictaictels leteloloreoleleralateletelefovetoitore 1889 IrvING, JOHN, 550 Park Ave., New York City...eseeeeeeeeceeee cess 1894 IsHam, C. B., Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York City........-..--..-- 1891 Jackson, THoMAS H., West Chester, Pa....--.eeeeeee eee e cece cece 1888 Jacoss, J. WARREN, Waynesburg, Pa.--.--eeeee eee ee eee cence ee eees 1889 James, Howarp K., Roclanilile, (Corliss sa tad50 sg00d0 00000000 doousd oC 1888 Jerrries, WILLIAM AuGusTus, 78 Devonshire St., Boston, Mass..... 1883 JesuruN, Dr. Mortimer, Douglas, Wyoming..---++seeeeeeeeeeeees 1890 Jos, Rev. HersBert K., North Middleboro, Mass..-..-++.++-- anieretatete 1896 Jounson, ALBERT I., Des Moines, Iowa....---- +--+ e eee eeeeeeeeee 1885 Jounson, A. W., Upper Lake, Lake Co., Cala.-.-.-+-+eeeeeeeeeeee 1893 Jounson, EvERETT EDWIN, Bast Elebromy Mes csle's reels os ceieciets ois ce alere 1896 JOHNSON, FRANK E., Parkville, Kings Co., N. Y..--..2.02--seceeses 1888 Jounson, JAMES Howarp. Miamstiel dem Vials sierersttelolelsielsiereleroheteteionetereis 1894 JoHNson, WALTER A., Gale's purer, MMije.c'= oiwtavels cela) = ate) o'w\a\=\\ni ela rate telere aah 1895 JOHNSON, Win Ss, BOONE Ng Neo aboourdcopcde cocoon sacawesonsos 1893 JouNsTON, CHARLES Haven Lapp, Cambridge, Mass.............. 1894 Jones, Lynps, College Museum, OberhinslOhvoscsesee cece cere ee 1888 Jones, Prof. Marcus E., Salt Lake City, Utah........200.s0c0seeeees 1890 Jorpan, A. H. B., Johnsonburg, Pa....+. eee cere eee ee cece eee eens 1888 JorpaAN, Prof. Davip STARR, Stanford University, Cala....+...++.+-- 1885 Jupp, Ermer T., Cando, No. Datla eyarekarotetavaperstencusteyotnls cusisuelesarsrsyaiesstaievcre 1895 Jupp, SyLvesTeER D., Dept. of Agriculture, Washington, D. C...... 1893 Justice, WILLIAM W., Jr., Germantown, Philadelphia, Pa.......... 1895 KEEKER, WILLIAM A:, Harrisburg, Pas. cece © = o0 ccc eee cciss ce = 1896 KELLOGG, VERNON L., Stanford University, Cala................00- 1888 KENDALL, Dr. W. C., U. S. Fish Commission, Washington, D. C.. - 1886 KENNARD, FREDERIC. HEDGE, Brookline, Mass. ...+.--..-eseeee cece 1892 _ Keyser, Rev. LEANDER S., Dayton, Ht erie cic etere tele ote etereroreus ties 1891 KIMBALL, R. E., 631 G St., N. W., Washington, D. C............... 1892 Kinc, GEORGE Gorpon, Newport, R. I...--..---- 2. ces cece cccccees 1888 KOR KPATRICK, HARRY ©). Meadville: eae: artes m1 ton e)s © oe alele lel slolel sie 1891 KirKwoop, FRANK C., P. O. Box 364, Baltimore, Md.............. 1892 KNIGHT, Ora WILLIS, Bangor, Me....---22--2----- eee cece eee eee 1893 KNOWLTON, EH. Ul S: Nat. Mus: Washington, D. (©... 5... ec 1883 Kocn, Prof. AuGust, Williamsport, Pa.----......--es-e sees cece cess 1891 Koch, “HREDERIC W-,) Univ. Cala.) Berkeley, Calas. «=. -- = see cereals 1891 Koun, GusTAVvE, 14 Carondelet St., New Orleans, La.............-. 1886 KoumMty, Rev. PiRMINE M., St. Benedict’s College, Atchison, Kansas. 1892 KRAEMER, FREDERICK L., Box 198, Williamsport, Pa.........--.... 1893 Krom, STEPHEN ARTHUR, Plainfield, N. J.....-.....2-cccwscie cme 1894 KUMLIEN, Lupwic, Milton, Wis............- Ree Shr chas te ee 1895 Np DA SAMUE TE Dee VVeSEl@ WHESter barter ates ele cla 'eic\cla ololeioleisteleteleieietetelet> 1889 Associate Members. xxl LU ANeiao, Digeinnis Ilb, AUiKooi, 1 lO aco da ooccins oo Dondao DO oDOCUoCD OoUdoc 1893 ILINS@S AuHARaGS Aa Son, Wilton oood Gono bons douo SAS coop Uoooer odd dc 1890 Lanrz, Prof. D. E., State Agl. College, Manhattan, Kansas....-.+.-1885 Lawrence, Hrram V., 203 Bedford Ave., Brooklyn, N. Y.---------- 1895 LAWRENCE, RoBertT B., Flushing, N. Y..-----+-es2 eee cece cece cers 1883 Lawrence, Rospert Hog, 45 William St., New York City...-------- 1890 Lemmon, WILLIAM P., Englewood, N. J.----+--++ + eee ereeee ee ee cee 1896 LreuTLorr, HerMAN C. A., 611 E. 136th St.. New York City...-..-- 1896 Lewis, WiLiiAM H., Pawtucket, R. I.---.......- 2. eee cece ee eeeeee 1890 LinskILL, Davin J., Plymouth, Pa......+---e cece ee cece ee eee eee eeee 1891 GONG) Ele Bee WIOECES ters WlaSSiielael=\relelele stele oleleial-) 2 0)« 10) scl e)e/ela)a'=[e) ein) 1889 Loomis, JOHN A., Paint Rock, Concho Co., Texas..+-+.+++++++++++- 1887 LorinG, J. ALDEN, Dept. of Agriculture, Washington, D. C.....-.--1889 Lowe, WILLouGuHBy P., Goodpasture, Colo.....---+-+++++e+-eee eee 1893 LuuHrRMAN, JOHN, Jr., 158 Pacific Ave., Jersey City, N. J--------+- +++: 1893 Lusk, RicHarD D., Tucson, Ariz........22--- see eeee cece eceee ees 1894 MacDouGatLt, Gro. R., 112 Wall St., New York City....-.-------- 1890 MAcKAyY, Dr. A. H., Halifax, Nova Scotia............02+2--sssccene 1885 Mackay, GeorGE H., Nantucket, Mass...-- +++. +++ ees eee eee e eee 1890 Macoun, Prof. Joun, Geol. and Nat. Hist. Surv., Ottawa, Ontario. . 1883 Macuire, Dr. J. R., Lewistown, Il]... ... eee cece ce eee cece eer eeee 1896 MAILLIARD, JOHN W., 323 California St., San Francisco, Cala....--. 1895 MAILLIARD, JOSEPH, San Geronimo, Cala..--++++++-eeeee cree cree 1895 MAITLAND, RoBeErT L., 10 E. 35th St., New York City....----+---- 1889 Maui, CHartes M., 93 Willow St., Brooklyn, N. Y..--+++++++-+-+-- 1889 Marcy, Prof. OLIvEerR, Evanston, Ill........ a ca isisinsab atc alavav arahovetsis) oieletsisto 1892 MarsH, DANIEL J., Springfield, Mass.....+-++e++eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee 1894 Mason, EpwarpD CAMPBELL, 76 Johnsons Park, Buffalo, N. Y------- 1888 MASTERMAN, ELMER ELLSworTH, New London, Ohio......------- 1895 Maxon, WILLIAM RALPH, 132 Main St., Oneida, N. Y..------------ 1894 May, Frank DwicGut, Jr., 17 Huntington St., Hartford, @ontt!assace 1894 MayYNarD, CoLTon, 1407 15th St., N. W., Washington, D. C....---- 1895 McCook, PuHiLip JAMES, Cambridge, Mass...--++++++++ cere ee eeeees 1895 McCormick, Louis M., Glen Island, N. Y-.-..--++++eeseeeeeeeeee 1892 NcGREGORS ke. Cee alow ANltos Galldiesre = oe cielo ola elieilelelels ejaieielale\ ==! shel =/= 1889 McILHENNy, EpwARD Avery, Avery, La.....-..... Seatbua Wolelated aslorstay ote 1894 McKenzi£, PETER, 4492 St. Catharine St., Montreal, Can.....----+-- 1896 McLain, RospertT Barirp, Palo Alto, Cala...-+--+- 0+ see eeeeeeeeees 1893 MELZER, JAMES P., Milford, N. H..------ esse cece cere ee reece cee cces 1891 Merriam, Miss Frorence A., 1919 16th St., N.W., Washington, D.C.1885 MERRILL, Harry, Bangor, Maine........--.+-02s eee ccete cere cceee 1883 MEeETCALFE, WILLIAM C., 21 Cortlandt St., New York City....------ 1886 MILLER, GERRIT SMITH, Jr., Peterboro’, N. Y..----++----+--+-2 202 1856 MILter, HARRY EDWARD, Derby Conn.....++-+e+-+es cere errr cece 1892 MILLER, JAMES HENRY, Lowville, N. Y.----+-+-++eeeeeeeeeeeecess 1894 Miccer, Mrs. O_ive THoRNE, 628 Hancock St., Brooklyn, N. Y.---- 1887 XXli Associate Members. MILLER, WALDRON Dewirr, Plainfield} IN. J's -c-- cc's siables «i= 1896 Minus. Re WAET ER.) Webster! GrovessiMlOrm elect clelallclelels ole alc lfelale etctare 1893 MITCHELL, WALTON I., 534 Summit Ave., St. Paul, Minn.........- 1893 Moor; J. Percy, Univ. of Pal, Philadelphiay (Pa. - <<. 6 sie.» re)s elete 1886 Morcom, G. FREAN, 330 So. Broadway, Los Angeles, Cala......... 1886 Morison, GrkorGE ABBOT, 34 Shepard St., Cambridge, Mass....... 1896 Morris, GrorGe SPENCER, Olney, Philadelphia, Pa............0- 1887 Morris, RoBertT O., Springfield, Mass......... Eoilsssus(ollololapeks oleh ele toretoners 1888 MORRISON, GEORGEPAS. Hox plWalkert WiScacis <' triste s c\cieleielelcrsieteje eiclarcte - 1891 MuMMERY, WALTER S., Flint, Mich... -...-..--22-.- scene cewceees 1895 MURDOCH; [ OHING IN OCIE IMGs Shalev le lore a1ofolols ofc sn! «) olaiel «1» ole (o/elelalayelataVslefele 1883 NACHTRIEB, Prof. Henry F., Univ. of Minn., Minneapolis, Minn....1892 INVASH OE Win mee] On C© OlOTa dO ercrcdsts cl'crete scl avave slesesisite lelele sists » eiciererete 1892 NEAL, ALBERT EDWARD, 98 Exchange St., Portland, Me............ 1896 NEAL, HERBERT VINCENT, Brookline, Mass....---.++ees+-eeee oct TOG a INT CHOLS EUGENE © 4 ebuut sires Nis Xie epetalala’=/elclofelaleliol a alatele telal2lallelol+/eyalors 1895 INICHOLS: fc Miz, Peabody,’ Mass\-c\cele wm: «'e eee nics sleiee plela picicve wleiole cate 1890 Norris, Guy BRUNAUGH, Garden City, Kansas....2........2-.e00- 1894 Norris, Rev. JAMES Avery, Hastings-on-Hudson, N. Y....-.--.+-- 1894 Norris, J, PARKER, 723 Walnut St., Philadelphia, Pa................ 1886 NORTON, ARTHUR FIC, Westbrook, Matmelece > «\-/crclne i sll») olelelelstle lala aie store 1895 SmiTH, Horace G., 2918 Lafayette St., Denver, Colo..--........... 1888 SmitTH, Dr. HuGH M., 1248 New Jersey Ave., Washington, D.C..... 1886 SMUERH OBER IM IVVIIND SOR] HG SWiOO Cid Gialetais/elcloteteliele se) lste elles talalnlsiiclessle 1895 SMP, CHEODORESE .,) Ora, IN. isis sce nlinileie «61% »0\\0's sie lee e.neee'e) ou 1896 SMITH, S. SIDNEY. 59 Wall St., New York City.........sseeccescee 1888 SmyTH, Prof. Eriison A., Jr., Agr. and Mech. Coll., Blacksburg, Va..1892 OMY DH LULA GeV cust Aves, slnOiys IN, Yee «lecle «'= 0 ciclo + = elim) oiele i= 1896 SNYDER, WILL Epwin, Beaver Dam, Wi's.....--...2+0-20s000s0-ec- 1895 SORNEORGER, JEWELED), Camibridee, Niassve ci cess 1s eles leleiele icine 1888 SOUTHWICK, E. B., Arsenal Bldg., Central Park, New York City..-.1888 SOUTHWICK, JAMES M., 27 Whitmarsh St., Providence, R. I.......--- 1896 SPAULDING URED Dew Game astetsNicmbdecc etc «ec sicle ovehoie eieietereileranels 1894 SPELMAN, HENRY Munson, Cambridge, Mass...--.....--.---seeee- 1883 Assoctate Members. XXV SPRAGUE, JOHN C., 257 W. 74th St., New York City....-.+++-+++-- 1891 SPRATT, CHESMAN CHADWICK, Richmond, Maine........--------- 1894 STANTON, Prof. J. Y., Bates College, Lewiston, Me..-.-..++--++---- 1883 STEERE, JosepH H., Sault Ste. Marie, Mich..-.-..-+-+-+++--+++++---- 1894 STEPHENS, F., Witch Creek, San Diego Co., Cala....-...+..0-+---e- 1883 STEPHENSON, Mrs. Louise McGown, Helena, Ark..----..+++++-++- 1894 STICKNEY, Myron WILDER, 62 George St., Providence, R. I.------. 1895 Shite, Vivo Wor lelevamtisinwires, IPA coo0 aba odosdoboodHo oga0 DOCoDOUDOS OG 1891 STONE, CLARENCE FREEDOM, Branchport, N. Y.-+++++++eeee++ee ee: 1894 Stone, DwicuT D.,,Lansing, N. Y--.---22.----ceccee cess ecce veers 1891 STONEBURN, FRED H., Newark, N. J.-..---- eee cece cece cere ee ecceee 1893 STREATOR, CLARK P., Dept. of Agriculture, Washington, D. C....-- 1889 STRECKER, JOHN KERN, Jr., Waco, Texas... +--+ +e+e++ + eee eeeeeee- 1894 STRONG, REUBEN M., Oberlin, Ohio...< = «cit 010 siece oe elcicln ale o2---1893 WILLIAMS, J. BICKERTON, 116 University St., Montreal, Can........ 1889 WILLIAMS, ROBERT S., Columbia Falls, Montana...........e0seecee 1888 WILLIAMS, W. J. B., Holland Patent, N. Y-.-.---.............. - -- 1893 WILSON; SIDNEY S:, St. Joseph, Mo... 015i. scien ele cleic clete oe 1895 WILSON, WILLIAM EpwarD, 387 Olney St., Providence, R. I........ 1894 WINTLE, ERNEST D.,11 Hospital St., Montreal, Can............... 1887 Woop, NELSON R., Smithsonian Institution, Washington D. C...... 1895 WoopruFF, FRANK M., Acad. Sci., Lincoln Park, Chicago, IIl..-..1894 WoopruFF, LEwis B., 14 East 68th St., New York City.-........... 1886 WoopwortH, Mrs: NEEEY HART, St. Allbamiss Vitec. . crlsleis o siatciee/sie 1894 WORCESTER. Prof. (ORAN C., Ain AisborMIICliiiree = <4 «crea c= 01s) 5) evs leiene 1895 WWiGRTEEH Ne: GEIAIOE ES BVVESaWemlllll eretelercloleyoleetoleteloiatalohelatstelalstaralsietelaiate 18g1 WoRTHINGTON, R. B., Dedham, Mass...-........ rs usatayatathete ick or erate 1893 WoRTHINGTON, WILLIS W., Shelter Island, Suffolk Co., N. Y........ 18S9 WRIGHT, DRANK S-, 51,Genesee ot.,eAUbUt ta Na X51 0 o/n' allel 1894 Wrichr, Mrs. MABEL OSGoop, Mainheld (Conn. «~ . a. sclelolele stoic 1895 WriGHT, Miss NorA GirRALDA, Olneyville, R.I--..--.......--..... 1896 VWiIRIGH DE, MOAMUEIE- | COMSMOMOCK Ete: byclietstelet se =)cie)= olla)» o(alalels as c)o etelateteleterele 1895 YEATON, ARTHUR CHARLES, Deering; Me.-.----. 2.05... 0ccccnceee- 1895 YormeE, Dr P-sHENR Ys Pooslamd solillteryen cia) +1919 01 or cle) ete eletnioliniareleyeielel 1891 Youne, Curtis CLay, 395 Clermont Ave., Brooklyn, N. Y.--...-.+- 1891 Deceased Members. DECEASED MEMBERS. ACTIVE MEMBERS. XXVil Date of Death. BAIRD | SEENCEROH UGH TON tesco = cteteisisinls eieicl siete ciel aie eeote Aug. 19, 1887 KGS SHUN Ss fale a teeta yodeolcre taior 1 itfore SMefelslate’siei ns o'eici ge a/at= (a =e March 10, 1891 FOE DERG OSHEP Hb terete eter avers arasieis ee hele seve lcterre ce (etarey «/cteterere Feb. 28, 1888 PEPE RIES | JORIN | AMORY 24s cleric cate at aici aja'etel cl vicr on sta\arciciais'e'cia'a.e March 26, 1892 NVIEREC AE ONE OEE NN CIM a 12 ste aloha Fo) Sia ta} )aray taba a otclene ral arcnsisioneysneber aie Jan. 28, 1887 HONORARY MEMBERS. IBURMEIS TERS ELE RMANN# 6 ocls\siae, s1c/4)s/06, ee elelete) ellel einai lotr March 25, IRI GEARIDS ON MIEININIE SS crelclevslle\s) oro, «1010/0 o1s/ole isi s)ele/sis) sieve cieleeieieieleieeie June 24, SLND, |AMISS IE bao Gooeso op SOOO BAOONOmeDooso 5 00n0065Gq0dC Feb. —, SMALE, EDGAR Aj ce. - ><. Bicisjeve sisteiess.ousioeencicers iste eete renee April 24, SMEBH p CMARION CHW NEBERD: as c,c'0 11s 0 + c's, vices vem eve verieee ete May 6, OVE VV famed tmeneqetetetsWovel els follete c\ sivera, « @\o'siis afodsi/eiel0,e (eisceretsveteroretotoreie March —, MLSE OR WHS) yt Gretterey syelle)s\fsreieietolelie/eiccioisis ore to. 4) sa a alate ereseevere ie ieneietnieete Sept. 6, WiBRINORy 181. (Ge conn sbceas Odom Os OOSaaOOnpoObOs codscG5cboon June 8, WARE ARID OUNIVUTES TS SVVPENTEIGG te elie) oisie) o/s oiyelsieie\ sisl's/ejela) s s1etel eters at ocelot May 24, NO OD AUVALIDIEWAIND tetas etrorchei stele stelle) o:'c,%|telieve\eievc'e ous oveveneor cuter detec taken Aug. 9, 1893 1893 1885 1894 1888 1894 1889 1895 1893 1885 1889 1895 1895 1393 1895 1885 1894 1894 1888 1888 1890 1895 1890 1896 1891 1893 1895 1893 1895 1884 1896 1895 1896 1884 1887 1885 “e (eas Pore Pre AK, VOL. XIV PEATE Wildl h\ | f M2 5) A.Hoen & Co CN DL eave Ch Onna, Savi DN es See ern Cid wOAvalia Lithacaustic, Baltimore MAE AUK: A OUCAR EE RLY JOURNAL ©OF ORNITHOLOGY: on ELV « JANUARY, 1897. NO. I. NOTES ON A: CAPTIVE, HERMIT THRUSH. BY DANIEL E. OWEN. JUNE 26, 1896, while exploring a small patch of mixed growth in search of birds, I fell in with a young Hermit Thrush, accom- panied by its parents. The young bird was just from the nest and had such ill control of its faculties and muscles that, ulti- mately, after a laborious flight of seven or eight yards, it alighted at my very feet. I captured the youngster, by dropping my hat over it, and having tied the bird, loosely, in my handker- chief, carried it home in my collecting basket. For the next five weeks, the Thrush was my constant study companion, and during this period discovered so many attractive traits that when I came to restore my captive to its native wood, the parting was, to one of us, the occasion of real regret. I domiciled my little orphan in a large, old-fashioned canary cage which was allowed to stand, most of the time, on the sill of an open window. At first the Thrush objected to this durance vile, expressing its distaste by ejaculatory ‘peeps’ which, June 28, attracted to the roof, near the window, a sympathetic Chipping Sparrow, and caused a Robin in a neighboring tree to sound a loquacious and protracted alarm. But the imprisoned bird 2 OwEN, A Captive Hermit Thrush. Ea seemed soon to realize that remonstrance was of no avail, and by June 29 its impatience had given way toa philosophic serenity and composure that rarely were disturbed during the remainder of our acquaintance. It was astonishing to see how quickly and well the Thrush adjusted itself to novel conditions. By the twenty-ninth of June, that is, after three days of confinement, the bird was not only on the best of terms with me, but we had learned to communicate. I found that a very gentle kissing sound, made with the lips, at once attracted its attention, causing it to ruffle its feathers, as young birds do on the approach of the old ones, and giving rise to an expectant attitude generally. Having secured its attention, I had then only to open the cage door, when the bird would come out, hop into my lap, and open wide its mouth. Ina few days more, the Thrush had learned my step and my whistle. Its recog- nition of these sounds was voiced in a succession of chirps, which, usually, had an imperative tone, or a coaxing one, and indicated an empty stomach. If my absence had been rather long and the bird’s meal unduly delayed, its piping voice took on a mandatory key which bordered on imprecation. When well fed and com- fortably at rest on its perch, the little fellow had a habit of trilling softly, as if talking to itself. This trill had a remarkable property of ventriloquism that led me, at first, to ascribe the notes to a bird out of doors; but I soon learned their author and came to take pleasure in their assurance of genuine contentment. When captured, my Thrush was unable to feed itself, so I had to make my bungling fingers do the work of a mother-bird’s dexterous bill. Knowing that it would be a good deal of a task to furnish, altogether, food of the same nature as that provided by the parent birds, I made the experiment of substituting, to some extent, for grubs, earthworms, and insects, raw beef cut into bits about one centimeter long by half a centimeter wide. Before inserting the pieces of meat between the young bird’s gaping mandibles, I dipped them in water by way of lubrication, in order that they, readily, might slip down the bird’s throat. This was the more necessary because the bird, often, wouid refuse to swal- low unless the food had been placed far back in the mouth, at the very entrance to the gullet. Moreover, it seemed well to supply Ae OwEN, A Captive Hermit Thrush. 3 water, in some way, to the digestive tract of the Thrush, which for many days refused to drink. Although the bird bathed almost daily, and once, at least, bathed twice in one day, up to July 31, when observation was discontinued, it drank in my presence but three times. These exceptions to its rule of abstinence occurred during some hot weather toward the end of its confinement. The young Thrush took kindly to its diet of meat. June 28, between 8 A. M. and 7 P.M., it was fed eight times and swallowed 27 bits of meat. June 29, between 8 a.M. and 8 P.M., it was fed ten times and ate 25 pieces of meat. In order to get a more definite idea of the appetite that demanded this amount of solid nourishment, I began, July 4, to weigh the bird’s food, as well as the bird itself. As this little investigation proceeded, it became apparent that the bird’s weight fluctuated greatly within a space of twenty-four hours. Thus July 4, at night, the Thrush weighed 30 grammes, while in the morning of July 5 it weighed but 25.5 grammes, a loss during the night of 4.5 grammes. To appre- ciate the significance of this variation, let it be noted that the loss in a single night was 15 per cent of the total weight, so that if a 150 pound man were to suffer the same diminution in avoirdupois, between going to bed and rising, he would lose no less than 22.5 pounds. In order to get comparable figures, I made it a practice, there- ~ fore, after July 5, to weigh the bird in the morning. For the five days, July 4 to July 8, inclusive, the bird’s average weight was 27.7 grammes, and the average weight of meat eaten daily, 13.56 grammes. These figures do not convey a strictly accurate idea of the bird’s appetite, because I was absent from my study several hours daily, and the Thrush, undoubtedly, would have eaten more if assiduously tended. Forexample, July 7, between the hours of 11.30 A.M. and 8.45 p.M., being constantly looked after, the bird ate 12 grammes of meat, nearly as much as its average for a whole day ; and although my record indicates that it ate about 50 per cent of its weight in meat, yet I feel certain that under the most favorable conditions it would have made way with at least its own weight of raw beef, daily. While meat formed the staple diet of my Thrush, during the first weeks of its confinement, and was used, more or less, throughout, 4 OweEN, A Captive Hermit Thrush. pe I began, early, to experiment with such food as I thought likely would have fallen to the lot of the Thrush had it been left to the care of its parents. Thus, July 1, I fed to the bird a number of earthworms. For convenience’ sake, I cut a few of the biggest worms into two or three pieces, each of which was as large as an ordinary worm. Counting these pieces as whole worms, and this is legitimate, considering their size, the Thrush ate 19 worms between the hours of 8.30 a.m. and 1 P.M., four hours and a half. This is at the rate of 4 worms per hour, or one worm every fifteen minutes. These figures, again, do not represent the capacity of the bird truthfully because I had not become expert in feeding, and after I had made several unsuccessful efforts to thrust the wriggling object in my fingers down the bird’s throat, it often would shut its mouth in disgust and refuse the worm. July 3 came the discovery that the Hermit Thrush is fastidious in its diet. At 1.45 on that day, the bird weighed 25.2 grammes. At the same hour, I weighed out 7.5 grammes of worms taken from a manure heap. In 30 minutes, the bird had eaten four ‘grammes of the worms. If it had continued at the same rate, it would have eaten its own weight in worms in 3.15 hours; but it soon appeared that the bird did not relish the flavor of these dunghill delicacies. It made a great splutter in eating the worms and frequently rejected them with every symptom of nausea and abhorrence, wiping its bill on the nearest object, which was, generally, my hand. So I threw away the remainder of this lot of worms and renewed the experiment with five grammes of worms taken from cool, black, garden mould. ‘These the bird dispatched, with evident relish, in just 30 minutes more. At this rate, it would have eaten itsown weight of acceptable worms in about two hours and a half! My record of later experiments, however, indicates that the Thrush would not prove quite so voracious a songster. Just how long it would take the young bird to eat its own weight in worms, I never accurately ascertained. To know this would, indeed, be interesting, but it would be of small scien- tific value since the conditions of captivity differ widely from those surrounding a bird in the wild state. The results of the raw meat and the worm experiments caused me to infer a rapid digestion on the part of the young Thrush. It Garey OweEN, A Captive Hermit Thrush. 5 was not long before I had an opportunity of verifying this pre- sumption. July 11, Iwas shown, inablueberry patch, a nest which I took to be that of a Hermit Thrush. Judging that the location of this nest might imply a fondness for blueberries on the part of the Thrush, I introduced a few berries, July 13, into my bird’s cage. The avidity with which they were seized and swallowed showed that my conjecture had been well founded. The coloring matter of the berries dyed the bird’s excretions, and it occurred to me that this fact furnished a ready method of finding the length of time required by the Thrush to digest blueberries. The test was made July 25. At 12.56 p.M. of that day, the bird voided white excrement and was fed, at once, with blueberries. At 2.28 P.M., one hour and thirty-two minutes later, it dropped blue excrement mingled with berry seeds. If this experiment is trustworthy, and I see no reason to doubt the accuracy of its method, the time required for a blueberry to traverse the digestive tract was, practi- cally, one hour and a half. I have said that, at first, my little captive was unable to feed itself. Generally speaking, thisis true ; but the bird soon acquired a habit of picking up occasional morsels and at the time of its release, July 31, it could get along very well without assistance, although, even then, it preferred to be fed. i The bird began to peck at imaginary objects, in a desultory way, June 29. In the morning of July 1, while the Thrush was ona window sill, a favorite perch when liberty had been granted tt, I put beside it a piece of earth-worm. It eyed the worm fora moment and then attacked it in dead earnest. In its enthusiasm, the bird lost its balance and fell off the sill; but later, when it had regained its equilibrium, mental and physical, it managed to get away with several worms unassisted. July 3, the Thrush spent some time on the floor of my study, running about, sometimes making short flights, and displaying, withal, a great deal of curiosity. My shoes, particularly the lace fastenings, the carpet tacks, and a pair of ring staples on a box, were all critically examined and pecked at; but the favorite subject of investigation was a small piece of waste paper that lay on the floor. The paper was red on one side and white on the other and was picked up and _ tossed about very frequently. July 8, the bird discovered a fondness for 6 OwEN, A Captive Hermit Thrush. cee house flies, to which, when placed in its cage, dead or disabled, it helped itself. Later it developed considerable skill as a flycatcher and no insect was safe within the wires of its cage. The bird’s predilection for pulling over paper grew on it. It was very amus- ing to see it alight on my study tabie and essay, forthwith, to look beneath each separate sheet of paper lying thereon. ‘This habit I took to be a display of instinct, which, exercised in the woods, would lead the bird to overhaul leaves and other similar rubbish in search of food. The behavior of the Thrush at various times gave me several hints as tothe habits of its species in the wild state. For example, it ate most greedily in the morning and at night, thus corroborat- ing the general testimony of observers that birds take a rest in the middle of the day. Again, as dusk came on, the bird became restless and fluttered about its cage so recklessly that, at times, I was obliged to cover the cage with a cloth and set it in a dark corner. After some study of the bird’s movements, I was led to attribute its unrest at evening to a desire for a high perch. To test my inference, I one evening liberated the bird. It flew about the study, close to the ceiling, a high picture. This proved that I had, in fact, in these nightly and, finally, went to roost on flutterings, an evidence of the instinct that leads birds to seek high perching places, at night, as a safeguard against many dangers. It struck me as especially interesting in the case of the Hermit Thrush which builds its nest on the ground. My captive Thrush slept with its head under its wing, in the orthodox fashion, and took occasional naps during the day. It proved a meditative bird and would sit for half an hour at a time with an air of deep abstraction. As it dozed on my study table, June 30, I counted its respirations and found them to be from 80 to 85 per minute. When it is reflected that the rate of human respiration ranges from about 44 at birth to 15 at maturity, the fact that the bird is a high pressure organism may be appreciated. My Hermit Thrush belied its name by being very fond of society. Occasionally, I allowed the bird the freedom of my study. At such times it preferred to keep near my chair, often alighting on my head, or on the table upon which I was writing. It would allow itself to be held in the hand, but was rather ill at Neat isa OweEN, A Captive Hermit Thrush. Fi ease, and pruned itself carefully on being released. It bathed regularly, and though it kept its cage in a litter, was scrupulous about its plumage. When taken, its tail feathers had just started. They grew rapidly, and by July 31 had attained their full length. As soon as the appendage had gained sufficient length to be used b) in gesticulation, the bird accompanied its ‘peeping’ cry with flicks of the tail, after the manner of a Robin. Some of its atti- tudes, as it stood with uplifted tail, were very like those of the Catbird. In concluding this record it remains to speak of the bird’s method of eating earthworms, for it was method, indeed. The bird began by worrying the worm, much as a cat does a mouse, nipping, pecking, and slatting its victim violently. The attack seemed to be directed, mainly, at the extremities of the worm. Thus, in one case, the head of the worm was pecked ten times, the tail seventeen times, and the middle twice. The worm, of course, squirmed and wriggled vigorously, at first; but, after a time, lost, in a measure, the power of motion. Now and then, the bird’s beak would miss the worm, or would slip off. At such times the mandibles came together with an audible snap, conveying a suggestion of the torturing pinches to which the unfortunate worm was being subjected. The pummeling and nipping having gone on for from one and a half to three and a half minutes, the Thrush would next essay to swallow the worm, beginning, almost invariably, at the tail. This mode of attack may have been prompted by a chivalrous desire to give the poor worm as much of a chance as possible. If so, its object was, in a measure, gained, for, in the case of a big worm, the process of swallowing was distressingly prolonged by the efforts of the worm to escape, in which it often succeeded so far as to crawl out of the bird’s mouth almost as fast as it was drawn in. The outcome of the struggle was always in the bird’s favor, although in one instance, that I timed, the head of the worm visibly protruded from the bird’s throat for seven minutes and a half after swallowing began. The fact that the Thrush swallowed its worms tail first gains something in interest when the structure of the earthworm is taken into account. As is well-known, the earthworm’s body consists of from ‘roo to 200 rings, or segments. Every segment, except the 8 BEAL, Food of European Birds. [ fan Jan. anterior two or three and the last. affords insertion to four groups of short bristles, to which muscles are attached, and by means of which the worm progresses. The bristles may be made to point in either direction, according as the worm wishes to advance or retreat. When pointed toward the tail, they hold the worm as it crawls ahead; when directed ahead, they give foothold for retrograde movement. Now a person would suppose that the presence of several hundred little bristles, all pointing the ‘ wrong way,’ would inter- fere with easy and pleasurable deglutition; and inasmuch as a worm, normally, crawls ahead, and not back, I expected to see my Thrush swallow worms head first, when, it is to be presumed, the bristles in question would not retard the process. As a matter of fact the contrary method, as noted above, was followed. Once in a while, a small worm was seized by the middle and doubled, or taken by the head; but careful observation, extending over several days, brought out so few instances of this kind that I am con- vinced it was a rule with the bird to swallow earthworms tail first. The fact that the worm often made some progress in its attempt to escape from the bird’s mouth would indicate that the bristles were in working order, despite rough treatment, and that they were pointed back, toward the tail of the worm. From this we must infer, either that the bird was indifferent to the rasping of the bristles on the walls of its throat, or that the sharp resistance they exhibited added spice and flavor to the writhing morsel. But, for all that, any explanation is merely conjecture, and why the Hermit Thrush should choose to begin its meal with the tail of its victim remains a curious, though not a profound, subject for speculation. RECENI INVESTIGATIONS OF “THE, - FOOD” OF EUROPEAN BIRDS. Bethan Bi) ace BRYAN. A PAPER upon the food of the Rook (Corvus frugilegus) by Dr. Hollrung, appears in the Seventh Annual Report of the Experi- re Y BEAL, Food of European Birds. 9 ment Station at Halle.1 Another paper by Mr. John Gilmour? of Fifeshire, Scotland, treats of the food of the Rook, the Wood Pigeon (Columba palumbus) and the Starling (Sturnus vulgaris). These two papers are interesting contributions to the literature concerning the food of three rather important birds, but they can only be considered as giving glimpses of a fieldin which much remains to be done. Dr. Hollrung gives the following statement of the food found in 131 stomachs of Rooks killed in April, May and June, within a narrow limit of territory : Larvae of Zabrus gibbus, 48 ; wire worms (Elaterid larve), 20; grub worms, 253; May beetles, 160; weevils (Otiorynchus), 1688; weevils (Zanymecus), 22; snails; mice, 17; grains of wheat, 420; grains of barley, 471; grains of oats, 190; cherries, 22. From these examinations Dr. Hollrung has arrived at the fol- lowing general conclusions : “yz, The Rooks examined have proved on the whole neither exclusively useful nor exclusively injurious. While 25 per cent of the Rooks’ stomachs contained no vegetable matter, there were only two cases in 131 where no animal matter was found. ““2. Their food consisted for the most part (about 66 per cent) of animal matter, such as mice, larve of the grain-eating Carabid (Zabrus gibbus), grub worms (Melolontha vulgaris), dung beetles (Aphodius spec.), and clover weevils ( Otiorynchus ligustict). ‘The vegetable food was made up of wheat, oats, and barley, and cherries. “¢3. The harm done by the Rooks on the one hand was per- fectly balanced, and even considerably outweighed on the other hand by the useful services rendered. ‘¢4. The Rooks feed principally on slowly moving insects.” In the investigations made by Mr. Gilmour the stomachs of 336 birds were examined, not counting 19 that were empty. They ' Untersuchungen iiber den Mageninhalt der Saatkrahe (Corvus frugile- gus L.) Dr. M. Hollrung. 7ter Jahresbericht Versuchs-station f. Pflanzen- schutz zu Halle a. S. 1895, pp. 5-20. 2 An inquiry Concerning the Relations of Certain Birds to the Agricultural Interest, as shown by their Diet. John Gilmour. Trans. Highland and Agri. Soc. Scotiand, 1896. Fifth Series, Vol. VIII, pp. 21-113. 2 fe) Brat, Food of European Birds. a were evenly distributed through the twelve months of the year, but were all killed in a restricted area. Mr. Gilmour thinks, however, that the results obtained would not differ greatly if they had been collected over a larger district, as the one in question may be considered as fairly typical of southern Scotland. The food found in the 336 stomachs was classified under four heads, viz: (1) insects and grubs, (2) roots, (3) cereal grains and husks, (4) miscellaneous. Of these the third is of the greatest importance, both from its economic interest and from the fact that it is the food most often taken. Mr. Gilmour reckons his per- centages from the number of times that the bird has taken the food, and from this concludes that grain and husks constitute 58 per cent of the Rook’s food. Insects and grubs, reckoned in the same way, amount to 23 per cent. It can hardly be claimed that this is the most accurate method of calculating the relative amounts of food found in a bird’s stomach. Birds are fond of eating a great many different things, the aggregate quantity of which may be small, just as human beings eat a little butter and sugar at nearly every meal, but never make a whole dinner of either. To illustrate, in an examination of 2258 stomachs of the Crow Blackbird corn amounted to 35 per cent of the food by bulk, but when reckoned by the number of times taken it aggregated Reaper Cent: Insects and grubs are mostly eaten by the Rook from May to August inclusive, but only in June and July do they amount to more than any other item. As most of the insects are said to be useful species, Mr. Gilmour is of the opinion that the harm done by their destruction ‘“‘can scarcely be considered as counter- balanced by the grub consumpt.” On the whole, his verdict is against the Rook, for he says: “Taken altogether, the Rook has almost no claim to agricultural regard. . . . Is not the broad fact clear that grain is. the staple of staple foods for Rooks? Lusting for it as these birds do, we may rest assured that the Rook will attack and prey freely upon the farmer’s grain whenever and wherever favourable opportunity is presented; whether soft or hard, whether sprouted or unsprouted, whether ripe or unripe, whether in dung or on stubble-field, is of little moment to the Rook.” While he acknowledges that much of this grain was taken ies ae Beal, Food of European Birds. UT from dung, or consisted of scattered kernels picked up in stubble- fields, he still considers that it must all be counted against the birds, as it shows their taste for grain. Thisis not fair. Grain so obtained has no value to the farmer and should not be reckoned as aloss. As a matter of fact, Mr. Gilmour’s own tables show that the Rooks do not ‘‘ attack and prey freely upon the farmer’s grain whenever and wherever favourable opportunity is presented.” Many stomachs taken in harvest time show no grain, and a large proportion of them contained some insects. It cannot be claimed that any of them lacked opportunity to eat grain, for all were collected practically from the same locality. In comparing the results obtained by these investigators some important differences are noted, and it is seen that the two have drawn almost diametrically opposite conclusions. The Rooks examined by Dr. Hollrung contained 17 mice, an article of food which Mr. Gilmour does not seem to have found in his. The insects, unlike those eaten by the Scottish Rooks, were mostly noxious species whose destruction was a decided benefit to the farmer. While grain was eaten to some extent by Dr. Hollrung’s Rooks, it does not appear to constitute an important article of their diet economically considered. Mr. Gilmour assumes that the Rooks taken in Fifeshire fairly represent those of the whole of the Lowlands of Scotland in their food habits, an assumption that may possibly be true, but Dr. Hollrung’s investigation shows that no such supposition will hold for extensive areas of country. Stomach examination as well as field observation shows more and more that the kind of food taken by birds is determined by availability as well as taste; conse- quently the food of any particular species will vary to a certain extent in different localities. The Common Crow (Corvus americanus) represents in this country, as nearly as may be, the economic position occupied by the Rook in Europe, and a few points of comparison in their food may not be without interest. The food of the Crow consists of about the same proportion of animal and vegetable matter as that of the Rook. In the first four items of Dr. Hollrung’s list the Crow and the Rook present a great similarity of taste, the Zachnosterna of this 12 BEAL, Food of European Birds. ce country replacing the AZe/o/ontha of Europe. It is in the next two items, the weevils, that the Rook shines resplendent. Anaverage of over thirteen specimens of those small but very harmful beetles in each of the 131 stomachs is certainly a splendid showing. It is singular that none of these insects were eaten by the Rooks taken in Scotland. While many of these beetles were eaten by the Crow, they do not constitute so constant and important an item as in the case of the Rook. The Crow eats a considerable number of Carabid beetles, most of which are of the more pre- daceous species, while those eaten by the Rook are, for the chief part, the larvae of Zabrus gibbus, a very destructive grain-eating species. Grasshoppers, which are extensively taken by the Crow, are conspicuously absent from the food of the Rook. In the varieties of vertebrates eaten, the Rook is far behind the Crow. Only seventeen mice were found in the 131 stomachs taken in Germany, and none in those collected in Scotland. In no case did any stomach contain the remains of more than one. ‘The Crow, on the other hand, not only preys upon mice and other small mammals but even captures young rabbits, and eats many snakes, young turtles, salamanders, frogs, toads and fish. The Crow also eats many crayfish and other smaller crustaceans which do not appear in the Rook’s bill of fare. In the matter of vegetable food the Rook does not seem to indulge in any great variety. It does, however, eat some potatoes, which the Crow rarely touches. The Crow eats about every kind of grain that the country produces, besides fruit and acorns or other mast. It appears to be far more omnivorous than the Rook ; in fact, it seems doubtful if there is anything eatable which a Crow will not eat, while, so far as shown, the Rook is quite exclusive. In Mr. Gilmour’s investigation of the food of the Wood Pigeon 245 stomachs were examined. ‘They were quite evenly distributed through the year, but, like the Rooks, were all taken within a limited area. The contents of these stomachs are arranged in five groups, which, taken in the order of frequency, are as follows: (1) Cereal grains; (2) leaves; (3) other fruits and seeds; (4) roots; (5) flowers. Cereal grains were taken to the extent of 33 per cent of the year’s food, by Mr. Gilmour’s method of calcula- Lesa BEAL, Food of European Birds. 13 tion, but asa great part of this was eaten in the months after August it would seem to an American farmer that it must be mostly waste grain picked up in the stubble fields. Leaves were eaten to the extent of 274 per cent and a large amount of these were leaves of clover. While a bird that eats clover leaves may be potentially harmful, it is evident that the birds must be wonder- fully abundant in order to do the clover much damage by simply eating the leaves. A great number might possibly hurt the forage by breaking it down and sitting upon it. Besides clover leaves, the Pigeon also eats the leaves of turnip and several weeds, as well as the seeds of beans, peas, clover, turnips, weeds and some trees. Roots and underground stems (mostly potatoes) are eaten to the extent of 84 per cent. Mr. Gilmour’s conclusions are entirely against the Pigeon. He says: “Though grain be left entirely out of court, the Pigeon stands utterly condemned by the heavy black score still standing against him for root-crop and clover-leaf destruction.” While we know nothing about this bird practically, we are inclined to think that further observation and thought will serve to render the score several shades lighter. Of the Starling, 175 stomachs were examined, collected in every month, though but few were taken in July, August, October and December. Like the Rooks and Wood Pigeons, the Starlings were all taken within a small area of country. With regard to the food in these stomachs, Mr. Gilmour says. “. . . Starlings are most monotonous in regard to diet. All the food-stuffs found in the crops and gizzards examined are conveniently grouped thus: (1) grubs; (2) insects, etc.; (3) cereal grains; (4) miscel- laneous.”’ Of these the first two amount to 70 per cent of the whole food, and the third to 22 per cent. This grain is very properly not reckoned as being very valuable, as the tables show that most of it was taken after harvest time, so that the comparative usefulness of the bird is made to depend upon the character of the insect food. Mr. Gilmour does not seem to have any very definite method of determining comparative quantities of food, for he says: “ The ow much of each kind cannot, of course, be stated ; but the impression which one gets from careful and close examin- ation of the contents of any large batch of Starlings is that the Jan. 14 Bartow, Nesting Habits of White-tailed Kite. ar injurious species are more frequent in the birds than the useful kinds.” It is gratifying to learn this, as the Starling has been introduced into America, and in time may possibly become numer- ous enough to be of economic importance. Mr. Gilmour makes the following happy summation of the status of the three birds whose food habits he has investigated. “Of the Pigeon it may be said that he is an unmitigated scoun- drel; of the Rook that he is a cunning rogue ; but of the Starling we can say with truth that he is our natural friend, by habit and by instinct.” SOME NOTES ON THE NESTING HABITS OF THE WHITE-TAILED KITE. BY CHESTER BARLOW. THE White-tailed Kite (/anus leucurus) is perhaps as common in certain portions of California as anywhere throughout its breeding range, and it is resident in Santa Clara County, where the genial climate and almost perennial sunshine are conducive to an abundant food supply. Santa Clara County lies south of the San Francisco Bay region, and its northern boundary is the lower shore of San Francisco Bay. ‘The northern portion of the county consists of the ‘ lowlands,’ which support, in many places, a luxuriant growth of willow. Toward the ranges which sur- round the valley there are magnificent fields of live oaks and white oaks, which have attained in many places a grand perfection. Considerable of this country is given to farming, and here the trees have been spared. Approaching the foot-hills, and all through the valley from San Jose southward, especially along the water courses, the sycamore and white oak are most commonly met with, and afford the Awzzeo tribe many available and secure nesting sites. Thus it will be seen that certain portions of Santa Clara County are peculiarly attractive to raptorial birds as breed- Vol. XIV Lee Bartow, Nesting Habits of White-tailed Kite. 15 ing grounds, and the White-tailed Kite is found scattered in pairs at suitable locations throughout the county. It has been my pleasure to spend considerable time during the past few years in observing the nesting habits of several pairs of Kites, distributed at various points throughout the county, and the results tend to show considerable individuality in the respec- tive pairs of birds. The White-tailed Kite being of unquestion- able benefit, is deserving of the fullest protection, and in one locality at least I know that its usefulness is appreciated by the farmers. Its principal food in this section consists of small rodents, such as gophers, field mice and wood rats, lizards and probably in season a few grasshoppers. Mr. Henry W. Carriger, of Sonoma, Cal., who has had considerable experience with this bird, writes me of finding a freshly-killed ground squirrel lodged in a tree beneath a nest, and which had undoubtedly been captured by one of the Kites. This is probably larger game than they attack as a rule. With the gradual settling up of the country there is no doubt but that this bird is becoming rarer each year. They are essen- tially birds of the valley and are rarely seen in the foothills and mountains. One pair which [I have known for years and which had never failed to nest in a particular growth of live oaks each year, was missed from its accustomed haunts the past spring and could not be located anywhere in the vicinity. A wood choppers’ camp had been erected in the grove and the Kites, in their gentle and unsuspecting nature, had probably fallen prey to the gun of some misguided wood chopper. Their flight is even and graceful, often quite rapid but lacking the dash of the true Falcons. In hunting in the early morning hours both birds often go together, and they may frequently be seen hovering motionless in air, much after the manner of the Sparrow Hawk. ‘The principal note consists of a low, plaintive, musical whistle, quite pleasing to the ear, and which is uttered both when the bird is at rest on some tree top and occasionally while it is on the wing in the vicinity of its nest. With few exceptions I have found this Kite nesting in level or slightly rolling country where the live oak is abundant. A pair of these birds will take up their abode in a favored location Jan. 16 Bartow, Nesting Habits of White-tailed Kite. mk where they will remain for years, zealously guarding their domain against intruders, and nesting from year to year within a small radius, sometimes in the same tree. If their first laying of eggs be taken they will, as a rule, construct a new nest and lay a second time, and only in one instance did I find the same nest used twice in the same season. My experience with the White-tailed Kite dates back to 1887, when a pair of birds were found in a secluded live oak pasture. They were commonly known as ‘White Hawks’ and it was not until several years later that I succeeded in finding my first nest. These birds frequented the same locality each year until the past season when they had disappeared, having probably been shot as mentioned. Having found several of their old nests at different times I visited the locality on April 19, 1894, having previously seen the birds among the trees. Most of the oaks averaged twenty-five to thirty feet in height and were easily accessible. After a short search a nest was discovered in the extreme top- most branch of a live oak, twenty-five feet from the ground. The nest was composed of small oak sticks and was lined with dry stubble and a little Spanish moss, and measured about one foot across. It contained three eggs, which were fresh and had evi- dently been deserted, as a cobweb had formed over a portion of the nest. The eggs were slightly faded from exposure to the sun, and the birds did not put in an appearance. I did not again visit the locality during the season of 1894. Early in the season of 1895, when budding trees and bright foliage heralded an early spring, my thoughts went back to the Kites of the previous year, and though March had ushered in a cold, rainy spell, on the 17th I visited the country to ascertain if the Kites had returned to their former haunts. The day was a dark one, threatening rain, and a strange quiet pervaded the grove, in contrast to the usual varied chorus of small birds. Neither of the Kites could be seen, so I searched for the tree in which they had built the previous year, and from which I had removed the nest. My surprise was complete when a new nest was dis- covered built on the exact site of the former one, in the highest available crotch of the tree. From the nest one could see in all directions over the fields, and still the nest itself was securely ee | BarRLow, Nesting Habits of White-tailed Kite. LY hidden in the leafy top of the oak, and only to be seen on close inspection from the ground beneath. At this date, March 17, the nest contained four eggs, which were warm and very slightly incubated. The parent bird was not seen until I had left the tree, and had doubtless been enjoying her morning exercise. ‘The nest, which is a typical one, measured twelve inches across, with a depression in the center of perhaps three inches, and was com- posed of small dead twigs from the live oak, and’ lined with fine straw stubble, from the field near by. The four eggs constituting this set are of an unusual type, three of them being marked chiefly about the ends, while the fourth is streaked lengthwise more heavily than the average egg. I did not visit the locality again until April 5, when both birds were observed sitting quietly in the top of one of the tallest trees, this time some distance from their former nest. I, however, repaired to the nest and found it to contain three eggs, it being evident that the set was not complete. On the gth five eggs had been laid and the female quietly left the nest when I was half-way up the tree. The same nest had been used in which the first set had been laid, and the birds had added no new lining. The parent birds showed little concern, remaining quietly at a distance and giving expression to an occasional ‘ whistle’. The time which had elapsed between the taking of the first set of four eggs and the completion of the second set of five was twenty-three days. It seems unusual that the second laying should have consisted of five eggs, and the set itself exhibits extreme variation in coloration, the specimen with the buff ground color and dark markings being perhaps the oddest of all. The white egg and the bright reddish specimen were laid last. The eggs of this set average somewhat larger than the first laying of four eggs. The three sets of eggs to which we have thus far referred are the production of one pair of birds during the seasons of 1894 and 1895, and will, I think, if the normal types from each set be compared, show a similarity, in that the markings tend toward the ends of the eggs asa rule. Be- fore disposing of this pair of Kites I will say that I did not visit them again during 1895, but early this year while looking over the ground I discovered another nest in a small oak, which had been used, and which leads me to believe that the birds laid a 3 18 BaRLow, Nesting Habits of White-tailed Kite. re third time and successfully reared their brood. This year the birds had disappeared, and were not located in the surrounding country, so it is evident that they had been shot after inhabiting the locality for at least ten years. On March 24, 1895, I met my second pair of birds in a region similar to the last and where I had somewhat expected a pair might be nesting. When incubation has well begun the female is . difficult to flush, and the male seems to make himself as inconspic- uous as possible, so one might at times pass through a locality inhabited by the Kites and not suspect their presence. On the day in question, while walking among the trees I chanced to seea Kite flying toward a cloister of oaks half a mile distant and followed it. The bird, presumably the male, was perched on a lofty white oak, the highest in the field, where he sat quietly. Sus- pecting the female had a nest near by I began a careful search of the neighboring oaks and after twenty minutes’ work located the nest twenty feet up in a small live oak tree. The female did not leave the nest until I had almost reached in, when she flew to a near-by tree and was joined by the male. The male began a gallant attack in defense of the nest, swooping down on me at intervals in a furious manner, being occasionally reinforced by the female, while both snapped their beaks, much after the manner of young Owls. The nest was unusually large, having evidently been used more than once. It was lined with long dry grass, and similar in other respects to the average nest. It contained five heavily-marked eggs of the usual dark type, in which incubation was far advanced, three of the eggs being slightly pipped. From the stage of incubation it is likely that the nest was constructed late in February and the eggs laid soon after. The eggs of this set average 1.80 X 1.31. The clutch is now in the collection of Mr. John W. Mailliard. This pair of birds after being robbed removed to a locality half a mile away, where they soon began to construct a new nest in a small oak, twenty feet from the ground. One of the birds was observed to alight in the top of a tree, where it broke off a twig from among some dead limbs, when it flew back to the newly begun nest and deposited it. Finally the nest was completed and four eggs were laid. These I collected on April 15, the female leaving Vol. XIV 657 Bartow, Nesting Habits of White-tacled Kite. 19 the nest on my approach. The eggs of this set average smaller than those of the first laying of the same birds, and one specimen is particularly bright in coloration. The parent bird attacked me as in the first instance, but soon gave up the battle and alighted near by. This set is now in the collection of Mr. C. W. Crandall. This spring I was interested to see if these birds would prove as early breeders as in 1895, so on March ro, 1896, I visited their domain and found that the last year’s nest had been added to and freshly lined, and four eggs deposited. The nest was twenty feet from the ground. Incubation was fully one-third advanced, which corresponded approximately as to date with the laying of the former season. The birds showed the same aggressive spirit, which in itself seems a trait amply sufficient to distinguish this particular pair. This set of eggs is also in Mr. Crandall’s collection. The Kites now repaired to their location of the previous year, where they built a new nest in a scraggly live oak twenty-five feet from the ground, and which contained four eggs on March 29. The set was not collected. Nineteen days had been required to build a new nest and deposit a set of four eggs, while in 1895 twenty-two days were occupied in performing the same duties. This pair of birds have never used a nest the second time during the same season. I fully expect to find them amid their familiar surroundings next spring, and judging from the occurrence of white eggs in their layings, I consider that they have occupied the present locality for many years. On April 13, 1895, a third pair of Kites were found occupying a grove of trees ina grainfield, where there was a plentiful food supply. Their uneasy actions indicated a nest in the vicinity, and careful search revealed an old one in the top of a tall oak. It contained numerous dried-up pellets, which are found in nests in which a brood has been reared, and which are no doubt ejected by the young after being fed. The new nest was found a short distance away, thirty-five feet up in a live oak, and smaller than the average in size. It was lined with dry stubble, a small quan- tity of Spanish moss and a few feathers from the parent bird. ' Four eggs constituted the set, three being one-half advanced in incubation while the fourth was infertile. The eggs were quite 20 Bartow, Nesting Habits of White-tailed Kite. Auk Jan. round in shape. Both birds remained perched on a white oak a short distance away, and showed little concern. This year I did not visit these birds until March 29, when a short search brought one and then both birds to view. They flew about uneasily, uttering their plaintive whistle, while I looked for the nest. Presently it was found in the extreme top of a slender oak, thirty-five feet from the ground, and contained four eggs which were fresh. The nest was 18 inches in diameter and lined with long, dry grass. Two of the eggs of this set are of the bright coloration. The eggs of this pair of Kites are considerably rounder than any others I have taken. The set is now in the collection of the U. S. National Museum. During the early spring of the present year my collecting trips took me through the hills to a great degree and here I found a — pair of Kites located in a most picturesque spot. On February 23, the birds were observed in a canon, giving chase to a Western Red-tailed Hawk, which had evidently trespassed upon their ter- ritory, after which they slowly flew back and perched on a fence on the hillside. On March 8, the nest was found containing two eggs. Both birds were near but showed little anxiety when I climbed to the nest. On March 14, I again visited the nest, this time during a shower, and both birds were very quiet. The male was doing look-out duty on a favorite post of a fence bordering the canon, while the female was on the nest. She left when I began to climb the tree and joined her mate. The nest held four eggs, which are quite round in shape, and two of them are of the handsome reddish coloration. The nest was fifteen inches across and six inches thick, with quite a depression in the center, as was necessary, for the nest was 50 feet from the ground in the top- most branch and subject to high winds which swept up the cafion. The birds flew high overhead, uttering their plaintive whistle but making no attack. The nest was beautifully situated, being in the top of a high oak which was covered with streamers of Span- ish moss, and the view down the cafion was unusually picturesque. The birds were observed at different points for three weeks when they finally began a new nest in a small scraggly oak near the head of the canon. When not at work on the nest both birds would sit for long intervals on a dead tree near by, without mak- Vol. XIV 7 Report of Committee on Bird Protection. 21 ing a sound. On April 12, the nest held its first egg, and both birds were near by. A week later when I visited the caion, neither of the Kites could be found, and the nest contained naught but a few fragments of shell. The destruction of the eggs was probably accomplished by a ground squirrel, after which the birds deserted the locality. REPORTVOR THE A. O. U. COMMITTEE, ON PROTEC— TION OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. Your Committee feel that the work done for the protection of birds during the year 1896 has been amply rewarded, and that the results obtained in the various channels of labor have been commensurate with the efforts made. The brief outline of re- sults given below will, we think, be of interest to the members of the Union, and will also be an incentive to an increased activity on the part of the various bodies and individuals who are inter- ested in this most important and necessary work. MASSACHUSETTS. Mr. Geo. H. Mackay, of the Committee, reports as follows: ‘“‘T have to report for the district coming under my jurisdiction that there is substantial evidence to prove that the enforcement of all protective laws has been a good and wise investment. - Two visits to Muskeget Island during the summer gave evidence of the beneficial results of protection, for it is doubtful if in the history of the Massachusetts Terns they have ever been so abun- dant as during 1896. They have enjoyed a season of unmolested quiet ; no eggs have been taken, and only eight birds were shot. The results to be appreciated should be seen. I regret to be compelled to add that the unsettled conditions between the town of Nantucket and the owners of Muskeget, referred to in 1895, still exist, making the work of protection a peculiarly difficult one. The majority of the Selectmen of the town do not oppose Auk De, Report of Committee on Bird Protection. ae the protection of the Terns. The work in its detail takes both time and effort, and I am convinced that a relaxation of vigilance would be to the decided disadvantage of the birds. The United States Government during the past summer has erected a Life Saving Station on Muskeget Island, the crew employed being on duty except during the months of June and July, when the cap- tain remains there alone. As these two months are the breeding season of the Terns which annually return there, I hope, in the future, to be able to arrange with the Selectmen of Nantucket or the Captain of the Station, or both, to continue the protection of the colony. “In June I visited Penikese Island, Mass., and made an exami- nation of the large colony of Wilson’s and Roseate Terns domiciled there, estimated to number some six or seven thousand birds. They have been subjected to numerous hardships, having been annually robbed of their eggs up to the roth of June, after which date they were left more or less undisturbed. ‘This colony of Terns appeals to the best efforts of all who are ifiterested in preserving bird life, especially residents of Massachusetts. I have reason to believe that before the commencement of the next breeding season the owners of the island may be induced to co-operate with others in extending to these Terns the fullest pro- tection, and it is desirable that those interested in such a result will use their influence in bringing about such an end. ‘“‘ Karly in the present year I appeared several times before the Fish and Game Committee at the State House in Boston, urging a new law which I had assisted in formulating, advocating a closer season for some of our Game Birds, and also for the pro- tection of some of our Hawks and Owls. Had any legislation been obtained I believe the statute advocated would have been recommended by the Committee. It is very probable that I may again offer the same bill during the coming season.” GREAT GULL ISLAND, N. Y. Protection was given the colony of Terns on Great Gull Island, N. Y., during the past season by Capt. Henry P. Field, the State Game Protector, whose salary was paid by the Linnzan Society, the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, Vol. XIV 187 Report of Committee on Bird Protection. 23 and the West Side Natural History Society, all of New York City. Capt. Field reported that the Terns arrived at the island May tr, about four days earlier than usual, that there were large num- bers of them, and that it was pretty generally known by the public that they were protected. This island, being the property of the General Government, and Capt. Field having full charge of it, as well as being the State Game Protector, his authority is recognized and respected. At the close of the season Capt. Field reported that the Terns left the island September 27,— one day earlier than in 1895. A great many were hatched during the past season, as the colony was not disturbed atall. Itis ahard matter to estimate their numbers, but they are very plentiful. I should think that there were about 7000 pairs in the colony. That the colony has grown very largely is evidenced from the fact that an overflow colony of some hundreds of birds has estab- lished itself on the north end of an adjacent island (Gardiners Island). The keeper of Montauk Point Light informs me that the Terns were more numerous about the point during the past summer than for many years. It is proposed by your Com- mittee to continue the protection of this colony until, if possible, the south side of Long Island is again populated with these beau- tiful birds, as it was before they were practically exterminated in 1886 by the demands of fashion. NEw JERSEY. Mr. Stone, of the Committee, reports of the New Jersey coast: “T have visited, or have reliable reports from, various points from Point Pleasant to Cape May. I have no record whatever of any Sterna antillarum. S. hirundo continues in about the same numbers as for several years past. There were about ten pairs breeding between Atlantic City and Brigantine, all back on the salt marshes, and they are reported more plentiful near Avalon. Larus atricilla 1 found breeding on the marshes northwest of Brigantine beach, the colony including about 4o pairs. ‘Another colony is reported from near Sea Isle City. Tam sorry to state that fishermen were systematically robbing the nests at Brigantine; the colony, however, is out of reach of the ordinary 24 Report of Committee on Bird Protection. oe summer visitors, as the water is so shallow that but few yachts ever go up so far. The Clapper Rails were very plentiful, and but little egging was done. Unfortunately, however, there were two very high tides in September which completely flooded the marshes and compelled the birds to swim, when they became easy marks for the pot hunters. It is estimated that ro,ooo birds were killed in two days at Atlantic City alone. The market was glutted, and large numbers of the dead Rails went to waste. If a limit to the number shot by one man could be fixed by law it would have an excellent effect. “The Pennsylvania Audubon Society has only just been organized, and is not yet in working order. Its plan of work will be much the same as the Massachusetts Society, after which itis modeled. Many of the most prominent citizens of Philadel- phia have given it their support as honorary Vice-Presidents, and we hope to do some good work. “During the year I have delivered a number of lectures in Philadelphia and vicinity before schools, societies, etc., on orni- thology, and worked with good success to interest persons in the study and protection of birds; the former generally follows the latter, and I think the diffusion of: ornithological information in this way a very important matter. Mrs. Olive Thorne Miller’s course of lectures in the city last spring was productive of good results. “ Finally, I would report that the Delaware Valley Ornitho- logical Club has a Committee on Protection of Birds, which is prepared to deal with any questions which may be brought to its notice.” ILLINOIS. Mr. Ruthven Deane, of the Committee, reports as follows : “In regard to the present use of birds for millinery purposes, I have made considerable investigation, having been introduced to a number of our largest and best-posted firms in that business. The result of my inquiries is that while feathers and plumes are extensively used in the trimming of hats, few, if any, native birds, aside from the Egret, are now used. Vol. XIV a7 Report of Committee on Bird Protection. 25 “The majority of the feathers are from pigeons and chickens, and are dyed. I cannot find, as reported by Miss Merriam, that any artificial heads and beaks are made of celluloid. “The rage for the Egret plumes is greater than ever, and in the past sixty days the price has advanced over one hundred per cent. At present the fashion is principally to use the stub half of the plume, although the tips and finer ends are also used, but to a less extent, naturally being considerably higher in price. “Our city taxidermists advise me that they have had little or no order work for millinery purposes in the past year, and such as they have had has not been for insectivorous birds, and that they do not employ boys to shoot specimens, as was once their custom. “The proprietor of one of our large wholesale millinery stores informed me that a feather and plume dealer with whom he used to do business had ceased fitting out any further expeditions, he having lost heavily or: former ventures. “ About the only heads of birds that have been in use in the past year have been those of some foreign Blackbirds and Spar- rows, which have been principally imported from France. The quills of one or two species of Pheasants, probably from China, are also more or less in fashion. ‘The birds are imported in the skins, so as to save the duty on manufactured goods, and the tail, composed of eighteen feathers, commands quite a large price. ‘“ Really the only destruction that is now going on among our native birds is evidently among the Herons and Egrets, and, while this has been on the increase for the present fashion of this spring (1896), the general opinion is that it will die out, not to return to the extent that has heretofore prevailed. “T have recently been using my influence upon a number of ignorant country boys, who have annually made a great depreda- tion among the Herons in what is known as ‘Crane Heaven,’ on the Kankakee River, in Indiana, and, while my influence was only on a moral basis, several promised to desist from any wanton destruction this year. Two gunners would visit the heronry once or twice during the summer and slaughter from sixty to eighty Great Blue Herons in a day, leaving them where they fell on the ground. 4 26 Report of Committee on Bird Protection. tans “The Game Laws of Illinois last year were more carefully enforced than for many years, and a great many arrests were made among idle boys who were shooting small species, such as Robins, Woodpeckers, etc. I think the same watchfulness will be continued this year.” In a later communication Mr. Deane writes as follows: ‘‘ Fashion in feather ornamentation has not materially changed since I wrote you in detail in the spring. We occasionally see the heads or wings of some of our native species worn in their natural color, yet the tame Pigeon and Egret head the list in this section of the country. ‘‘T wrote you before that I had endeavored to use influence in the protection of Herons in a certain ‘Crane Heaven’ on the Kankakee River in Indiana. During two trips in the past two weeks in that region I find, quite to my Satisfaction, that no raids were made on the heronry last spring and summer, as had yearly been the custom of the native boys and, I am sorry to say, some so-called sportsmen. My appeal may have done some good, but the fact that a bad fire played havoc in the woods near the her- onry, made the approach much more difficult. The location where the Night Herons bred, a long stretch of low ‘ pucker brush’ bordering the marsh, was wiped out by fire, but the birds evidently found another favorable site, for they are much more abundant now than I have seen them in years. “T have been living this summer at Highland Park, a small town twenty-five miles up the Lake shore. The authorities have taken strict action against the killing of insectivorous and song birds, and have posted that section of the law on the trees and public buildings of the town. The unusual abundance of many of the summer resident birds is no doubt the result of the enforce- ment of the law.” CALIFORNIA. Mr. Leverett M. Loomis reports for California as follows : — *‘ Several days ago I sent you a ‘separate,’ giving some account of the havoc that is being made by the light keepers among the sea birds on South Farallon Island — the sale of eggs to collectors Vo). XIV 1867 Report of Committee on Bird Protection. 27 threatening the extermination of the Petrels, and the market trade the extermination of the Murres and Gulls. “I write now seeking the aid of the A. O. U. in putting an end to this nefarious traffic. Two steps are needful: “1. A California law must be secured prohibiting the sale of wild birds’ eggs. ‘This will stop the shipping of eggs to the ” markets. “2. An order must be obtained from the U.S. Lighthouse Board instructing the Farallon keepers to stop gathering eggs, and to keep off possible poachers that might want eggs for their own consumption. “A committee from the California Academy of Sciences can attend to the California law. I shall present the matter in a lecture [am to deliver on the Farallons, October 19, before the Academy. | “ It remains for the A. O. U. to secure the action of the Light- house Board. ‘‘ All this can be accomplished this fall, and another season the birds will be allowed to breed, and the rookeries will be preserved. Kindly send me copies of the New York and Massachusetts laws relating to bird protection, especially of sea birds.” (A popular article, confirming Mr. Loomis’s statement regard- ing the wanton destruction of eggs on the Farallons, appeared in ‘Leslie’s Popular Monthly,’ New York, November, 1896, pp. 589-597 — ten illustrations. ) In response to Mr. Loomis’s appeal for aid, your Chairman at once, wrote to the Lighthouse Board as follows : — New York, Oct. 3, 1896. THE Hon. SECRETARY LIGHTHOUSE BOARD, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR :— As Chairman of the American Ornithologists’ Union Committee on the protection of North American Birds, I deem it my duty to call to your attention an abuse that you have power to abate, z. e., the destruc- tion of the eggs of certain sea birds that breed on South Farallon Island. I send you herewith a copy of a letter received from Prof. Loomis, of the California Academy of Sciences, together with a copy of a paper written by him on California birds in which, on pp. 356-358, he calls attention to the abuse. Jan. 25 Report of Commitiee on Bird Protection. ans I assume that the island in question belongs to the Government, and as the lightkeeper is a public servant in the employ of the Government, drawing a salary for a specific purpose, he has no right to engage in any commercial pursuit, especially when it is so harmful in its effects. This destructive work can be easily stopped if the Lighthouse Board will issue an order to the keeper of the South Farallon Light prohibiting him from engaging in egging, and also authorizing him to prevent all other persons from egging on the Government property. I feel assured that your Board are in sympathy with this work, from the fact that some four years since, by authority of the Lighthouse Board, Capt. Henry P. Field, of the Little Gull Island Light, N. Y., was allowed to be appointed as Special Game Protector under the New York State laws for the purpose of protecting the colony of Common Terns (Sterna hirundo) and Roseate Terns (Sterna dougallz) on Great Gull Island. The protection afforded this colony of Terns has increased it more than four-fold and necessitates no action on the part of the Lighthouse Keeper except to inform eggers that the birds are protected. I trust that your honorable Board will see fit to issue the order asked for, and I shall be pleased to have a communication from you to that effect so that I may so report to Prof. Loomis and to our Society. An immediate reply was received, as follows : Treasury Department, Office of the Lighthouse Board. WASHINGTON, 7 October, 1896. Mr. WILLIAM DuTCHER, Chatrman of the American Ornithologists Union Committee, No. 525 Manhattan Avenue, New York, N. Y. SIR :— Your letter of 3d of October, 1896, relative to the sale of wild birds’ eggs, by employes of the Lighthouse Establishment, on South Farallon Island, Cal., has been received. In reply, the Board has to state that your letter, together with its enclosures, was referred this date to the district officers of the 12th Lighthouse District for enquiry, and for a joint report to the Board upon the subject. The co-operation of the Biological Survey of the Department of Agriculture has been promised in case the appeal to the Lighthouse Board is not successful. LOWER CALIFORNIA. Mr. A. W. Anthony, of San Diego, Cal., appealed early in the year to the Committee, through Mr. Stone, for aid to prevent the Vol. XIV i867 Report of Committee on Bird Protection. 29 extermination of the Herons of Lower California. The follow- ing extracts are from letters from Mr. Anthony to Mr. Stone, dated April 5 and May 3, 1896. “IT see by the January ‘Auk’ that you are a member of the new Committee on Protection of North American Birds. The subject is one in which I have been, and still am, very much in- terested; of late, however, I have about given up ever seeing anything done for the few Herons that are left. The fact that a new Committee has been appointed would seem to indicate that something was to be done, but what? Has any plan been proposed ? “I have for several years thought of all sorts of impossible plans for protection, but could never hit upon anything that [ thought would do any good. If we could get one or two journals like ‘ Harper’s Bazar’ to cry down the custom of wearing birds, advising something in their place, the fight would be short. | think that about half the women who wear Heron plumes honestly believe they are not feathers; and then, also, education is needed. I often, when I scold at such head-wear, am somewhat taken down by: ‘ The idea! that ‘aigrette’ never saw a bird. They are simply manufactured feathers,’ etc. “The slaughter has begun here on this coast in all its glory. Eastern firms are sending out great inducements to anyone they think will hunt or buy for them. Papers like the San Francisco ‘ Call,’ etc., in their Sunday editions, print accounts several columns in length of how someone made some fabulous sum in a few weeks shooting Herons for their plumes ‘which are worth several times their weight in gold,’ etc., and every such article does vast harm. “As a result, all the Indians on the Colorado River below Yuma, and many white men also, are hard at work killing off the birds that nest in considerable numbers on the islands in the delta and along the extensive lagoons of that region. This year they have got into Magdelena Bay, where countless thousands have heretofore nested in safety, but at the rate they are now being killed they cannot last long. “T have carefully avoided publishing anything regarding the very extensive nesting colonies of Terns, Herons, etc., of Lower 30 Report of Committee on Bird Protection. ro California, fearing that it would result in their being set upon by plume hunters, but I think I have had my trouble for nothing. There was a good deal of talk last spring of outfitting one or more large schooners here and taking a lot of hunters to the Mex- ican coast below San Blas, where lagoons extend for a hundred miles or more along the beach and vast rookeries are known to exist, but other business came up at that time and the schooners did not go; however, they will go as soon as times get dull again. ‘“‘T think it is in the power of the Secretary of the Interior, or of Customs, to put a stop to all such work in twenty-four hours. There would be little use, I think, in trying to do anything with them in a political way, but if the right parties were approached personally, z. ¢., notin their official capacity, it might work, and, if so, would do a great deal toward helping us inthe United States. I shall be interested in hearing what your Committee is doing. “‘T think a good plan would be for a Committee of some scientific society to prepare a letter, setting forth in strong language the damage done to our Herons in Florida, and the fact of these same plume hunters being now engaged in similar work in Mexico. I think it is now unlawful to take plumes in Florida. If so, that would have its good effect, as they like to follow our lead. You cannot make it too strong, and by appealing to them in person,— the Governors of two or three States,— you would make a strong friend of each. If one could be made to stop the work in his State, I think by a very little work the rest would be induced to follow, and so stop it all over Mexico. Such letter should be endorsed by as many scientific societies as possible, which would make it very impressive. .. . “We have a very good class of farmers in Southern California, at least; they object strongly to having Hawks and Owls shot, and give them all the protection one could ask. “Cold storage doesn’t cut any figure in this State,— all game must be disposed of at once and possession, even in cold storage, is the same as killing in the close season, even if shipped from Mexico. “T think the egg traffic should be stopped, however, at San Francisco, especially as it does a great deal of damage to the sea fowl. Vol. XIV 857 Report of Committee on Bird Protection. 31 “Tf I can be of use at any time I shall be glad to furnish any aid possible.” Following the suggestion of Mr. Anthony, strong letters to the proper authorities, urging the protection of all Herons, were sent through Mr. Stone, and by Prof. J. A. Allen in behalf of the Linnaean Society of New York, to whose attention the matter was brought. No report of the direct results obtained has been received as yet. AUDUBON SOCIETIES. Very valuable work is being done, and will be done in the future, by the Audubon Societies which have been established, or are now in process of organization. ‘The first of these, the Massachusetts Audubon Society, was organized in 1886. As each one is planned on the same lines, and with the same objects in view, a quotation from the prospectus of the Massachusetts Society will serve to give the character of the work hoped to be accomplished. ‘The purpose of the Society is to discourage buying and wearing for ornamental purposes the feathers of any wild bird, and to otherwise further the protection of our native birds. We would awaken the community to the fact that this fashion of wearing feathers means the cruel slaughter of myriads of birds, and that some of our finest birds are already decimated, and may ultimately be exterminated by the demand for their feathers. We would make an appeal to all lovers of nature, since by this reckless demand of fashion the woods and fields are being stripped of one of their chief attractions, and the country deprived of indispensa- ble friends to agriculture.” Any person is eligible for membership who is willing to sub- scribe to the following simple pledge: ‘‘ Being in sympathy with the principles of the Massachusetts Audubon Society, I hereby agree not to purchase or encourage the use of feathers of wild birds for ornamentation.” A very small fee is required of members, the same being used solely for the purpose of printing and disseminating the necessary literature of the subject. Societies similar to the above are now actively working in Phila- delphia and Chicago, and I am pleased to state that one is in Auk Jan. 32 Report of Committee on Bird Protection. process of formation in New York. As a striking sign of the influence of the Massachusetts Society, it may be stated that one of the fashionable milliners of Boston is a member of the Society and, consequently, will not sell the plumage of wild birds to her customers. A large and influential Society, having for its object the pro- tection of birds has existed for some years in England, the President being the Duchess of Portland, and the Secretary, Mrs. F. E. Lemon, Hillcrest, Redhill, England. The literature issued by the English Society has been sent to your Committee, and is found to be very complete. A large part of it, with some modi- fication, could be adopted by the American Societies to advantage. At a recent International Congress for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals it was decided to found, in the various countries represented at the Congress, children’s societies for the protection of those birds which are now killed in such vast numbers for the sake of adorning with their plumage feminine hats and dresses. While legislation may be of vast benefit in protecting all bird life, yet we firmly believe that the true solution of the problem will be the education of the children of our schools, both public and private. They should be taught in every grade, from the kinder- garten to the college, not only the esthetic but the economical value of our birds. ‘To this end the Division of the Biological Survey, United States Department of Agriculture, has issued a very valuable paper (Circular No. 17) which should be in the hands of every teacher and educator on this continent, with an urgent appeal that the suggestions in the circular be carried out to the fullest extent. When we have educated our children laws will be unnecessary. In conclusion, your Committee asks to be continued with the power to add to its numbers from the members of the Society, and suggests that each one of the 600 members of the Union shall take an active interest in this work during the coming year, espe- cially in distributing ‘ Circular No. 17,’ and in the formation of local societies in the localities in which they may reside. Respectfully submitted : WILLIAM DUTCHER, Chairman. Vol. XIV aSa7 CHADBOURNE oz Individual Dichromatism. 33 EVIDENCE SUGGESTIVE OF THE OCCURRENCE OF ‘INDIVIDUAL DICHROMATISM’ IN MEGASCOPS ASIO. BY ARTHUR P. CHADBOURNE, M. D. Plate I. (Concluded from Vol. XIII, p. 325-) As to the cause of the altered color :— The exclusive diet of liver seems to be the only unusual feature in the conditions under which my two Owls lived, compared with other birds of prey in captivity; or at least, it is the most noticeable one. We have already seen that the change in the female was first apparent after this food had been alone used for about three weeks, and also that the smaller Owl a little later showed signs of a similar change; while almost an equal length of time after the liver had been discontinued, there seemed to be a gradual loss of the red tint. Was this chance, or is it a hint, as to the cause of the red brown color? The liver is well-known to contain an extremely large amount of coloring matter, and to play an important part in the production of the majority of the different pigments of the organism, either directly or indirectly. Moreover, it is a fact that the color of the plumage can be altered by certain kinds of food — thus, some breeds, of the Canary (the ‘ Yellow Norwich’ among others), change froma pure yellow to a bright orange, if red pepper is daily mixed with their food; and this too without any feather loss, as I have myself seen. Who can tell the effect of a continued diet of liver, until he has tried the experiment — on an Owl? The way in which the colors of feathers are produced can only be briefly mentioned here, but a few words on the subject may not be out of place. In general, feather-color is due (1) to pig- mented matter of one, or of several colors; (2) to the physical effect of the structure of the part on the light rays ; or (3) to both of the above combined. Pigment absorbs all kinds of light ex- cept that on which its color depends, thus in a brown feather the only unabsorbed light rays are those which produce the sensation of brown, and these alone reach the eye. Black results from the complete absorption, or deflection of all light rays; while if none 5 34 CHADBOURNE 0x2 Individual Dichromatism. ew of the spectral colors fail to reach the eye, the combination pro- duces white. In addition, an almost endless variety of colors, shades and tints are caused by mixtures of different ‘ pigments,’ much in the way we use different paints. The action of the structure and form of the colored parts is, on the other hand, purely physical; for example, the lateral branches, forming the vane, may have their surfaces so shaped, as to produce the effect of a multitude of small prisms, by which the different colored rays are made to diverge, only those of a certain color reaching the eye; perhaps, as believed by Gadow, slight movements bring different kinds of rays successively to the eye, and iridescence is the result. Color-change in the individual feather, — or, in a broader sense, in the plumage as a whole, without adequate new feather-growth (z. é., without a so-called ‘ moult’),! seems to have received little or no attention from ornithologists in this country during the past quarter of a century or more.” Yet about 1850, when the theory of “color-change without moult” was revived by Schlegel and Martin independently, German ornithological literature teemed with articles on this subject; and it had been proved even prior to this that the plumage might be completely altered in color without feather-loss or new feather-growth. And such color- change also seems to be normal, and probably recurs at regular intervals in certain individuals and conditions among various species. It has been shown in connection with the subject of the ‘ Spring Plumage of the Bobolink,’ *® that feather-change and color- change are two distinct processes ; but the point which concerns us at present is that a change in the color of the feather, or even of the whole plumage, not only may, but has been proved to occur nor- mally without increase of feather-loss. The color of my Owls was. evidently due to pigmented matter, and was practically independent of the physical action of the structure of the part on the light rays. Morphologically, one 1 The ‘aptosochromatism’ of Coues (Cf Auk). * The above was written in 1894, before the recent articles of Allen, Chap- man, Stone and others had appeared. 3 «The Spring Plumage of the Bobolink.’ Auk, Vol. XIV, pp. —. [The publication of this paper is necessarily deferred till the April number.— Epp. ] Vol. XIV Bey CHADBOURNE on Individual Dichromatism. 35 black, and at least two varieties of brownish coloring matter (so-called ‘ pigments’), were present, not only after the red-brown shade appeared in the plumage, but also in every feather of the gray type, except three of the ‘first’ and one from the mature gray plumage. The black pigmented matter was made up of oblong-oval or ellip- tical granules, never of small rods, as in the domestic pigeon ; but it is well-known that the shape varies in different kinds of birds. The amount of black granular matter was always rela- tively small, and it was chiefly confined to the deeper cell layers. Isolated spots of true black were frequent in the central cells, while around them there was often much dark brown. The brown pigmented material was found in the form of a pale, nongranular, diffused stain, extending through all kinds of feather tissue; and also as brown granules, of various tints and sizes, which were usually in narrow lines or groups, instead of being generally distributed, like the nongranular stain. The two extremes were connected by a complete series of intermediate forms, showing every gradation between the dark chocolate and the ochraceous tint; while the size of the granules also varied considerably, and it was at times not easy to distinguish the homo- geneous from the very finely granular. The black and very dark brown granules perhaps also intergrade, but on this point I can- not speak with certainty. As the red phase developed, more and more red-brown granules and diffuse stain seemed to be present in the feathers, at times obscuring, or completely hiding the dark markings beneath (Plate I, fig. 1), or grouped and scattered about the black in the deeper layers, caused various shades and tints of brown andtawny. Asa rule the seemingly black color proved to be the result of either a dense mass of dark brown granules, of the greater thickness of the darker portion of the specimen, or of both continued, plus an un- derlying area of true black in the deep tissues. The pure rufous and bright tawny portions had the coloring matter chiefly in the more superficial cell layers, and either little or no true black beneath; while the streaks and lines of brownish granules suggested the ‘bast-fibre layer’ of certain plants, and the tawny effect was heightened by the diffuse nongranular stain (Plate I, fig. 4, 3 Auk 36 CHADBOURNE oz Individual Dichromatism. Tan and ¢, fig. 5, and cut in text). In the white parts of the vane,‘the only color was a pale straw-yellow almost entirely limited to the outer (peripheral) cellular tissue, and probably caused by the Two Barbs from near A., pl. I, fig. 1. Groups of dark colored cells are seen in some parts of the barbs. (Zeiss 16mm. apochromat. and No. 6 comp. oc.) homogeneous stain (Plate I, fig. 1). The downy parts of the con- tour feathers had nodular enlargements at regular intervals, in which the coloring matter was usually collected (Plate I, fig. 4, 7); in other specimens the nodes were almost colorless, and the inter- nodes pigmented (Plate I, fig. 4,@). There seems to have been an absolute loss of black, as well as of the darkest brown granules Vol. XIV ae CHADBOURNE ox Individual Dichromatism. 37 during the progress of the change to the reddish phase, for mark- ings were absent, not merely hidden by overlying color, which had been distinct in corresponding specimens of the. gray phase. Feathers from twenty-five specimens of A/egascops asio' in the writer’s collection, in all stages of plumage, were indistinguish- able from those of the dichromatic female in corresponding dress, both the black and also the various shades of brownish pig- mented matter being present in the large majority of specimens examined ; but differing in relative amount and distribution. 1 The material examined was as follows: CAST-OFF FEATHERS FROM MY TWO OWLS. First plumage , : : : . 15 feathers. Typical gray phase j ¢ : : 9 ss Intermediate ‘ : : F : 56 ee During most marked stage of red-brown fe) cs Specimens from female after death of male 3 as From skin of female : : : 127 ie Total : 220) ae CAST-—-OFF FEATHERS FROM SKINS OF M. ASIO. 2 specimens | first plumage, typical gray : 4 . : gt feathers I © as s cr idexal é : 2 : Lice 7 " adult “ “gray : 3 ; : TIAy ace 9 7 5 a ee CouEs, Zamelodia against Habta. 4! gers now referred to Sa/fator or elsewhere. Hadbia may or may not be tenable for some such birds ; but obviously it cannot stand for any others; and consequently, on the principle that “once a synonym always a synonym,” or by our rule for the rejection of homonyms, Aadza Reich. 1850 falls to the ground, dragging with it the dsyecta membra of Dr. Stejneger’s worsted According to the admirably lucid neger’s ‘Analecta Ornithologica’ wer | even when their author was mistak: thus stated : — Genus Zame. 1850.— Habia ReEIcH., Av. Sy: I, 1850; type Guzraca CuvIER, 1849; mec AGAS ASSIZ ESA0n (Vee -407@ LEACH, Co x.ub ne, oY) 1851.— Hedymeles CaB., Mus. Hein. i, June, 1851, p. 152; type Loxia ludoviciana LINN.; nec Hedymela SUND., 1846. 1880.— Zamelodia CoueEs, Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, V. Apr. 1880, p. 98; type Loxta ludoviciana LINN. 1884.— Habia STEJNEGER, Auk, Oct. 1884, p. 367, evrore. 1886-95.— Habia, A.O. U. Lists, 1886-95, exrore, and of mis- led American writers generally since 1384. I gladly avail myself further of the incomparable Stejnegerian method of exposition to state that the species, according to Coues’s Key, 2d—4th eds. 1884-g0, p. 389, will stand—not as Dr. Stej- neger, /. ¢., says they will stand— but as: 244. Zamelodia ludoviciana (LINN.). RoOSE-BREASTED GROs- BEAK. 245. Zamelodia melanocephala (Swains.). BLACK-HEADED GROSBEAK. Dr. Stejneger’s acquirements in Greek etymology seem to have failed him in discussing the meaning of 4dza, as the Agassizian emendation of Hada, in 1846. The learned gentleman says that Abia would seem to be derived from dios, in the meaning of ‘ poor, without food.’ He may be glad to be informed that Adza is directly from the Greek 4 privitive and Bia, force, power, might, bodily strength, being first introduced in zodlogy by Dr. W. E. 6 Auk Jan 42 NELSON, New Birds from Mexico and Guatemala. Leach for a.genus of hymenopterous insects of the family Tenth- ridinidz, and subsequently (1856) used by Dr. Giebel for a genus of neuropterous insects. While I am pleased to be able to compli- ment him upon the discovery that this entomological word “ has no connection with the original #adza,” he is mistaken in saying that Abia and Hadia are not the same word in ornithology; for Aédza is simply a variant of Hada, introduced by Agassiz upon a mistaken notion of the etymology and correct form of Azara’s name hadia. If Dr. Stejneger will look in the Index of Gray’s‘ Handlist’, he will find both forms in ornithology. The literal identity of 44za Leach and Adia Agassiz is simply fortuitous; the former is of Greek origin ; the latterisnot. I stated the matter correctly, some years ago, in the. ‘ Century Dictionary >: see under the words Adza, Habia, and Zégnelodia. PRELIMINARY DESCRIPTIONS OF NEW BIRDS FROM MEXICO; ANDVGUATEMALA IN THE COLEEC TION OF TEE UNITED SLA LES DEPART- MENT OF AGRICULTURE. BY E. W. NELSON. THE present paper is based upon specimens of Mexican and Guatemalan birds obtained mainly by myself and my assistant, Mr. E. A. Goldman, during explorations conducted for the Bio- logical Survey of the U. S. Department of Agriculture during the last five years. In addition to this collection, numbering between four and five thousand specimens, I have had free access to the National Museum series of Tropical American birds for purposes of comparison. In the course of our work we have traversed Mexico from one end to the other, and have crossed the country six times from sea to sea. Specimens were obtained in many districts never before visited by an ornithologist, and although the collections were not exhaustive in any given place, yet the aggregate of series from numerous localities scattered over a large part of the country has afforded a great amount of interesting material. Vol. XIV oe | NELSON, Mew Birds from Mexico and Guatemala. 43 Mexico covers a wide range of topographic and climatic condi- tions, from tropical coasts to snowy summits of gigantic volcanoes. The coast lowlands are humid in some parts and very arid in others. Above these rise mountain slopes that are bathed in rain and mist during much of the year; and still beyond are the arid desert table-lands of the interior. As might be supposed, these differences in climate and other physical features result in various well defined life zones and give great variety to the animal and vegetable life. My knowledge of these climatic and topographic features has been of the greatest service in enabling me to define with some accuracy the geographical races herein described. In no instance is a bird described as new unless the differences from its nearest relative are associated with definite changes in the phy- sical surroundings. A detailed study of the country with,modern methods will define the life areas of this region, and the corre- sponding variation of many species into geographical races will be more definitely known. The present descriptions are merely preliminary to a fuller account that will be given in a future publication. I have to express my obligation to Dr. C. Hart Merriam, Chief of the Biological Survey, under whose direction the field work was done, for the opportunity to report upon the material obtained. During the preparation of this paper I have had the most cordial assistance from Mr. Robert Ridgway, Curator of the Department of Birds in the National Museum, whose thorough knowledge of North American birds was placed freely at my service, enabling me to do the work in a fraction of the time that otherwise would have been necessary. I am indebted also to Mr. Charles W. Richmond, Assistant Curator of Birds in the National Museum, for assistance in a number of ways. Throughout this paper the measurements given are in milli- meters. Dendrortyx oaxacez, new species. Oaxaca WooDGROUSE. Type, No. 155565, U. S. Nat. Museum, Dept. Agric. coll., ¢, Totontepec, Oaxaca, Mexico, July 24, 1894. Collected by E. W. Nelson and E. A. Goldman (Orig. No. 2227). Distribution.— Mountains of eastern Oaxaca trom the Cerro San Felipe, near Oaxaca City, to Mount Zempoaltepec, Oaxaca. Auk Jan. 44 NE son, Mew Birds from Mexico and Guatemala. Description of type.— Top of head and nape, including crest, black. The white cheek stripe extending from below eye backward along side of gular black patch, and the white superciliary line, so prominent in the forms of D. macrourus, are very indistinct in this bird. The white borders to the feathers also so conspicuous on the back of the neck in that species are absent in D. oaxace. The feathers of neck, below the black throat patch, and on sides of breast are mostly dark chestnut with very narrow ashy borders along their sides, thus producing an almost uniformly chestnut area. The entire bird is darker than macrourus and is characterized by a suppression ot the lighter markings seen in that species. Dendrortyx macrourus griseipectus, new subspecies. GRAY-BREASTED WOODGROUSE. Type, No. 155560, U. S. Nat. Museum, Dept: Agric. coll., g, Huitzilac, Morelos, Mexico, Dec. 30, 1892. Collected by E. W. Nelson (Orig. No. 628). Distribution.— Heavy oak forest on the Pacific slope of the Cordillera, in the States of Morelos and Mexico. Description.— Basal half or two thirds of breast feathers with narrow rufous shaft-streaks almost entirely concealed by broad, dingy gray borders of overlapping feathers; general color of breast nearly uniform dingy gray; back, rump, wings and flanks darker and more olive than in mac- rourus; flanks with very indistinct, narrow shaft-lines of rufous; size of MaACKOUKUS. The type of Dendrortyx macrourus was described and figured in Jardine and Selby’s ‘ Illustrated Ornithology’ (text to plates 38 and 49) and its range given as ‘Mexico’. The description given in the work quoted applies most closely to birds from the mountains about the Valley of Mexico. The Zetrao marmorata of La Llave, from the mountains about the same Valley, is undoubtedly a pure synonym of macrourus. Taking birds from these high, pine and fir clad mountains as typical representatives of the species, specimens from other parts of southern Mexico show variations worthy of recognition as geographical races. Dendrortyx macrourus striatus, new subspecies. GUERRERO WOODGROUSE. Type, No. 155567, U. S. Nat. Museum, Dept. Agric. coll., 2, mountains near Chilpancingo, Guerrero, Mexico, Dec. 24, 1894. Collected by E. W. Nelson and E. A. Goldman (Orig. No. 2436). eee ul NELSON, New Birds from Mexico and Guatemala. 45 Distribution. The mixed forest of oaks, pines and firs on the high Cordillera of Guerrero above 8000 feet. Description.— Rather smaller than the other forms, with a longer, slenderer beak. The most conspicuous character is the heavy rufous shaft- lines of the feathers along the entire flanks, which do not become obsolete posteriorly as in the others. The back is very dark and the rump and upper tail-coverts lack the mottling of whitish conspicuous in the others. The tail also is darker. Colinus salvini, new species. SALvVIN’s BoB-WHITE. Type, No. 155503, U. S. Nat. Museum, Dept. Agric. coll., @, Tapachula, Chiapas, Mexico, March 10, 1896. Collected by E. W. Nelson and E. A. Goldman (Orig. No. 3634). Distribution.—The grassy coast plains between Tapachula and San Benito, Chiapas, Mexico. Description of male.— Head, neck and fore breast dull black, feathers on back part of crown and nape spotted with whitish and brown along borders; top and sides of shoulders dull rufous, the feathers heavily bordered with dull, dark gray; middle of back, rump and upper tail-coverts blackish, the ends of the feathers with rufous brown mottling and gray edges ; wing-coverts with irregular rufous shaft-lines, their sides grayish and brown with white spots along edges; scapulars like back but with conspicuous white spots along borders ; primaries and secondaries grayish brown with lighter mottling of fulvous and gray on outer part of second- aries ; lower surface of body, below black area on breast, dark rufous, the feathers faintly edged or washed with blackish giving a dingy shade to main color; lower tail-coverts mottled, or coarsely variegated with rufous, blackish and white. Dimensions.— Wing 100, tail 54, culmen 15, tarsus 29. Colinus coyolcos is the nearest relative of this bird, but in com- paring eleven specimens of each species, including both sexes, it appears to be perfectly distinct. It is named in honor of Mr. Osbert Salvin, one of the authors of the ‘ Biologia Centrali-Americana,’ which has added so much to our knowledge of Mexican and Central American bird life. Colinus godmani, new species. Gopman’s Bop-wHITE. Type, No. 155493, U. S. Nat. Museum, Dept. Agric. coll., ¢, Jaltipan, Vera Cruz, Mexico, May 2, 1896. Collected by E. W. Nelson and E. A. Goldman (Orig. No. 3719). 46 NeEtson, New Birds from Mexico and Guatemala. Auk Jan. Distribution.— The coast plains about Jaltipan and Minatitlan, Vera Cruz, and thence north to Lake Catemaco, in the same State. Description of male.— Lores, superciliary stripe, chin, throat and sides of head up to ear-coverts white; a black band from near angle of gape, below eye, running backward over ear-coverts to join black area of neck; forehead and line along each side of crown black; middle of crown and nape blackish with brown and gray edgings to feathers; hind part, sides and lower part of neck, with breast, glossy black; shoulders and fore part of back chestnut, with narrow borders of black and then gray on each feather; lower back, rump and upper tail-coverts blackish, finely marked and mottled with olive, rufous brown and grayish white; the general color much darker than in C. graysonz; wing-coverts irregularly marked with black, with white spots on edges of feathers; tertials similar in general color to rump but with distinct white spotting along edges; quills dull brown with ashy borders on outer vanes; secondaries brown, trans- versely mottled with grayish and buffy on exposed parts; flanks, abdomen and lower tail-coverts light chestnut, with heavy black borders on feathers of flanks and abdomen; these markings producing a broadly streaked pattern; under tail-coverts black spotted; feathers on sides of crissum spotted with white on each vane near tip. Dimenstons.— Wing 100, tail 55, culmen 15, tarsus 29. This is a very distinct species and one of the most beautiful in the genus. It is based upon five adult specimens and is named in honor of Mr. F. DuCane Godman in recognition of his valuable services to Mexican and Central American ornithology, as joint author with Mr. Salvin of-the ‘ Biologia Centrali-Americana.’ Colinus insignis, new species. GUATEMALAN Bos-wHITE. Type, No. 155516, U. S. Nat. Museum, Dept. Agric. coll., 2, Nenton, Guatemala, December 16, 1895. Collected by E. W. Nelson and E. A. Goldman (Orig. No. 3299). Distribution.— Guatemala, near Nenton (and Valley of Comitan, in Chiapas, Mexico?). Description of female.— Forehead, lores and superciliary stripe united in a buffy area; chin and throat of sfme color; feathers on top of head and nape black, tipped with chestnut, and edged on sides with bufty gray; a black line from angle of gape to ear-coverts; ear-coverts dark brown; feathers on back of neck and fore part of shoulders chestnut, heavily marked along sides with black and white spots and blotches ; feathers on back, rump and upper tail-coverts blackish, irregularly barred and marked with dull, whitish gray and brown, and narrowly edged with y er ea NeEtson, Mew Birds from Mexico and Guatemala. 47 whitish which, contrasting with the blackish centres, produces the main pattern of coloration; tertiaries and wing-coverts similarly colored, but bordered with pale fulvous on inner webs; the fulvous borders heaviest on tertiaries; tail slaty gray, with vermiculations of paler gray and brown; quills dull brownish, edged on outer borders with ashy; sides and under part of neck with fore part of breast conspicuously marked with white, black and dull chestnut; sides of breast and flanks dull chestnut, the feathers marked on each side near the tip by a black area succeeded by a white spot; under tail-coverts chestnut with narrow black shaft-lines which broaden near ends of feathers. Dimenstons.— Wing 104, tail 58, culmen 16, tarsus 29. While in the Valley of Comitan, Chiapas, we were told of the presence there of a species of Bob-white, but saw none during our short stay. At Nenton, in Guatemala, a locality half a day’s journey beyond the Valley, we secured a single adult female which is very different from the female of any other known bird of this genus, and as none of the various species taken in the surround- ing region show a gradation toward it, I feel justified in giving the new bird specific rank. Colinus graysoni nigripectus, new subspecies. PUEBLA Bob-WHITE. Type, No. 155522, U. S. Nat. Museum, Dept. Agric. coll., ¢, Atlixco, Puebla, Mexico, August 9, 1893. Collected by E. W. Nelson (Orig. No. 1460). Distribution — Plains of southern Puebla. Description.— Contrasted with typical C. graysoni, nigripectus may be distinguished by its paler shade of rufous both above and below, by the greater width of the black area bordering the white of throat and by its smaller size. The black of the neck extends from the border of the white throat area down over the fore part of the chest and also reaches farther back along the sides of the neck. Dimensions.—W ing 110, tail 60, culmen 16, tarsus 30. We found typical grayson7 ranging south to the northern end of the Valley of Mexico. Thence southeasterly to the City of Puebla none were seen, but when we reached Atlixco the present subspecies was common on the cultivated plain. This subspecies is based upon five adult specimens. Auk 48 NELSON, New Birds from Mexico and Guatemala. ina Cyrtonyx merriami, new species. MERRIAM’S PARTRIDGE. Type, No. 155543, U. S. Nat. Museum, Dept. Agric. coll., g, Mt. Orizaba, Vera Cruz, Mexico, March 21, 1894. Collected by E. W. Nelson and E. A. Goldman (Orig. No. 1830). Distribution — East slope of Mt. Orizaba, Vera Cruz. Description.—The general pattern of head markings of merréam?@ is much as in montezume, except that the black chin and throat area extends down to the chestnut on the lower neck and breast with no intervening white collar; the white superciliary band which extends under the black throat patch as a white collar in montezume@, ends on each side of the neck in merriamz. Bluish-black auricular patches extend forward on the sides of neck and form a broad junction with the black of the throat. The crown and crest are darker than in moxtezume, the light shaft-streaks on the back of the neck and shoulders are bufty whitish, becoming more and more intensely colored posteriorly, until on the longer scapulars and tertiaries they are almost or quite chestnut; the webs of the tertiaries are gray, becoming browner near the tips, and are crossed by several trans- verse, oblong black spots which are much narrower and more like bars than are the corresponding markings in montezume; the back and rump are blackish with golden buffy shaft-lines, brown mottling and narrow ashy edgings to the feathers; the upper tail-coverts are ashy with heavy rusty shaft-lines and several transverse black bars on each web or the feathers ; the chestnut area of the breast and belly is as in montezuma, but is of a lighter shade; the sides of the breast and flanks are slaty gray, lighter than in the latter species and marked with numerous round white spots about half the size of those in that bird. On the posterior portion of the flanks the white spotting is replaced by spots of buffy and chestnut. The rest of the lower parts are black as in montezume. It is named in honor of Dr. C. Hart Merriam, under whose direction our work in Mexico has been done. This Partridge appears to be closely related to Odontophorus meleagris of Wagler (Isis, 1832, p. 277), but differs in having the white spots of the flanks on a background of ashy gray instead of black. Like that species it lacks the white collar on the neck, which in montezume separates the black of the throat from the chestnut of the breast. Heretofore me/eagris has been placed as a synonym of montezume, but the discovery of C. merriami with the same general style of markings given for me/eagris, indi- cates that the latter is probably a well-marked species which has failed of recognition through lack of material. It was described from Mexico and should take its proper place in ornithological literature. Vol. XIV TRb9 | NELSON, New Birds from Mexico and Guatemala. 49 -Megascops marmoratus, new species. MARBLED SCREECH OwL. Type, No. 155676, U. S. Nat. Museum, Dept. Agric. coll., 2, Catemaco, Vera Cruz, Mexico, May 4, 1894. Collected by E. W. Nelson and Ba As Goldman (Orig. No. 2002). Distribution.— The only known specimen of this bird was taken in the sparsely wooded country bordering the northern shore of Lake Catemaco, Vera Cruz, at an altitude of about 1200 feet. In size and general style of color this species is most closely related to Megascops guatemalensis, from which it may be distin- guished by its generally paler and grayer coloration, and by the finer dark shaft markings, both above and below. ‘The general color of the dorsal surface is light sepia brown, darkest on head and shoulders. The gray and dark brown, or dull fulvous, mot- tlings on both dorsal and ventral surfaces are much finer than in guatemalensis. The legs to toes are thickly barred with white and reddish brown, the latter color being much paler than in the last named species. ‘Toes bare. From MZ. brasiliensis, as represented in the National Museum collection from various Central American localities, marmoratus may be distinguished readily by the absence of the dull yellowish, or fulvous, suffusion which pervades the plumage, just below the surface, in that species. Momotus mexicanus saturatus, new subspecies. Coast Mormot. Type, No. 155151, U. S. Nat. Museum, Dept. Agric. coll., ¢, Tehuante- pec City, Oaxaca, Mexico, April 29, 1895. Collected by E. W. Nelson and E. A. Goldman (Orig. No. 2618). Distribution.— Pacific coast district of Mexico from Mazatlan, Sinaloa to Tonala in Chiapas. Description.— Contrasted with typical MZ mexicanus the new form is larger and has the crown deeper rufous; the greens of the back are deeper and more olive; the rufous of the crown and neck extends farther over the shoulders, and the black area of the ear-coverts is more broadly edged with blue. The type measures as follows: Wing 126, tail 200, culmen 44, tarsus 29. A typical male of mexzcanus measures: Wing 116, tail 170, culmen 39, tarsus 25. Momotus mexicanus was described from specimens obtained at Temiscaltepec in the State of Mexico. Having before me a con- 7 Auk Jan. 50 Ne tson, New Birds from Mexico and Guatemala. siderable series of these birds I find that specimens from the hot, dry ‘tierra caliente’ midway on the mountain slopes draining to the Pacific, from Etzatlan in Jalisco to southern Puebla and adja- cent parts of Oaxaca, agree in being smaller and duller colored than those from the more humid districts near the coast, between Mazatlan and Tonala. ‘The bird of the interior being the typical form, it remains to describe that of the coast region. Dryobates sanctorum, new species. CHIAPAS WOODPECKER. Type, No. 154889, U. S. Nat. Museum, Dept. Agric. coll., @, Todos Santos, Guatemala, December 30, 1895. Collected by E. W. Nelson and EK. A. Goldman (Orig. No. 3321). Distribution.—High mountains of Chiapas and Guatemala. Description—The lower surface is an intense smoky brown, and the outer tail-feathers have their light areas nearly as dark. The dorsal stripe in most cases is like the ventral surface but is rather more fulvous. The type of sanxctorum measures as follows: Wing 111, tail 64, culmen 25, tarsus 21. An average male from the region whence came the type of jardinti measures: Wing 127, tail 80, culmen 28, tarsus 21. In the collections made by us in Mexico and Guatemala are two distinct Woodpeckers of the jardini style. One series of eight specimens from the mountains of central Mexico, taken at localities ranging from the State of Michoacan to the mountainous borders of the Vailey of Mexico and Mt. Orizaba, Puebla, are typical jardiniz, South of this region, in the mountains of Oaxaca, these birds become extremely rare. Crossing the Isth- mus of Tehuantepec and entering the high mountains of interior Chiapas and Guatemala, a smaller species is found which has hitherto been referred to the central Mexican bird, zardiniz. Ten specimens before me from Chiapas and Guatemala, are very dis- tinct from sardinit, being decidedly smaller and very much darker in color. Specimens in the National Museum from these two regions support the conclusions drawn from our collection. Antrostomus ridgwayi, new species. RipGway’s Wuip- POOR-WILL. Type, No. 154754, U. S. Nat. Museum, Dept. Agric. coll., 9, Tlalkisala, Guerrero, Mexico, November 29, 1894. Collected by E. W. Nelson and E. A. Goldman (Orig. No. 2370). Vol. XIV 1807 | NELSON, New Birds from Mexico and Guatemala. Ea Distribution.—Nothing is known of the range of this species, except that the type was taken in the mountains of interior Guerrero. Description.—Crown dull grayish with a narrow black median line and fine parallel lines on each side; back, rump and tail, with exposed part of closed wings, gray like the crown and finely maculate with darker; back and rump marked with narrow, dark shaft-lines; scapulars marked with small, roughly triangular black spots bordered with bufty; gray of tail indistinctly and irregularly barred with darker, and feathers tipped nar- rowly with buffy; chin, throat and sides of head grizzled gray, darker than crown; neck encircled by a golden buffy collar, bordered along front below by a narrow whitish band; breast nearly as dark as throat; abdo- men, flanks and lower tail-coverts pale buffy barred with gray and brown, the light color predominating. The type and only known specimen is an adult female. Stze.—Wing 153, tail 116, culmen 18, tarsus 16. This form is readily distinguishable from any other known Mexican species of the genus by its generally lighter or grayer color and by the conspicuous, pale rufous or golden-buffy collar which completely encircles the neck. Delattria pringlei, new species. PrInGLE’Ss Hummer. Type, No. 155219, U. S. Nat. Museum, Dept. Agric. coll., @, from 15 miles west of Oaxaca City, Oaxaca, Mexico, September 14, 1894. Col- lected by E. W. Nelson and E. A. Goldman (Orig. No. 2288). Distribution.—Mountains of central-western Oaxaca and thence into Guerrero. Descripiion.—Similar to henricé and margarethe in general coloration, but differing in the color of the throat patch, which is royal purple. Using Ridgway’s color nomenclature, the three species named above may be distinguished by the following colors of the throat patch. D. henrict, phlox purple. D. margarethe, violet. D. pringlet, royal purple. We obtained specimens of D. henric? at Mt. Zempoaltepec in eastern Oaxaca. From central Oaxaca to central Guerrero D. pringlet was found, and in the interior of the latter State D. mar- garethe was taken. Thus it appears that the three species occupy contiguous areas. ‘This species is dedicated to the field botanist, Mr. C. G. Pringle, whose work in Mexico is so well known. 5 2 NELSON, New Birds from Mexico and Guatemala. rae Platypsaris aglaiz sumichrasti, new subspecies. SUMICHRAST’S BECARD. Type, No. 154701, U. S. Nat. Museum, Dept. Agric. coll., g, Otatitlan, Vera Cruz, Mexico, April 15, 1894. Collected by E. W. Nelson and E. A. Goldman (Orig. No. 1926). Distribution.— The hot coast lowlands of central Vera Cruz and thence southward to Guatemala. Description.— Adult male with entire top and sides of head and neck, including back to rump, uniform glossy black; rump dark ashy; ‘tail and wings blackish brown. There is a large, dark rose-colored throat patch, and the crissum is dull, dark fulvous. The rest of lower parts are dark slaty, somewhat lighter on the flanks and abdomen. The females, com- pared with those of a@glaz@, may be known by their more intense coloration. In the ‘Revue Zoologique,’ 1839, p. 98, Lafresnaye describes Pachyrhynchus aglaie and gives its habitat as ‘ Mexico.’ He says that it is “ above slate color, the nape and rump partly rufescent, pileum entirely black, forehead more grayish.’ _ Beneath pale mouse gray, the chin grayer, the foreneck and breast with a broad spot of intense rose color.” The rufescence of nape and rump men- tioned above are due to the immaturity of his specimen. In ‘ The Ibis’ for 1859, p. 394 (pl. xiii), Mr. D. G. Elliot de- scribes Platypsaris affinis, with habitat in ‘ Mexico.’ He remarks that ‘This species of Platypsaris, to which I have given the name of affinis, is closely allied to Platypsaris aglaie (La Fresnaye), from which, however, it can easily be distinguished by its much smaller bill, and the general lighter color of its plumage, as well as the distinct black head, whereas ¢here is little or no difference in the adult male of P. aglaie, between the color of the head and back. The black of the head and neck \in affinis| is separated from the plumbeous of the back* by a narrow line of ash color; and the ears are tinged with purple. Beneath, this species is much lighter than P. aglaie, being ashy white.” The plate of afimis agrees with Mr. Elliot’s description and at the same time agrees as closely as could be expected with Lafresnaye’s description of ag/aze of which affinis is a pure synonym. I take it that Mr. Elliot must have ' Italics are mine. Vol XIV ae ] NELSON, New Birds from Mexico and Guatemala. 53 used a wrongly labeled specimen for his comparison in place of referring to the original description. In Vera Cruz there are two perfectly good subspecies of this bird which were recognized and their proper ranges indicated years ago by Prof. Sumichrast. He states: ‘“‘I am led to believe that there are two varieties of this bird in the State of Vera Cruz. The one especially found in the hot and temperate regions, of stouter proportions, avd in the adult male at least, with darker plumage,’ etc. The other which I have met with several times in the alpine region, is appreciably inferior in size to the preceding, and with lighter tints in the adult male. It is possible that to the latter variety the name of P. afinis has been given.”’ Our explora- tions and the specimens in the collections at hand show that the birds agreeing in every way with the original descriptions of Lafresnaye’s ag/aze and Elliot’s afnzs are the ordinary residents of the tierra templada of Vera Cruz from Mirador, Jalapa, and Jico north to the State of Tamaulipas. The hot, coast lowlands and foothills from Tlacotalpam in Vera Cruz, and Tuxtepec in eastern Oaxaca, south toward Guatemala are inhabited by a very much darker bird which is readily distinguishable. This new form is dedicated to the memory of Prof. Francis Sumichrast to whose labors we owe so much of our knowledge of Mexican birds. Empidonax bairdi occidentalis, new subspecies. PLUMA FLYCATCHER. Type, No. 154599, U. S. Nat. Museum, Dept. Agric. coll., g, (?), Pluma, Oaxaca, Mexico, March 18, 1895. Collected by E. W. Nelson and E. A. Goldman ,/Orig. No. 2566). Distribution.— Heavy forests on Pacific slope of the Sierra Madre in Oaxaca. Similar to Z. bazrdz, but dorsal surface brighter, clearer green ; inside of bend of wings clear yellow in place of fulvous yellow; and under parts brighter or clearer in color. This new race is a Pacific coast form of dazra7, which latter is an east coast species, the type having come from Cordova, Vera Cruz. 'Ttalics are mine. Auk Jan. 54 NELSON, New Birds from Mexico and Guatemala. Picolaptes compressus insignis, new subspecies. BROADLY STRIPED WOODHEWER. Type, No. 154647, U. S. Nat. Museum, Dept. Agric. coll., ¢, Otatitlan, Vera Cruz, Mexico, April 15, 1894. Collected by E. W. Nelson and E. A. Goldman (Orig. No. 1938). Distribution.— Lowlands of Vera Cruz. Similar to Picolaptes compressus of Costa Rica, but distinguished by broader white shaft-lines on top of the head, neck and back, and their farther extension down the back. ‘The white markings below are also broader than in ordinary Central American birds. The wings are of about equal length, but the tail of zzszgnzs is decidedly longer than in true compressus. Automolus pectoralis, new species. Oaxaca AUTOMOLUS. Type, No. 154672, U. S. Nat. Museum, Dept. Agric. coll., g, Pluma, Oaxaca, Mexico, March 18, 1895. Collected by E. W. Nelson and E. A. Goldman (Orig. No. 2571). Distribution.— Found by us only in the heavy forest of the temperate zone near Pluma, Oaxaca, where they were not numerous. Description.— Crown, nape, and back to rump, dull tawny brown, a little lighter on forehead; rump rich rufous; tail a little darker shade of same; lores and line under eye with ear-coverts united in a uniformly brown area; breast, throat and sides of neck and extending forward above the ear-coverts to eye a nearly uniform dark rufous brown; chin a slightly paler shade of same; middle of belly dark fulvous in marked contrast to breast; flanks dark, tawny olive; under tail-coverts like breast ; exposed parts of folded wings dull rufous. The uniform color on the top of the head and back, with the generally lighter coloration of the entire bird distinguishes this from other known Mexican and Guatemalan species of this genus. Wing 94, tail 86, culmen 25, tarsus 27. Otocoris alpestris oaxacz, new subspecies. OAxAcaA HORNED LARK. Type, No. 145003, U. S. Nat. Museum, Dept. of Agric. coll., @, San Mateo del Mar, Oaxaca, May 15, 1895. Collected by E. W. Nelson and E. A. Goldman (Orig. No. 2700). Distribution.— Valley of Oaxaca and coast plain immediately bordering the Oaxaca shore of the Gulf of Tehuantepec, from Salina Cruz to the border of Chiapas ; ranging from sea level up to about 6000 feet. Vol. XIV eeo7 | NELson, New Birds from Mexico and Guatemala. 55 Description.—The males of this bird are distinguishable from chkrysolema of the southern table-lands of Mexico by the greater extension of the vinaceous coloration on both upper and lower surfaces of the body. It is a lighter and brighter shade of this color than on chrysolema and extends over the crown, nape, sides of neck, shoulders, rump, lesser and middle wing-coverts and sides of chest and flanks. In addition, the greater wing- coverts are more or less broadly bordered with the same. The exposed portion of the feathers of the folded wings as well as the back has the pale brown ground color suffused with a wash of this color, thus shading the entire upper surface behind the black area on the head. This general suffusion of vinaceous affords the readiest means of distinguishing this bird from chrysolema. The yellow on the throat is paler in eaxace than in chrysolema. The females differ from those of chkrysolema by being lighter brown above with a greater suffusion of pale vinaceous on the dorsal surface and along the flanks. The Oaxacan form averages a little smaller than chrysolema. Unfortunately my series of sixteen adult Oaxacan birds are all in summer plumage and more or less worn. A comparison of well plumaged birds with the fine series of chvysolema would, no doubt, emphasize the differences noted. Ovocoris peregrina of Bogota is very similar in coloration to chryso/ema of the table-lands of central Mexico. Judging from the two specimens from Bogoté in the U. S. National Museum collection, it is a smaller form than either oaxace or chrysolema. While on the highlands of Chiapas and Guatemala I looked carefully for Horned Larks but did not see a single individual. O. alpestris oaxace was found breeding rather commonly in the Valley of Oaxaca and also along the salt flats near the sea about San Mateo del Mar. So far as known, its range is limited to parts of the State of Oaxaca. To the north its range meets that of chrysolema. So far as our collections show, none of the several forms of O/ocorts found in winter along the northern border of Mexico range south to the southern highlands about the Valley of Mexico and Plains of Puebla where true chrysofema abounds. Calocitta formosa azurea, new subspecies. BLUE-BACKED CALOCITTA. Type, No. 144529, U.S. Nat. Museum, Dept. Agric. coll., ¢, Huehuetan, Chiapas, Mexico, February 24, 1896. Collected by E. W. Nelson and E. A. Goldman (Orig. No. 3559). Distribution.—Vhe Pacific coast of Chiapas and thence southeasterly through Guatemala and other parts of Central America. Auk 56 NELSON, New Birds from Mexico and Guatemala. an Description.— Back greenish blue with a grayish shade, the blue much lighter or brighter than in true formosa. N ‘o No) (o/0) wm = ASS wm 153280 N ak ~ On N / n OB B® %®® DB A> Ow | | 153278 Auk So BREWSTER, Nomenclature of the Downy Woodpeckers. Tan ON THE NOMENCLATURE OF CERTAIN FORMS OF THE DOWNY WOODPECKER (DR YOBATES PUBESCENS). BY WILLIAM BREWSTER. In accordance with a wish expressed by the Committee on Classification and Nomenclature at its meeting in Cambridge on November 13, 1896, I have investigated certain matters of synonymy suggested by a recent article on the Downy Wood- pecker by Mr. Oberholser,! who proposes to separate this bird into three geographical races of which Dryobates pubescens meridionalts, a small, brownish-breasted form inhabits the *“ South Atlantic and Gulf States, from South Carolina to Texas” and Dryobates pubes- cens nelsoni, a large and relatively white form, ‘“ Alaska and Northern British America”; the bird intermediate in respect to size and coloring and occupying the region lying between the areas just mentioned being considered as representing Dryobates jubes- cens verus. A similar division was made by Swainson in 1831, in the ‘Fanua Boreali-Americana’ (Part Second, p. 308), but Swainson applied the name /zdescens to the Downy Woodpecker of British North America and renamed as a distinct species the bird which ‘‘inhabits the middle parts of North America,” and that found in ‘“‘ Georgia’ calling the former “‘Prcus (Dendrocopus) medianus, the Little Midland Woodpecker” (type locality New Jersey), and the latter “ Picus (Dendrocopus) meridionalis, the Little Georgian Woodpecker ” (type locality Georgia). Mr. Oberholser of course credits the name meridionalis to Swainson, with an appropriate reference to the ‘ Fauna Boreali-Americana’, but he makes no allusion to Swainson’s treatment of the other two forms, nor does he give his reasons for restricting the name /wzbescens to the mid- land bird. In the synonymy of Dryobates pubescens meridionals, however, he cites “‘ Picus pubescens, Linnzus, Syst. Nat., Ed. 12, 1766, I, 175 (fart)”, the insertion of the final word in parenthe- sis indicating that he regards this name as only in part applicable to the southern race. 1 Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., Vol. XVIII, No. 1080, pp. 547-550. Vol. XIV 1897 | BREWSTER, Womenclature of the Downy Woodpeckers. 81 Linneus based his Picus pubescens on Catesby and Brisson. There can be no doubt as to Catesby’s bird, for that author says distinctly in his introduction that the collections on which his work was based were all made either in “the inhabited Parts of Carolina”? which ‘extend West from the Sea about 60 Miles” or “at and about /ort Moore, a small Fortress on the Banks of the River Savanna, which runs from thence a Course of 300 Miles down to the Sea, and is about the same Distance from its Source, in the Mountains.” The whole of this region, of course, is included in the range of meridionalis and Swainson’s type of that form came from the neighboring State of Georgia. Brisson gives a detailed description, evidently drawn from a specimen in hand, but he does not mention from whence his bird came. As he is ordinarily careful to state not only the locality but the collector’s name, it seems probable that in this instance he had no definite knowledge on either point, and that his state- ment “on les trouve en Virginie G a la Caroline”? was made largely on the authority of Catesby, whom he cites in his synonymy and whose work he appears to think related to Virginia as well as to the Carolinas. He also cites Klein but this author’s Pzcus varius minimus’?! was based wholly on Castesby. Mr. Oberholser says that the Downy Woodpeckers which he has examined ‘“‘from North Carolina .... and extreme Southern Virginia, appear to be intermediate between D. fudes- cens meridionalis and D. pubescens ; and these, although not above included, are perhaps without impropriety referable to D. pudbes- cens meridionalis.”” If Brisson’s bird really came from Virginia it was probably taken somewhere not far from the coast and in the southern part of the State. Its measurements favor this hypothesis, for they indicate an exceptionally small bird of even the southern form. It is impossible, however, to ascertain defi- nitely from whence this specimen was derived. It may have been taken almost anywhere in eastern North America in Can- ada, for instance, where many of Brisson’s birds were obtained. These facts and considerations have led me to conclude that Mr. Oberholser’s position is not tenable, and that if the separation 1 Historias Avium Prodromus, 1750, p. 27. 82 Fourteenth Congress of the A. O. U. fe which he advocates be deemed advisable, we should regard the Southern Downy Woodpecker as the true Dyryobates pubescens (Linn.), calling the bird of the middle region Dryobates pubescens medianus (Sw.) and that of northern British America Dryobates pubescens nelsoni Oberholser. The alternative would be to adopt Swainson’s arrangement 7 fofo, for if not applicable to the southern form the name pubescens is subspecifically indetermin- able and Swainson was within his rights in restricting it to the Downy Woodpecker of the far north and in bestowing new names on the other two birds. FOURTEENTH CONGRESS OF THE AMERICAN ORNI-— THOLOGISTS’ UNION. THE FouRTEENTH ConGREss of the American Ornithologists’ Union convened in Cambridge, Mass., Monday evening, Novem- ber 9, 1896. The business meeting was held at the residence of Mr. Charles F. Batchelder. The public sessions, lasting three days, were held in the Nash Lecture-room of the University Museum, commencing Tuesday, November ro. Business SEss1on.— The meeting was called to order by the President, Mr. William Brewster. Thirteen Active Members were present. The Secretary’s report gave the membership of the Union at the opening of the present Congress as 673, constituted as follows: Active, 47; Honorary, 19 ; Corresponding, 67 ; Asso- ciate 540. During the year the Union lost seventy-two members,— seven by death, fifteen by resignation, and fifty were dropped for non- payment of dues. The members lost by death were Henry Seebohm,’ an Honorary Member, who died in London, England, November 26, 1895, aged 63 years; Dr. Juan Gundlach,? who died in Havana, Cuba, March 14, 1896, at the age of 85, also an 1 For an obituary notice, see Auk, XIII, 1896, pp. 96-97. ? For an obituary notice, see /ézd., p. 267. re Fourteenth Congress of the A. O. U. 83 Honorary Member; and Thomas Lyttleton,! Lord Lilford, late President of the British Ornithologists’ Union, a Corresponding Member, who died at Lilford Hall, Oundle, Northamptonshire, England, June 17, 1896, aged 63 years. Also the following Associates: Dr. Willard L. Maris,? who died in Philadelphia, Dec. 11, 1895 ; Clarence A. Smith,? who died in New York City, May 6, 1896, aged 22; Howard Gardiner Nichols,‘ who died in Atlanta, Ga., June 23, 1896, aged 25; and Eugene C. Thurber,® who died at Alhambra, Calif., September 6, 1896, aged 31. The report of the Treasurer showed the finances of the Union to be in good condition. The Amendments to the By-Laws proposed at the Thirteenth Congress were considered ; part, were adopted and part rejected.® An election of officers was then held under the provisions of the change in the By-Laws making the Ex-Presidents of the Union Councillors. This required the election of three new members to the Council. The officers of the previous year were all re-elected with Mr. Chas. B. Cory, and Drs. Jonathan Dwight, Jr., and L. Stejneger as new members of the Council. Dr. Walter Faxon, of Cambridge, Mass., was elected an Active Member, and seventy- eight new members were added to the list of Associates. The usual reports of Standing Committees were received. Pustic Session. /irst Day.— The meeting was called to order by the President, Mr. Brewster. An address of welcome was made by Dr. Geo. L. Goodale, on behalf of Harvard University. Mr. William Dutcher, Chairman of the ‘ Committee on Protection of North American Birds,’ then read the report of his committee for the past year. The report is published in full in this number of ‘The Auk’ (pp. 21-32), and will be reprinted as a separate pamphlet. ‘For an obituary notice, see Auk, XIII, p. 348. * For an obituary notice, see /ézd., p. 193. 3 For an obituary notice, see /ézd., pp. 267-268. 4For an obituary notice, see /ézd., XIV, Jan. 1897, under ‘ Notes and News.’ ° For an obituary notice, see /ézd., XIII, p. 349. 8 See under the department of ‘ Notes and News’ in the present number of ‘The Auk.’ 84 Fourteenth Congress of the A. O. U. a The Union was honored by the presence of Miss Maria R. Audubon, granddaughter of the renowned naturalist. It her behalf Dr. Elliott Coues exhibited some recently discovered man- uscript journals of John James Audubon, including the one giving an account of his famous trip up the Missouri River. A vote of thanks was tendered Miss Audubon for her kindness in allowing the manuscripts to be seen. Under the title ‘Ornithological Publications, Present and Prospective, Dr. Coues laid before the Union an advance copy of ‘Papers presented to the World’s Congress on Ornithology,’ of which he was the responsible editor. He also stated that he was engaged in the preparation of a new edition of his ‘ Key to North American Birds,’ and in conjunction with a well known author was writing a bird-book for beginners. Mr. Louis Agassiz Fuertes exhibited and explained a collection of his own unpublished drawings of birds, made from life. The opening paper of the afternoon session was by Mr. Frank M. Chapman, entitled ‘ An Ornithological Tour in Yucatan.’ The members and visitors repaired to the Geological Room of the University Museum where lantern slides illustrating this paper were shown. The second title was ‘Some New England Birds’ Nests,’ by Mr. William Brewster. He illustrated his paper with lantern slides from original photographs. Remarks followed by Messrs. Chap- man, Bent, Chamberlain, Clark, Batchelder, and Rev. H. K. Job. Second Day.— The meeting was called to order by the President, Mr. Brewster. The reading of scientific papers began with one by Dr. Jonathan Dwight, Jr., on ‘The Philadelphia Vireo ( Vireo philadelphicus).’ Remarks followed by Mr. Bradford Torrey, Dr. Coues, the Chair, and the author. The next paper was by the same author on ‘ The Molt of the Song Sparrow (Melospiza fasciata), and of the Red-eyed Vireo ( Vireo olivaceus).’ Remarks followed by Messrs. F. H. Kennard, Frank M. Chapman, the Chair, and the author. The third title of the morning was ‘ Notes on the Black Rail (Porzana jamaicensis) in Southern Connecticut,’ by Judge John N. Clark. Remarks followed by Messrs. Torrey and Deane, the Chair, and the author. See ai Fourteenth Congress of the A. O. U. 8 5 Some bird-drawings, the work of Mr. Ernest E. Thompson, were shown by Mr. Frank M. Chapman. A vote of thanks was given Mr. Dutcher for the admirable manner in which his accounts with the Union had been kept during his long service as Treasurer. The feature of the afternoon session was the open-air talk by Mr. Abbott H. Thayer, demonstrating his theory of the principles of protective coloration. Mr. Thayer placed three sweet potatoes, or objects of corresponding shape and size, horizontally on a wire a few inches above the ground. They were covered with some sticky material, and dry earth from the road on which they stood was sprinkled over them so that they would be the same color as the background. ‘The two end ones were then painted white on the under side, and the white color was shaded up and gradually mixed with the brown of the sides. When viewed from a little distance these two end ones, which were white below, disappeared from sight, while the middle one stood out in strong relief and appeared much darker than it really was. Mr. Thayer explained that terrestrial birds and mammals which are protectively colored have the under parts white or very light in color, and that the color of the under parts usually shades gradually into that of the upper parts. This is essential in order to counteract the effect of the shadow, which otherwise, as shown by the middle potato, makes the object abnormally conspicuous and causes it to appear much darker than it really is. In the case of Mr. Thayer’s experiment some of the witnesses could hardly believe that the striking difference in the visibility of the three potatoes was entirely due to the coloring of the under side, and Mr. Thayer was asked to color the middle one like the two others in order that the effect might be observed. Mr. Thayer complied with the request, painting the under side of the middle potato white, and shading the white up into the sides as in the case of the others. The effect was almost magical. The middle potato at once disappeared from view. A similar experiment was tried on the lawn. ‘Two potatoes were painted green to resemble the green of the grass above which they were suspended. One was painted white on the under side and at once became invisible when viewed from a little distance, while the other showed plainly and seemed very dark, the shadow, superadded to the green of 86 Fourteenth Congress of the A. O. U. ae the under side, making it remarkably conspicuous. ‘The experi- ments were an overwhelming success. Discussion followed (in the Nash Lecture-room) by Drs. Merriam, Coues and Allen, Messrs. Phelps, Chapman and Fuertes, the Chair, and the author. The thanks of the Union were tendered Mr. Thayer. Third Day.— The meeting was called to order by the President, Mr. Brewster.. Before proceeding to the reading of papers, resolutions were adopted thanking Prof. Geo. L. Goodale, and the Geological Department of Harvard University for the use of their respective lecture-rooms for a place of meeting, and for other courtesies tendered to the Union; and to the Nuttall Ornithologi- cal Club for the cordial welcome and generous hospitalities extended to visiting members. The first paper of the morning was by Dr. C. Hart Merriam, who spoke informally about some of the birds of Oregon. Mr. Brewster then exhibited a series of Redpolls, and talked in an informal way about ‘Two Curious Birds Nests.’ The opening paper of the afternoon was ‘On the Terns of Penikese Island, Massachusetts,’ by Geo. H. Mackay. It was read by Mr. Reginald Heber Howe, Jr. Remarks followed by Messrs. Fuertes, Dutcher, Howe, the Chair, and the author. Mr. Edward H. Forbush, Field Director of the Massachusetts Gypsy Moth Commission, asked for information and suggestions regarding the advisability of introducing into the United States foreign birds that feed upon the eggs of the gypsy moth. It was the opinion of those who discussed the matter that such a scheme would be impracticable. Owing to the lack of time for their presentation in full the following papers were read by title. ‘The Fringillidae of Dodge County, Wisconsin,’ by Will Edwin Snyder. ‘Some Notes on the Nesting Habits of the White-tailed Kite (Elanus leucurus). With exhibition of eggs,’ by Chester Barlow. ‘On the Terns of Muskeget Island, Massachusetts,’ by George H. Mackay. The Union then adjourned to meet at the American Museum of Natural History, New York City, November 8, 1897. Jno. H. SaGe, Secretary. Portland, Conn., Nov. 30, 1896. ees General Notes. 87 GENERAL NOTES. The Nostrils in Young Cormorants. — Through the kindness of Mr. R. C. McGregor and Mr. Curtis Clay Young I have come into the possession of a considerable series of crania of Cormorants, from a very early stage of incubation up to the twenty-eighth day after hatching. In the old- est of these skulls the external nostrils are still open, and the bones of the palate have not coalesced, and the probabilities are, as already stated, that the external nostrils close about the time the young Cormorants take to the water and begin to feed themselves.— F. A. Lucas, Washington, D.C, Labrador Duck.—In the Museum at Amiens in France, which is located in a temporary and very unworthy building by the river, I was surprised to come across a fine adult male Labrador Duck, Camftolaimus labradorius, in good preservation. It was unknown to Mr. William Dutcher when revising the list of extant specimens (Auk, 1891, p. 201), but I conclude that it is probably one of the specimens which he men- tions to have been sent to Europe by Mr. John Akhurst prior to 1850 (of. ctt., 1893, p. 270). —J. H. GuRNEy, Keswick Hall, Norwich, England. Nesting of the Larger White-cheeked Goose (Branta canadensis occr- dentalts) in Okanogan Co., Wash.— In May, 1896, a nest of this species was located in the gorge of the Columbia River due east of Chelan. A visit paid to it on May 13 led me through a wild stretch where the cliffs press in upon the swirling river. I began to walk softly over a rocky point which projected over the stream at about fifty feet above high- water mark. I had seen a Goose push out from the shore below and hoped his mate might be on the nest. I was not to be disappointed, for as I rose over the crest of the rocky point the mother Goose flew off with a loud squawk, and I had in addition a vision of something green flying through the air. Ina shelf of rock commanding the river below three green goslings, newly hatched, were resting on a bed of down. Pale green egg shells were lying about the nest as a reminder of what might have been. The green thing “flying through the air” proved to bea fourth gosling which Mother Goose had knocked off the nest in her haste, but I rescued him froma cleft in the rock twenty feet below, where he had been fortunately caught before striking the fierce current of the river, and returned him apparently none the worse for his tumble. ‘The nest- lings were in general of a bright grass-green color mottled with a shade of olive. The nest was entirely composed of soft down from the Goose’s breast. The Larger White-cheeked Geese are the first birds to arrive in the Chelan valley in February, and they leave the wheat fields, reluctantly enough, in December. Their breeding in the county seems to be alto- 88 General Notes. Auk Jan. gether by detached pairs, although in some places where unusually abundant they gather daily for a sociable feed. —WiLLiam L. Dawson, Oberlin, Ohio. A New Bird for the Virginias.— I have lately received from Mr. Thad- deus Surber, White Sulphur Springs, West Virginia, a young male speci- men of the Stilt Sandpiper (M/tcropalama himantopus) which was taken on November 2, 1896, near Caldwell, R. O., on the Greenbrier River, six miles from the above mentioned Springs. This species has not hitherto been reported from either Virginia or West Virginia, although a bird from the Patuxent River, Md., has been recorded by Mr. Hugh M. Smith (Auk, Vol. III, p. 139).— Witiiam C. Rives, M. D., Wew York City. Asarcia spinosa.—In Vol. XXIV of the British Museum Catalogue of Birds, Limicole, p. 86, 1896, Dr. Sharpe names a genus Asarcia, type Parra variabil’s Linn., 1766, as distinguished from Yacaza proper by the reduc- tion of the facial appendages to a comparatively small frontal leaf, which is trifid, somewhat like a fleur-de-lis; the same cutaneous excrescence in the type of Yacana being bifid or heart-shaped, and supplemented by a pair of wattles. Assuming the generic sufficiency of this distinction, I may remark that Dr. Sharpe’s use of the specific term varéadbdl7s in this connection is at variance with A. O. U. canons of nomenclature. As shown by Elliot, Auk, July, 1888, p. 298, and as admitted by Sharpe, /. c., Parra variabilis Linn., S. N. 1766, p. 260, was based on Edwards’s Nat. Hist. 1.1743, p. and pl. 48, as a mere renaming of Fudica spinosa Linn. S. N. 1758, p. 152, which had the identical basis of Edwards’s pl. 48. Consequently varzabilis is untenable by our rules, and the species should continue to stand as Jacana spinosa, unless we recognize the new generic name; in which probable contingency Asarcza spinosa becomes the onym of the bird.— ELtiorr Covers, Washington, D. C. The Passenger Pigeon (Ecfofistes migratorius) in Lewis County, N. Y.—In the Boonville (N. Y.) ‘ Herald’ of May 27, 1896, appeared an item to the effect that Mr. Henry Felshaw had recently seen ‘ta large flock of Wild Pigeons, perhaps 300 in number, flying westward.” On writing to Mr. Felshaw he replied that there was no possibility of his having been mistaken, as he had shot, trapped and netted thousands of these birds, in former years, and the flock in question was seen when not more than fifteen rods distant. The flock, as said, numbered about 300, and was seen at about 5.30 A.M. on May 22, the locality being Constable- ville, Lewis County, N. Y. He further states, ‘‘I mounted, last spring (in April, I think) a cock Pigeon that was shot somewhere near North Western.” — W. S. JOHNSON, Boonville, N. Y. Melopelia leucoptera in Osceola County, Florida. — The National Mu- seum has recently received a wing and foot of this species from Prof. W. Vol. XIV F857 General Notes. 89 B. Hinton, of Kissimmee, Florida, Superintendent of Schools for Osceola County, who, under date of November 16, 1896, gives the following infor- mation concerning it. “Mr. J. R. Graves, proprietor of the ‘Lake House,’ purchased some Quail a few days ago from a young fellow from the country, and among the Quail was this Dove. Knowing my fondness for birds he gave me the Dove. It was put in a coop (6 X 9g ft.) with some Carolina Doves and some Quail, where it seemed to be contented for two or three days, eating wheat and corn grits with as much relish as would a cooped chicken. But something frightened it from its roost night before last and it killed itself by flying against. the woven wire with which the coop is covered. The astonishing thing is the velocity with which the bird flies, even at the moment it springs into the air. The coop mentioned is only four feet tall; yet this Dove struck the wire with such force as almost to strip one of its wings from its body, exposing, also, its windpipe completely.” So far as I am aware, this species has never before been observed so far north in Florida, where, even much farther south, its occurrence seems to be exceedingly rare. — RoBERT RipGway, Washington, D. C. The California Vulture in Alberta.—QOn the t1oth of September last (1896) I saw between Calgary and the Rocky Mountains two fine speci- mens of the California Vulture, Psewdogryphus califurntanus. Iwas not aware that this bird was found east of the Rocky Mountains, or so far north as the point above mentioned.—J. FANNIN, Provincial Museum, Victoria, B. C. Golden Eagle (Agucla chrysaétos) taken near New Haven, Conn.—I have a fine Golden Eagle, killed in Woodbridge, within five miles of New Haven, about Oct. 1, 1896. I received it in the flesh the next day after it was killed. It was eating a Red-tailed Hawk when killed, and we took portions of the Hawk from its crop. It was a female, in fine plumage.— A. E. VERRILL, Mew Haven, Conn. Abundance of Owls on the Coast of British Columbia.— Never in the history of my observations, which covers a period of thirty years, has there been such a gathering of Owls on the coast of British Columbia as that which has taken place this fall. The gathering is represented by the following species: Dusky Horned Owl (Subo virginianus saturatus), Snowy Owl (Wycfea nyctea), Kennicott’s Screech Owl (Megascops asto kennicotti?), and the Calitornia Pygmy Owl (Glauctdtum guona califor- micum). They have literally invaded the land, and the two first mentioned species are playing havoc with chickens, turkeys, quail, in fact anything they can lay their claws on. The extreme cold weather reported in the North is probably the cause of this migration.—J. FANNIN, Provincial Museum, Victoria, B. C. 2 go General Notes. Auk Jan. The Cuculidz of the A. O. U. List.—I am sorry to perceive that our treatment of this family involves several errors. One of these is a mere blunder, almost self-corrective; another is a grammatical mistake, easily set right; but two others are ornithological improprieties of considerable taxonomic consequence. 1. Cuculus canorus telephonus appears as a member of the “Subfamily Coccygine, American Cuckoos,” which of course it is not. This is a mere editorial inadvertency, or mechanical defect in the make-up of the List, by omission of a heading “Subfamily Cuculine” to cover this case. The ‘break’ is obvious, and easily mended. 2. “Coccygine” appears as the name of the American subfamily. This should be Coccyzzn@, of course, as derived from the name of the genus Coccyzus. I am well aware that the form Coccygine is used by many writers, including myself; it has so stood in the ‘Key’ since 1884 after Baird, Cabanis, and others, who alter Coccyzus of Vieillot into Coccygus. But those who preserve the original orthography of names, however faulty, must write Coccyzus and consequently Coccyzine, as I did in the orig. ed. of the ‘ Key’, 1872. (This criticism does not reach our use of Goccyges as a subordinal term, for the latter is independently formed direct from the Greek xoxkvé, a cuckoo, not from any generic name.) I am happy to be able to defend Vieillot’s Coccyzus on good linguistic grounds; for it is derivable direct from the classic Greek verb koxkvta, “TI cry ‘cuckoo.’” We are therefore philologically justified, as well as canonically correct, in using Coccyzus and Coccyzine. I may remark, in passing, the quite gratuitous changes which have been rung upon Coccyzus, namely: Coccyzon, Coccygius, Coccysus, Coccygus, Coccyztus, Coccygon, Coccycua, Coccyzea, and probably yet other forms, all of them superfluous and supererogatory. 3. Coccyzine. As to the necessity or expediency of recognizing for the American Tree Cuckoos any subfamily apart from Old World Cuculine, there may easily be two opinions. I have kept them apart in all my works, but am coming to the conclusion that they can hardly be so con- sidered, if we duly regard the various interrelations of genera in the whole family Cuculide. The strongest character I have seen ascribed to the American forms is that adduced by Beddard, P. Z. S. 1885, p. 187, who finds the ventral pteryla double at its commencement in Coccyzus, Piaya, Saurothera, and perhaps Diplopterus, it being there single in Cuculus, etc. But even Beddard brings all these forms under one subfamily, Cucu- line; and Shelley, Cat. B. Brit. Mus., XIX, 1891, p. 211, finds no super- generic difference between Coccyzus and Cuculus, though he recognizes altogether no tewer than six subfamilies of Cuculid@. I should wish to be better informed than I am before pronouncing upon this case without reserve ; but my present impression is, that Coccyziz@ must be abandoned as a subfamily, and merged in Cuculzn@, substantially according to Bed- dard’s views. Vol. X1V 1897 General Notes. gI 4. Neomorphine. However the doubt just expressed regarding Coccyzine be finally resolved, there is no question that we must recognize for the group of which Geococcyx is a shining example a subfamily apart from Coccyzine (or Cuculine) on the one hand, and trom Crotophagine on the other. This is the group of American Ground Cuckoos which I have for many years been calling Saurotherine ; but it now appears that the genus Saurothera does not belong to it, and that its proper name is Veomorphine, derived from the name of that genus (Veomorfhus GLOGER, 1827) which has priority over all the others which belong to this subfamily. The Neomorphine are a well-marked if not yet precisely limited group, much more nearly related to the Crotophagine than to any other. Thus, they possess the accessory femorocaudal muscle, which is present in none of the Cuculine (or Coccygine); and the ventral pteryla of each side is furcate. In these respects the Veomorphine, so characteristic of America, agree with the Old World Cextropodine but differ therefrom notably in some other characters. The Neomorphine agree with the Crotophagine in most respects, but differ in their pseudobronchial instead of truly bronchial syringes, and many other particulars. The Meomorphine are Ground Cuckoos, with a certain gallinaceous suggestiveness, being more or less pheasant-like in external appearance; tail of 10 rectrices, as usual in the family (not 8, as in Crotofphagine), long and graduated, with elongated upper coverts (approaching Dzplopterus and Dromococcyx in this respect); wings short, rounded, convex, with elongate inner second- aries (not long, flat, and pointed, as in Cuculine or Coccyzine) ; feet large and strong, in adaptation to terrestrial habits (as in Cenxtropus, etc., but without any peculiarity of the hind claw). With the possible or probable exception of Carpfococcyx, which is brought under MNeomorphine by Shelley, though it inhabits Borneo, and is therefore unintelligible as a member of this subfamily, if it be really such, the present subfamily is exclusively American. The genera which certainly compose it are Neomorphus, Geococcyx, and Morococcyx; very likely Diplopterus and Dromococcyx might without violence be brought under the same head. But until we know more of the structural characters of the two last named genera, as well as of Saurothera, Piaya, and Hyetornis, it will hardly be safe to pronounce upon these Neotropical forms. The times may not yet be ripe enough to do away with all the uncertainty attending the division of Cuculéde; but what I regard as established is, that the A. O.U. List contains representatives of at least three subfamilies : (1) CROTOPHAGIN. (2) NEOMORPHIN. (3) CuCULIN«. The latter may or may not be warrantably divisible into Coccyz7ne for the American genera Coccyzus, etc., and Cuculine proper for our waif from Asia.— Ertiotr Cours, Washington, D. C. Broad-tailed Hummingbird in California.—I take pleasure in recording the capture of Selasphorus platycercus, § ad., at Oakland, Cal., on May 8, 1890, the first taken in this State. On the same date an adult male of Q2 General Notes. Auk Jan. Calypte coste was also secured, which extends its recorded range some- what to the north in California. A number of Stedlula calliope, & g, were collected in April, the result of a bird wave. These birds are in the mounted collection of Mr. Walter E. Bryant, who kindly furnished me these data—— Ricnarp C. McGreGor, Palo Alto, Cal. Authority for the Name Myiarchus mexicanus.— The A.'O. U. List, 2d ed. 1895, No. 453, cites Myéarchus mexicanus Baird, B. N. A., 1858, p. 179, as the tenable name for the Zyrannula mexicana of Kaup, P. Z.S. 1851, p- 51. This isan error; for Baird’s AZ. menicanus of 1858 is M. cénerascens, as shown by the synonymy he adduces, the habitat he assigns, and the description he gives. Baird’s mexzcanus has also been almost universally considered a synonym of cézerascens, as by Dr. Sclater in many places ; by myself in my monograph of A/yzarchus, and in the ‘ Key,’ 2d—4th eds., 1884— go; and such reference of his name is implied by Baird himself, Hist. N. A. Birds, II, 1874, p. 331, where “ Myzarchus mexicanus, Kaur, LAwrR.”’ appears, to the exclusion of AZ. mextcanus Bd. The A. O. U. List, 1st ed., 1886, No. 453, cites as authority for the name Myiarchus mexicanus Lawr. Ann. Lyc. N. Y., IX, May, 1869, p. 202. This is probably correct; for AZ. mextcanus Dresser, Ibis, 1865, p. 473, though referring to the Texas bird, is undoubtedly czzerascens, as indicated by the locality, San Antonio, where czzerascens is known to occur.— ELLiorr Cours, Washington, D. C. Hepburn’s Leucosticte (Leucosticte tephrocotis littoral’s) in Summer, in Okanogan County, Washington.-—W hile engaged in exploringWright’s Peak (alt. 9,310 feet), in the high ranges west of Lake Chelan, our party made camp on a mountain shoulder at the foot of a glacier, At an elevation of about 8,000 feet. Here amidst the ice and snow was to be seen a pair of the Leucostictes feeding their brood of full grown young. On account of their rosy, warm coats they seemed utterly disregardful of the bitter winds, and flitted freely from point to point on the morainic piles or hopped about on the snow. The parent birds appeared to forage two or three thousand feet down the mountain side — there was nothing above but rock —and when they appeared over the edge of the mountain wall, in returning from their excursions, the young would set up an eager clamor. The ashy hood to be seen in the adult birds was entirely absent in the young. Otherwise there was no marked difference in appearance at a slight distance. The birds were observed Aug. 5 to 8, 1896.—W1L- LIAM L. Dawson, Oberlin, Ohzo. Ammodramus (Passerculus) sanctorum.— This bird is described in the ‘Key,’ 1884, 2d ed., p. 364, as Passerculus sanctorum, but has been ignored by the A. O. U., perhaps on account of my expressed doubt as to its validity. The type specimen, from San Benito Island in the Gulf of California, and another, also collected at the same time by Dr. T. H. Streets, U. S. N., are both in the Mus. Smiths. Inst. They were not in Vol. XIV 1897 General Notes. 93 good order, and did not furnish entirely satisfactory indications. But we now have a fine series from this identical island, showing the assigned specific characters to be valid; and the species has been promptly accepted by the A. O. U. Committee. I refrain from further remarks, not wishing to anticipate anything that Mr. A. W. Anthony, the rediscoverer of the species, may have to say on the subject. While on the genus or subgenus Passerculus, | may note a possible nomenclatural question which seems incident to our reterence of Passer. culus to the genus Ammodramus. This gives us the name A. savanna for one species, and A. savannarum for another. As these two names are of course the same word, only differing in terminal inflection, it may be that both cannot stand in the same genus. If so, it becomes a particularly awkward and unlucky matter; for sevannarum GmM., 1788, after Latham, Brisson, and Sloane, for the Jamaican form of the Yellow-winged Sparrow, antedates savanna Wics., 1811, for the Savannah Sparrow, and thus the latter unhappy bird loses its claim to its most distinctive designation — the very one, too, that gives it its common English name. As I do not find any other subspecific name that has been applied to our familiar eastern form, this may require a new one. I am quite ready to sink Coturniculus in Ammodramus, but think we may well recognize Passer- culus as a full genus. That would seem to be one way out of the present difficulty, but does not do away with the real trouble, which goes back to Fringilla savanna Wis. vs. Fringilla savannarum GM. Failing any other resource, our Eastern Savannah Sparrow may be called Ammodramus (Passerculus) sandwichensts wilsontanus.— ELLioTY Cours, Washington, /0), (Co Occurrence of Baird’s Sparrow (Ammodramus bairdiz) in Washington. — On the 5th of September, 1895, while residing at Chelan in Okanogan County, Washington, I first met this bird. Only one specimen was secured, but the birds were abundant on weedy bottom lands along the lower end of Lake Chelan. They kept for the most part pretty close to the ground, where they seemed to be feeding on a little wild bean. The migration was noted up to the 9th, when the last specimens were seen. The return movement of spring was less noticeable. On the 29th ‘of April, 1896, I came across perhaps a dozen Baird’s Sparrows in the sage- brush of an upland pasture, mixing freely with Zonotrichia leucophrys intermedia. An elegant male, with yellow areas in maximum color, was taken from a willow clump by the water’s edge on May 11.—WILLIAM L. Dawson, Oberlin, Ohio. Acadian Sparrow in Yates County, N. Y.— Oct. 7, 1896, I took a male Acadian Sparrow (Ammodramus caudacutus subvirgatus) and saw one more. The one I took was identified by Dr. Jonathan Dwight, Jr. I think there were more of them here, as the marsh grass was full of small Sparrows, but I was only sure of seeing two of the Acadian.—VERpI BurtcuH, Penn Yan, N. VY. 94 General Notes. fee Note on Junco annectens Baird and J. ridgwayi Mearns.— Although Professor Baird based his ,Juxco annectens (Ornithology of California, I, 1870, p. 564) on several specimens representing the bird which we have been accustomed to call by that name and one example typical of J. ridg- way? Mearns (Auk, VII, July, 1890, p. 243), reference to these specimens and careful comparison with Prof. Baird’s description show clearly that the rufous-backed specimen is the type of J. annectens. Junco ridgwayi Mearns, therefore, becomes a synonym of J. annectens Baird, and the other form (Jj. amnectens, Auct. nec Baird) being without a name I take pleasure in bestowing upon it the name,Junco mearnsi, in compliment to my friend, Dr. Edgar A. Mearns, U.S. A. Junco mearns? is similar to J. annectens, but may easily be distinguished by having the back hair brown, not conspicuously different in color from the gray of hind neck and rump, instead of being bright rusty or rufous, as in J. caniceps. ° The type of J. mearnsz is No. 11164, U.S. Nat. Mus., & ad., Fort Bridger, Wyoming, April 12, 1858; C. Drexler. The type of J. aznectens is No. 10701, U. S. Nat. Mus., 2 ad., Fort Bridger, May 28, 1858; C. Drexler.— Ropert RrpGway, Washington, D. C. Rectifications of Synonymy in the Genus Junco.— The unco hyemalrs danbyi which I described in the Nidiologist, III, No. 2, Oct. 1895, p. 14, as a provisional new subspecies from the Black Hills, and named for Prof. Durward E. Danby, principal of the high school of Custer, S. D., proves to be simply the young of J. azkenz, the characteristic representa tive of the genus in the said region. The type specimen, lacking the white wing-bars of the adult, has lately been deposited in the U.S. National Museum. The naming of the supposed new form will prove to have been not entirely in vain if it serves to emphasize the fact that J. atkeni is so thoroughly distinct from J. Ayemadzs that it can be recog- nized at any age, apart from the presence of its supposed chief distinctive characters— the white wing-bars. These are wanting at first, in birds of the year, and first appear as two rows of white dots on the ends of the median and greater coverts, respectively; these dots enlarge to spots by degrees, and finally coalesce as complete bars. The bird could not be mistaken for hyemadzs at any age; the ‘aspect’ in life, even at gunshot range, is distinctive; for one receives the impression of a large gray bird, more like caziceps than like hyemadlis. J. h. connectens of my ‘Key’, 2d-4th eds., 1884-90, p. 378, is a good sub- species which has been accidently overlooked by the A. O. U. Committee on Classification and Nomenclature in preparing both the editions of our Check-List, 1886 and 1895. In fact it also escaped my own memory, until it was brought to mind by the description of J. 4. skufeldt? by Mr. Coale, in The Auk, IV, Oct. 1887, p. 330; since which time I have been intending to bring up the case for final readjustment, but have meanwhile been much preoccupied with other than ornithological affairs. Mr. Coale’s Vol. XIV ZS 4 > pee General Notes. 95 shufeldti of 1887 is my connectens of 1884, characterized in the ‘ Key’ as intermediate between Ayemalzs proper and oregonus proper, and as occupy- ing a range between the habitats of the two forms as now restricted — that is, the interior region at large, and especially the Rocky Mountain region. I remember characterizing this torm hypothetically some twelve or fifteen years ago, at which time I picked out type-specimens from a lot of Juncos which I examined in the South Tower of the Smithsonian In- stitution, in the presence of Mr. Brewster, Dr. Allen, Mr. Ridgway and others; these type specimens belonged to Mr. Brewster’s collection and one of them has just now been identified by the A.O. U. Committee with ‘what we have been calling shufeldt?. Thus the case is perfectly clear, and the subspecies rests securely upon the diagnosis given in the ‘Key’ in 1884. The requisite rectification of synonymy will be made in the next supplement to the last edition of our Check-List. I only regret that I have been so dilatory in bringing the case up.— ELLroTr Cours, Wash- zngton, D.C. Spiza americana near Kingston, New York.— The familiar song of this species attracted my attention as I was driving a few miles from Kingston on June 5, 1896. The bird proved to be a full-plumaged male, but I was unable to secure him at the time or to return later to the same spot. The occurrence, however, of the species in the Hudson River Valley seems worthy of special mention.—JONATHAN DwiGurt, Jr., M.D., Mew York City. Correct Nomenclature of the Texas Card‘nal. — Having very recently, for the first time, seen the original description of Cardinalis sinuatus Bonaparte, I was much surprised to find the locality given as “the western parts of Mexico.” The name szzuatus belongs, therefore, in a restricted sense, to the form which I characterized, in 1887, as Pyrrhuloxia sinuata beckhamz7, under the erroneous supposition that Bonaparte’s bird was the eastern form; consequently, the latter requires a subspecific name; and, being known in the vernacular as the Texas Cardinal, I pro- pose for No. 594 of the Check-List the name Pyrrhuloxta stnuata texana, No. 5944. being the true P. s‘xwata.— RoBertT RipGway, Washington, 1D) (Ce Natural Breeding Haunts of the Barn Swallow (Chelédon erythrogaster). — The Barn Swallow is such a familiar tenant of our barns and out- houses that it may not have occurred to many to wonder where they nested before man provided them with such resorts. During the summer of 1895, while visiting the headwaters of Lake Chelan, in Washington, I found the Swallows af home. The shores of the lake near its head are very precipitous, since the mountains rise here some 7,000 feet above the surface of the water. Along the shore line, in the side of the cliffs, which continue several hundred feet below the water, the waves have hol- Auk Jan. g6 General Notes. lowed out crannies and caves. In one of these latter, which penetrated the granite wall to a depth of some twenty feet, I found four or five Barn Swallows’ nests, some containing young, and two, although it was so late in the season (July g, 1895), contained eggs. Others were to be found in neighboring crannies outside the cave. Another visit paid to this spot on August 10 of this year (1896) discovered one nest still occupied, which contained four eggs. Although breeding thus in a perfectly primitive state there was no important difference observed in the birds’ methods of construction. The nests were either affixed to the vertical walls of the cavern or else rested slightly on rocky knobs and projections. The feathery linings of the nests consisted of copious collections of the feathers of wild fowl, such as Ducks, Grouse, ete. The only other place in Okanogan County where I recall having seen Barn Swallows was at Malott, some 60 miles distant, where the birds had adopted the manners of civilization and were breeding in a large barn.— WiLLiAM L. Dawson, Oberlin, Ohio. Characters of Dendroica czerulescens cairnsi.—Cairns’s Warbler is named by me as a new subspecies in the work entitled: ‘ Papers Presented to the World’s Congress on Ornithology,’ pub. Chicago, Nov. 8, 1896, p. 138. It isa local race of the Black-throated Blue Warbler, breeding in the mountains of western North Carolina and eastern Tennessee, where the individuals arrive a week or ten days in advance of those that pass onward in their migration, and may be observed building and rearing * their young while the migration in the same region is still going on. At the time I named the subspecies I had seen no specimens, but was satis- fied that the bird could not have thus been localized for many generations without developing distinctive characteristics. At the recent meeting of the A. O. U. in Cambridge, I examined several specimens in the cabinet of Mr. William Brewster, collected by the late Mr. Cairns, and was pleased to find my prescience in the case confirmed upon comparison with a large series of the ordinary form from many different localities. The examination was made in company with Mr. Brewster, Dr. Allen, Mr. Chapman and others, who were immediately persuaded of the subspecific validity of the new form; and the Committee on Classification and Nomenclature at once voted unanimously to accept it. The bird is some- what smaller than the average of D. cerulescens, and has the middle of the back nearly or quite black, instead of blue. or blue with only a few black touches. Some specimens in the large series were fortunately found to be intermediate, showing intergradation with the typical form, and thus relieving me from the necessity of recognizing cazrus¢ as a full species. The diagnosis of the new subspecies may be given as: g D. cerulescenti simillima, sed mtnor, dorsogue medio nigro. \t is dedicated to its discoverer and original describer, Mr. John S. Cairns, of Weaverville, N. C., whose lamented death was recently noticed in these pages, and whose interesting article upon the summer home and nidification of the Vol. XIV 1897 General Notes. 97 bird occupies pp. 136-139 of the book named in the beginning of this note. The specimen which I have selected as the type of caérus¢ is in Mr. Brewster’s collection; it is a @, in full dress, and was collected by Mr. Cairns. — Ettiotr Cours, Washington, D. C. Dendroica czrulea vs. Dendroica rara. — Sylvia cerulea WILSON (Am. Orn. II, 1810, 141, etc.), the earliest name for the Cerulean Warbler, is un- fortunately preoccupied by Sylvéa cerulea LATHAM (Index Orn. IT, 1790, 540), which is a synonym of Poloptila cerulea (LINN.) ; hence, No. 658, of the A. O. U. Check-List becomes Dendroica rara (WiLson) (Sylvia rara, WiLson, Am. Orn. ITI, 1811, 119, pl. 27, fig. 2). — ROBERT RIDGWAY, Washington, D. C. Note on the Genus Lucar of Bartram.— The names given to many North American birds by William Bartram in his ‘ Travels,’ orig. ed. 1791, are likely to raise nomenclatural questions until we come to some conclusion whether they are to be accepted or rejected. At present our usage wavers. The A. O.U. rejects most of his names, on the ground that he was not a strict binomialist; yet it accepts the term Aphelocoma Jloridana for the Jay named Corvus floridanus by Bartram, Trav., p. 291. Let us at least be consistent, if we cannot be just! With regard to generic names, if Bartram was not very orthodox in binomiality, neither was Brisson, whose heterodoxy in this particular does not prevent us from adopting his genera; and the jewel of consistency requires us to treat both these authors alike. On p. 2904¢s of this book Bartram names the genus Lucar, with formal indication of its type species, LZ. Zévidus. This brings the case distinctly within our rules regarding generic names, whether properly ‘characterized’ or not, and disposes of the apparent objection that it is a xomen nudum. For this bird is of course the well-known Catbird, Bartram’s specific name of which is the obvious origin of Turdus lividus, Wilson, 1810. Bartram’s /7v¢édus is antedated by carolinensis Linn., 1766; but his Luwcar antedates Galeoscoptes Cab., 1850. As the Catbird is now removed from the genus Mmus, its only tenable name would appear to be Lucar carolinensis Coues, Pr. Phila. Acad., 1875, p- 349-— ELLiotr Cours, Washington, D. C. Breeding of the Carolina Wren (7zryothorus ludovictanus) on Long Island, N. Y—On the 20th of March, 1896, I heard a Carolina Wren in a swamp near my home in Roslyn, Queen’s Co., N. Y. Knowing it to be rare on Long Island I decided to watch it as closely as possible, hoping it might have a mate. The village of Roslyn is situated at the head of Hampstead Harbor, and is shut in by hills on three sides. There are three ponds in the vil- lage, a few hundred feet apart, with swamp land between, and being in a row, one above the other, they divide the village in two parts. Between the highest pond and the second one is a swamp three or four acres in 13 98 General Notes. Auk Jan. area, where I first heard the Wren, and where he stayed most of the time for several weeks. Every day I could hear his pickin’ cherries, pickin’ cherries, pickin’ cherries, pickin’, or tedkettle, teaketile, teakettle, or whee- ha, whee-ha, whee-ha, but the bird was very shy for a long time; in fact, till the nest was built. Starting from the swamp, he would make a com- plete circuit of the village every day, but apparently never left the valley. Early in June I noticed that he seemed to stick to one locality most of the time, so I did a little exploring on his account, but could find no signs of a nest or a mate. The property on which the bird seemed to be located being occupied by people with whom I was not acquainted, I felt a little delicate about asking to go over the place more than once, so I asked Mr. Lewis H. West, who owns the place, to ask his tenants if they would not watch the Wren and try to find the nest. ‘ Why, yes,” they told him, ‘the birds have their nest in the roof of the well.” This was about the 25th of June. We found the nest in one corner of the roof of the well, about ten feet from the ground. The well is less than forty feet from the house, and is used daily. One of the birds left the nest when we went to see it, but stayed close by on a hemlock till we left. I did not have a chance to visit the nest again till the roth of July, when I found three young birds in the nest, well feathered. The mother bird was feeding them at the time, and was not at all shy, alighting on the lattice work around the well, with a small green worm in her bill, and waiting till we withdrew. I did not keep track of the young birds after that, but heard the old ones nearly every day for a long time. On Nov. 3, I heard two calling to each other, one on the hill, one inthe swamp. The last time I heard anything of them was Nov. 22. There can be no possible doubt as to the identification of the bird, for Mr. West and I both were within six feet of them twice, and I have often watched them at short distances with a field-glass, while the song itself is a pretty safe guide with that bird. I have good reason to believe that this is the first record of the actual breeding of the Carolina Wren on Long Island.—Cuas. E. ConKLIN, Roslyn, Queen’s Co., N. Y. A Remarkable Nest of the Tufted Titmouse (Parus bicolor)—On April 23, 1896, I noticed a Tufted Titmouse with its mouth full of build- ing materials, and upon following it closely saw it fly into a very large mass of Spanish moss (77llandsta usneotdes). When it appeared again after depositing the nesting materials I was very much surprised to find that there was no hollow whatever where the moss was growing. It was followed by its mate, and made ten trips to the tree in less than fifteen minutes. Having had a good deal of experience with this species when nesting I knew it was characteristic of this bird to carry building materials to the nest even after the eggs were laid. I resolved to climb the tree Vol. XIV] 1897 General Notes. 99 with assistance later in the day, but a violent rain storm prevented my doing so. The next day, however, to my sorrow, I counted five eggs upon the ground and the nest completely blown out. Undismayed, she began work again in the same bunch of moss, but she was not encouraged at all by her mate, who would fly into a hollow near at hand and whistle for her, but she paid no attention to the hollow —just looked in and left. She worked rapidly and carried huge mouthfuls at every trip. Upon climbing to the nest on May 3 I found that it contained three eggs, and I left it for a full set. I was doomed to disappointment again, however, for the next day was very stormy, and upon visiting the tree I saw all the eggs on the ground and the nest, which was composed of dry leaves, hair, sedge, feathers and snake skins, was blown down in a mass. The fact of the Tufted Titmouse breeding in the Spanish moss is certainly a surprising departure for this bird.— ARTHUR T. WAYNE, Mount Pleasant, South Carolina. . The Whistled Call of Parus atricapillus common to both Sexes.— The well-known spring and summer call of the Chickadee, consisting of three clear whistles, is uttered by both sexes. JI am not aware that record has ever been made of this fact, which I determined some time ago by the judicious use of firearms.—JONATHAN DwiGutT, Jr., M. D., Mew Vork City. Passer domesticus at Archer, Fla., and other Florida Notes.— While collecting in Florida the past summer I killed a male P. domesticus. at Archer on July 1. I can find no record of it having been recorded from this section before, and a number of persons to whom I showed the speci- men said they had never seen one there before. In sections of the State traveled over, where I have collected in pre- vious years, I noticed a very perceptible falling off in the number of many of the large Waders. In Tampa Bay, however, I found the Roseate Spoonbill not uncommon, flocks of forty or fifty individuals being seen on two or three occasions, besides stragglers. I found them feeding in the boggy interiors of some of the mangrove islands and with a little caution was able to secure specimens.— T. GILBERT PEARSON, Guilford College, N. C. Records of Two Birds rare on Long Island, N. Y.— Contopus borealis.— Giraud in his ‘ Birds of Long Island’ makes no record of this-species. Mr. William Dutcher in ‘The Auk’ (Vol. VI, p. 137), records the capture of the third specimen taken on Long Island (Aug. 11, 1888), two previous records having been made: one by Mr. N. T. Lawrence in ‘Forest and Stream,’ Vol. X, p. 235, and the other by Mr. DeL. Berier in ‘Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club,’ Vol. V, p. 46. A single specimen of C. doreal’s from Long Island is contained in the collection of the Long Island Historical Society. TOO General Notes. any This specimen was likewise recorded in ‘The Auk’ (Vol. X, p. 276), by Mr. Wm. Dutcher. I take pleasure in recording two additional speci- mens. Looking for fall migrants in the Parkville woods — now a part of Brooklyn—my attention was attracted by three or four birds, all ap- parently of the same species and evidently Flycatchers, in the tops of a scattered group of lofty old trees whose upper branches were dead and leafless. It at once occurred to me that these might be Olive-sided Fly- catchers, though the extreme rarity of captures on Long Island was dis- couraging to the probability of a whole family presenting itself there at one time. In striking contrast to the familiar Kingbird, these birds were extremely shy. The least fearful of them was secured after some diffi- culty and proved to be a male Olive-sided Flycatcher of the year (date of capture, Aug. 29, 1896). September 1, three days later, in the same woods, a second specimen was taken. This bird was perched among the branches of a large tree which was in full foliage. This specimen was apparently alone, and exhibited none of the shyness which had made the previous capture difficult. This bird is also a male of the year, but measures longer by one half inch than the first. Helmitherus vermivorus.— This Warbler is nota lover of Long Island’s woods. Reaching the northern line of his breeding range at about this latitude, and evidently following regularly a route which does not cross Long Island, his occurrence here is doubtless an exception. A specimen of the Worm-eating Warbler of the year was secured within the present limits of Brooklyn on Sept. 16. 1896. This bird was feeding in company with other Warblers in a low shrubby growth within the borders of a wood. — WILLIAM C. BRAISLIN, Brooklyn, N. Y. Unusual Visits of Birds in Western Massachusetts during 1896.— Am- modramus sandwichensis savanna.— A Savanna Sparrow was taken in Longmeadow the 8th of last February at a spot in the vicinity of which it had been repeatedly observed during the six preceding weeks. This is the first record of this species wintering near Springfield. Agelaius phceniceus.— Close to the same place a small flock of Red- winged Blackbirds stayed from December until March. Ulula cinerea.— A Great Gray Owl was captured in Blandford, Maree 4. This is the third of the kind known to have been taken in this county. Mimus polyglottos.— For a few days during the last part of May a Mockingbird was observed in Ludlow. Corvus ossifragus.— On the 9th of June a Fish Crow was taken in Springfield. This bird has often been reported as having been seen here, but this is the only instance where its presence has been proved by con- clusive evidence. Uria lomvia.— Two Brunnich’s Murres were taken at different points near Springfield on Dec. 19. A heavy gale had just previously prevailed on the coast.— RoBerT O. Morris, Springfield, Mass. Vol: Sa General Notes. TOr 1897 The Michigan Ornithological Club.— The annual meeting of the Michi- gan Ornithological Club was held at the home of the Librarian, Mr. L. J. Cole, in Grand Rapids, on the afternoon and evening of December 11. Important business was transacted in the afternoon, and the evening was devoted to the presentation and discussion of papers. The reports of the officers of last year showed the Club to be in a pros- perous and growing condition. The treasurer reported a balance in the treasury. Prof. A. J. Cook, Dr. J. B. Steere, Dr. Morris Gibbs, and Mr. A. B. Covert were elected Honorary Members. Mr. L. D. Watkins, Man- chester, was elected to Active, and Mr. Henry Roth, Ludington, Mrs. S. W. Clarkson, Ann Arbor, Mr. Geo. Walker, Belvidere, Ill., and Mr. E. W. Durfee, Lordsburg, New Mexico, to Associate membership. Realizing the need of bringing the scattered members of the Club more closely in touch with one another, it was decided to commence the publi- cation of a quarterly bulletin containing accounts of the meetings and other things of interest to members. The editorial staff is made up as follows: Editor-in-chief, S. Whitney Watkins, Manchester; associates, W. A. Davidson, Detroit, T. G. Hankinson, Michigan Agricultural Col- lege, Morrison A. Wood, Ann Arbor, business managers, W. E. Mulliken and S. J. Cole, Grand Rapids. The following officers were elected for the ensuing year: President, A. B. Durfee, Grand Rapids, re-elected; Vice-president, W. A. Davidson, Detroit; Secretary, L. J. Cole, Grand Rapids; Treasurer, Mrs. F. A. Kelsey, Grosse Ile; Librarian, B. R. Laraway, Grand Rapids; Program Committee, B. W. Swales, Detroit; L. C. Read, Grand Rapids; C. M. Ayres, Sault Ste. Marie; Collection Committee, Prof. C. A. Whittemore, Grand Rapids; Percy Selous, Greenville, and H. F. Jones, Grand Rapids. It was decided to hold the next annual meeting at Lansing. Evening session.— The first article, ‘Concerning the English Sparrow,’ by Percy Selous, was read by Mr. Mulliken in the absence of the author. Mr. Selous upheld the foreigner, but the general verdict of the members was against the bird. Mr. T. L. Hankinson presented a paper entitled “The Progress of Ornithology in Michigan.’ Mr. Hankinson began with the list of Sager in 1839 and carried the subject up to the list of A. J, Cook and the organization of the Michigan Ornithological Club. Mr. L. Whitney Watkins of Manchester next read an article on ‘ Bird Migra- tion,’ drawing some interesting conclusions from the reports collected by the Migration Committee during the past year. Mr. Mulliken read a very interesting paper entitled ‘ The Limicole of Ottawa County, Michigan.’ Mr. Mulliken gave copious notes on the habits of twelve species, based on personal observation. The concluding article of the program, ‘History of Baird’s Sandpiper in Michigan,’ was read by Mr. Cole. He gave an account of the taking of this bird in Michigan, and enumerated ten specimens known to have been taken in the State. Auk Jan. 102 Recent Literature. All were well pleased with the progress made and the work done by the Club in the past year and look forward to even better success in the future. — Leon J. Coie, Secretary. Errata.— As I was notable to read the proof of my article on the ‘ Birds of the Coal Regions of Pennsylvania’ (Auk, Oct., 1896), on account of absence from the city, two errors have unfortunately occurred. Turdus Suscescens, not Turdus aonalaschke pallasi, was noted by me at Pottsville and Rock Glen. I noted Cowbirds at Pottsville on July 14, not July 11.—R. T. Youne, Philadelphia, Pa. RECENT LITERATURE. Sharpe’s Catalogue of the Limicolze.'— As Dr. Sharpe says, the collec- tion of Limicole in the British Museum “is truly a wonderful one. Of the 255 species recorded, the British Museum contains 250, and the types are 68 in number.” ‘‘The specimens arranged and catalogued in it are 13,440, exclusive of many hundreds of duplicates.” It is hence easily seen that the labor of preparing the present volume was very great, with, however, commensurate facilities for arriving at satisfactory results. The Limicole are divided into the following six families,— Gidicnem- ide, with 4 genera and 11 species; Cursoriide, with 8 genera and 37 species; Parride, with 7 genera and 11 species; Charadriide, with 76 genera (44 of them monotypic) and 192 species; Chionide, with 2 genera and 3 species; and Thinocorythide, with 2 genera and § species. The family Charadriidz includes 10 subfamilies, most of which have been often if not generally accorded the rank of families; as, for example, Arenariine, Hematopodine, Charadriine, Himantopodine, Scolopacine, Phalaropodine, etc.; while the genus Afsriza, sometimes recognized as a family, is not only reduced to generic rank, but is placed between Ochthodromus and Charadrius. While Sharpe thus degrades the rank of many groups usually recognized as families, he goes to the opposite ex- 1 Catalogue | of the | Limicole | in the | Collection | of the | British Mu- seum. | By | R. Bowdler Sharpe. | London: | Printed by order of the Trustees. | Sold by | Longmans & Co., 39 Paternoster Row; | B. Quaritch, 15 Piccadilly ; Dulau & Co., 37 Soho Square W.; | Kegan Paul & Co., Paternoster House, Charing Cross Road; and at the | British Museum (Natural History), Crom- well Road, S. W. | 1896.— 8vo, pp. xii + 794, pl. vil. = Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum, Vol. XXIV. Vol. XIV Recent Literature. 103 1897 treme in his treatment of genera, of which he here not only creates some eight or nine new ones, but elevates to generic rank a very large number of groups heretofore commonly treated as merely subgenera or else wholly ignored. As regards matters of nomenclature, we of course expect the continua- tion of the confusion which results from taking the XIIth instead of the Xth edition of Linnzus’s ‘Systema Nature’ as the starting-point for the law of priority, in opposition to the views of nearly all zoOlogists except Sharpe and a few of his British confréres. But we can hardly understand why, after accepting Jacana as rightfully superceding Parra, he should continue to call the family Parride, in contravention even of the British Association Code. The genus Asarcéa is proposed for jacana spinosa (Linn., 1758), and the specific name vardadzlis (Linn., 1766) is adopted for the species. The generic name AHydrophasianus is replaced by the new term Hydrophasis, without any word of explanation or apparent reason. Among the Charadriide proper, full generic rank is given to Oxyechus, Ochthodromus, Eégialeus, and Podasocys, as well as to Squatarola. Among the Tringee we have as full genera Helodromas, Limonites, Het- eropygia, Arquatella Ancylochilus, Pelidna, Rhyacophilus, etc., while Tringoides takes the place of Ac#zt/s. As regards the status of species and subspecies which enter the North American fauna, Charadrius dominicus fulvus is considered not entitled to recognition ; Macrorhamphus scolopa- ceus, Ereunetes occidentalis, and Symphemia semifalmata tnornata, are also relegated to synonymy, Yotanus solitarius ctnnamomeus Brewster, omitted from the body of the work, is added in the Appendix, where it is given the rank of a full species, but in the Systematic Index it stands as a subspecies. If we may judge from Mr. Sharpe’s remarks on these and other similar cases, he seems to be as far as ever from grasping the idea underlying subspecies, now so well understood by many of his British and continental fellow workers. Respecting #gtalitis meloda circumcincta, Mr. Sharpe sees no reason for considering it otherwise than as merely very old birds of -#. meloda. Tringa couesi and T. ptilocnem?s are both made subspecies of A. maritima, in the text, but in the Systematic Index T. ptilocnemts is enumerated as a full species. Tyrénga (Pelidna) americana (Cass.) (=factfica Coues) stands as a full species, under Cassin’s name, although the name americana Cassin (1858) is preoccupied by a 7ringa americana Brehm (1855) applied to another species. In the matter of specific names of North American birds, we have Limosa hudsonica instead of L. hemastica, and Phalaropus hyperboreus in place of P. dobatus, on the basis of the XIIth vs. the Xth edition of Linneus. In respect to the latter, he says the name /odazus ‘‘ is taken from the tenth (1758) edition of the ‘Systema Nature,’ and it is also the Tringa lobata of the twelfth edition. Here, however, is given the name 104 Recent Literature. ree ot Tringa hyperborea, which, in my opinion, it is wise to adopt, as the name of dobatus has been applied to the Grey Phalaropes so often, that even at the present day its adoption seems certain to create confusion.” To show how little there isin this plea, it may be stated that, according to Mr. Sharpe’s citations, the name dodatus was applied just 8 times in the century 1771-1871, deducting for one reference (to Blyth, pp. 694 and 695) given twice, and for one reference (to Treat) which belongs to ‘hyperboreus’! The bibliographical citations are very extended, under sorne species occupying from three to five pages. In fact, we are told in the Intro- duction that “ The references quoted in the synonymy are 18,892. With the exception of a few books, which proved to be inaccessible, the whole mass of this literature has been actually consulted.” The labor here involved no one can appreciate who has not engaged extensively in biblio- graphical work. It is doubtless well done, and as free from errors and transpositions as such work usuallyis. We miss, however, references to some publications that must have been accessible ; for example, the earlier volumes of the ‘Bulletin’ of the American Museum of Natural History are cited but the later ones are not; and so with other works that might be mentioned, which are either quite overlooked or cited irregularly. The earlier volumes of the ‘ Bulletin’ of the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Cambridge are cited as “ Bull. Hary. Coll.,” while later volumes are given correctly. As there is no such scientific publication as ‘Bull. Harv. Coll.’ there might be some trouble if one not conversant with the case should attempt to verify such references. With all this apparently ungrateful fault-finding, we share the sense of profound indebtedness all ornithologists must feel toward Dr. Sharpe for the great boon conferred by his work on the Limicole, and appreciate most heartily the vast amount of drudgery it must have cost, as well as the skill and efficiency displayed in its preparation.—J. A. A. Bendire’s ‘ Life Histories of North American Birds.'—This forms, in order of appearance, Part II of the author’s great work on ‘The Life Histories of North American Birds’, but through lack of foresight on the part of the proper authorities in such matters, we are left without any convenient method of notation to distinguish the present part of this ‘Smithsonian Institution. | United States National Museum. | Special Bulle- tin. | — | Life Histories | of | North American Birds, | from the Parrots to the Grackles, | with special reference to | their Breeding Habits and Eggs, | by | Charles Bendire, Captain and Brevet Major, U.S. A. (retired). | Honor. ary Curator of the Department of Odlogy, U. S. National Museum, | Member of the American Ornithologists’ Union. | With | Seven Lithographic Plates. | — | Washington: | Government Printing Office. | 1895 [= Oct. 1, 1896].— 4to, pp. i-ix, 1-518, col. pll. i-vii, each with explanatory leaf. Vol. XIV 187 Recent Literature. 105 monumental series from its predecessor.! Besides this, the work bears the date of printing and not of publication, it having been printed, or at least electrotyped, for more than a year before the Government Printing Office found it convenient to make the work accessible to the public. The high praise bestowed upon the first part of the ‘ Life Histories (Auk, IX, 1892, p. 375), issued in 1892, is equaily well deserved in respect to the present volume. Indeed, the high standard set at the beginning, both as to the text and the plates, is now, if possible, surpassed. For faithful, painstaking, conscientious work, these volumes are a model that may well be followed in similar fields. The method of treatment is similar to that of the first part, already described (/. c.). Its special feature is the large amount of original information conveyed, either from the rich fund of the author’s own experience or solicited from trustworthy correspond- ents for use in the present connection. As before, extraneous and thread- worn matter is excluded, a fresh harvest being given in its place. Also, ? as before, the plates are above criticism, and have as yet never been equalled in artistic effect or in faithfulness of execution. The amount of work entailed in the preparation of such a volume is not easily appreciated, without experience in similiar lines. The birds treated in the present volume comprise the Carolina Paroquet, the Cuckoos and Anis, one species of Trogon, three of Kingfishers, 36 kinds of Woodpeckers, 11 Goatsuckers, 4 Swifts, 18 Hummingbirds, 1 Becard, 39 Flycatchers, 13 Larks, 31 Crows, Jays and Magpies, 1 Starling and 29 Blackbirds and Orioles— 197 in all. This of course includes subspecies as well as species. The seven colored plates contain an aggregate of 196 figures, all natural size, drawn by Mr. John L. Ridgway, while the chromo-lithographic reproductions are by the Ketterlinus Printing Company of Philadelphia. In species that lay white eggs, like the Hummingbirds, Swifts and Woodpeckers, only a few figures are given for each group, but in birds laying colored eggs, with more or less characteristic markings, nearly every species is figured, often two or more eggs of the same species being given to show diversity of marking in eggs of the same species. In the text we have not only descriptions of the eggs and nests, and an account of the general habits of the birds, but special attention is given to the distribution and breeding ranges of the species. Unlike most odlogical writers, Captain Bendire gives careful attention to the technical points that distinguish species and subspecies, of which there is ample internal evidence in the volume before us. Doubtful points respecting alleged distribution are worked out, wherever possible, by direct recourse to the immense collection of bird skins in the National Museum, and questions of relationship between closely allied forms are discussed with ‘In the ‘ Advertisement ’ it is referred to in parenthesis as ‘Special Bulletin NOD 3.) 14 I 06 Recent Literature. Auk Jan. the intelligence of an expert ornithologist, as witness the case, among others, of the Florida Meadowlark. It is to be hoped that the author will be blessed with health and further opportunities for the completion of the grand work he has so successfully undertaken and already carried so far.—J. A. A. Bird-Nesting with a Camera.'—The prospectus accompanying this sumptuous work tells us that the edition will be limited to 300 copies of 18 to 20 parts, each part to contain ten plates, with descriptions of the habits of the species, anda more special history of the nests illustrated. Material has already been collected for the first thirteen parts, which will be issued at intervals of four to six weeks, and with the exception of “one or two” of the rarer species the author expects to present a complete series of the nests of British birds photographed ¢z stu. If he succeeds in his undertaking, and in the remaining parts of his work maintains the standard of excellence reached by Part I, he will have made on unparalled contribution to ornithology. Only those who have tried it know how much patience and ingenuity is required to obtain satistactory photographs of birds’ nests, and only those who have had experience with publishers know how difficult it is to secure a proper reproduction of the photograph after it is made. In both tasks Mr. Lee has achieved unqualified success. The ten photo- gravures included in Part I of his work, whether viewed from the stand- point of the photographer or reproducer, are above criticism, while neither pen nor pencil could so grapically illustrate the nesting haunts of the species they represent. The text presents a general account of the species as a British bird, and very wisely, a particular account of the nest figured, with interesting incidents concerning the making of the photograph.— F. M. C. Thompson’s Art Anatomy.” — This admirable work is an outcome of the author’s training both as a naturalist and artist. It goes without saying that no anatomist could alone have produced the series of beautiful plates 1 Among British Birds in their Nesting Haunts. Illustrated by the Camera. sy Oswin A. J. Lee. Part I. Edinburgh. David Douglas. Folio, pp. 39, pll. x. (Price 1os. 6d. per part to subscribers only.) > Studies in the | Art Anatomy of Animals | Being a Brief Analysis of the Visible Forms of the more | Familiar Mammals and Birds. Designed for the | Use of Sculptors, Painters, Illustrators, | Naturalists,and Taxidermists. | By | Ernest E. Seton Thompson ! Naturalist to the government of Manitoba; Author of “ The Birds of Manitoba,” ‘*The Mammals of Manitoba,” | ‘“‘ The King of Currumpaw,” Zxposant au Salon. | Mustrated with One Hundred Drawings by the Author | London | Macmillan and Co., Ltd. | New York: The Macmillan Co. | 1896.— Folio, pp. viii + 87; pll. xlix. Vol. XIV 1897 Recent Literature. I O7 with which Mr. Thompson illustrates his theme and proves his thesis ; and it isequally true that no artist could have drawn them without a knowledge of the anatomical details upon which they are based. Mr. Thompson’s plea is for scientific exactness as well as for artistic excellence. He rightly claims that no result can be correct which is fundamentally wrong, and he presents his fellow artists with a series of original studies of the visible form of mammals and birds as it is governed by bones and muscles, tendons, veins and nerves, hair, feathers, which they will do well to consider. We are here concerned only with that part of the work relating to birds. Plates are given illustrating the pterylosis of a typical pas- serine bird (Passer domesticus), a Kestrel (Falco alaudartus), and a Quail (Coturnix communis). Special attention is paid to the intricate arrangement of the feathers of the wing, and to the effect produced by the feathers of certain pteryle when in proper position. This is further shown bya remarkable drawing of the Peacock’s spread train, which, when in good condition, is found to present a perfect half circle, the ocelli being bisected by the radii and equidistant concentric circles. Mr. Thompson has rendered a service to science and to art for which all lovers of truth and beauty cannot be too grateful.— F. M. C. Miss Merriam’s ‘A-Birding on a Bronco ’.!—‘ A-Birding on a Bronco’ consists of a series of nineteen chapters or studies, mostly here printed for the first time, illustrated with numerous ‘ half-tones ’ from photographs of some of the scenes described and by spirited drawings of birds and birds’ nests by Mr. Fuertes. The scene of Miss Merriam’s studies is the vicinity of Twin Oaks, in southern California, “ thirty-four miles north of San Diego, and twelve miles from the Pacific,’ where parts of two summers were spent a-field with the birds. About sixty species are referred to at greater or less length, while a score or more are made the subject of special study. Some twenty pages are devoted to ‘The Little Lover,’ in other words, the Western House Wren, and as many more to the Western Gnatcatcher. The chief characters of another chapter are some young California Woodpeckers, while Bush-tits, Orioles, Chewinks, Humming- birds, the Valley Quail, the Road-runner, and others come in for a liberal share of attention. Miss Merriam is a sympathetic as well as a keen observer of birds in their native haunts, and relates in minute detail the vicissitudes of bird-life as seen in her numerous excursions to their favorite haunts. As may be inferred from the title of the book, two trusty broncos —one during the season of 1889 and the other in 1894 — afforded her not only means of easy travel during her daily excursions but also pleasant ' A-Birding on a Bronco | By Miss Florence A. Merriam |... . [== Motto, 3 lines] | Illustrated | [Vignette] | Boston and New York | Houghton, Mifflin and Company | The Riverside Press, Cambridge | 1896.—16mo, pp. x + 227. (Price $1.25.) 108 Recent Literature. toe companionship. While Mrs. Miller and other well known writers have made us familiar with the domestic trials and housekeeping methods of many of our eastern birds, Miss Merriam here enters a new field, and tells us in a charming way of the nest-building and brood-rearing ways of a score or more of interesting types of western bird-life. The work is of course non-technical, as it should be, being a popular contribution to bird-lore, yet, abounds with interesting observations of permanent value. —jJ.A.A ahs . ‘Papers presented to the World’s Congress of Ornithology.’ !— From the ‘Publisher’s note,’ we learn that the few weeks intervening between the appointment of the Committee of the World’s Congress of Orni thology (see Auk, X, 1893, 386) and the session of the Congress, did not enable the Committee to do all it wished to secure the co-operation of ornithologists living at a distance from Chicago, ‘‘ but they had reason to be much gratified at the measure of success attained, as witnessed by the large and interested audiences which attended every session, and the many papers which were read in person or by proxy.” The Congress was held Oct. 18-21, 1893, the sessions occupying four days. This Congress differed from other World’s Congresses of Ornithology that have been held in that it was not, and was not intended to be, to any large extent a scientific congress ; the subject of Ornithology being ap- proached mainly from its economic, esthetic, and humanitarian sides. Indeed, the motto chosen to grace the titlepage —‘ Birds must and shall be protected” — is the key-note to the volume. Of the 27 papers con- tained in the work, not one can be considered as technical; all are written in a popular vein, and nearly all, from the ‘ Presidential Address,’ by Dr. Coues, to almost the last paper in the volume, approach the subject of birds from the side of the humanitarian. Many of the papers are charm- ingly written, and there is less repetition and less of the commonplace than the nature of the subject would naturally lead one to expect. The papers here gathered are well worthy of the permanency now secured for them, and of their attractive typographical setting. Their perusal should tend not only to stimulate interest in bird protection, but in the popular study of birds for the pleasure it brings. The list of contributors includes a number of well known ornithologists, as well as many popular writers of distinction on ornithological subjects. The edition is limited to 600 numbered copies.— J. A. A. ‘Papers | presented to the | World’s Congress | on | Ornithology | Edited by | Mrs. E. Irene Rood | Chairman Woman’s Committee of the Congress | under the direction of | Dr. Elliott Coues | President of the Congress, Ex- President of the American Ornithologist’s Union. | — “ Birds must and shall be protected.” | — | Chicago | Charles H. Sergel Company | 1896.— 8vo, pp. 208, (Price, $5.00, net.) Vol. XIV 1897 Recent Literature. 109 The Revised New Nuttall.— The second edition of the Nuttall- Chamberlain ‘ Manual,’ recently issued,! comes to us under a modified title, properly indicating the scope of the work.’ It is also embellished with twenty chromolithographic plates, giving figures of about 110 species. In the case of the majority of the species, they are sufficiently truthful in coloring to be of material service to the inexperienced student of birds ; in the other cases they are very good reproductions of very poor originals. The text, of course, is mainly as in the first edition, being printed from the same electrotype plates, but many important corrections have been made, here and there, in the parts by Mr. Chamberlain, through which means the work is more nearly ‘brought down to date, and much improved. This is noticeable especially in the matter relating to the subject of geographical distribution; but if one were disposed to be critical, various desirable improvements, overlooked in the present revi- sion, might be pointed out. The preface to the first edition, or what purports to be such, is retained, but comparison of it with the preface to the first edition shows that 19 lines in pp. vi and vii have been expunged and replaced by 21 lines of new matter, of quite different import and much more creditable to the taste of the editor. Yet the preface, thus materially altered, still bears date “September, 1891.” This, to say the least, is an idiosyncrasy in book- making we do not remember to have before seen. This revised edition of the Nuttall-Chamberlain ‘Manual,’ with its amended title and important correction in the text, and the added helpful colored illustrations, is well deserving of generous patronage, as a ‘Popular Handbook of the Ornithology of Eastern North America.’— Ms BNo dike Millais on Change to Spring Plumage without a Moult.’— The intent of this paper is to show that in acquiring their summer plumage certain species of water-birds undergo not a moult but a recoloration and restora- tion of the old feathers of the winter dress. The Sanderling ( Calidris arenaria) is taken as a typical example of this change, and feathers ‘A Popular Handbook | of the | Ornithology | of | Eastern North America. | By | Thomas Nuttall. | Second revised and annotated edition | By Montague Chamberlain. | With Additions | and One Hundred and Ten Illustrations in Colors. | [Cut of Hummingbird] Vol. I | The Land Birds. | [Vol. II. Game and Water Birds.] | Boston: | Little, Brown, and Company. | 1896. —2 vols, crown 8vo. Vol. I, pp. i-liv, 1-473; Vol. II, pp. i-vii, 1-431, col. pll. i-xx, and 172 illustrations in the text. * For notice of the first edition, see Auk, IX, 1892, pp. 59-61. 3 On the Change of Birds to Spring Plumage without a Moult. By John Guille Millais. Ibis, 7th ser., Vol. II, Oct. 1896, pp. 451-457, pl. x. Auk Recent Literature. ian | ce) plucked from this species at various dates form a series depicted in a colored plate, which purports to show a color change without moult. It so happens, however, that Mr. Chapman has also studied the Sanderling (Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., VIII, 1896, pp. 1-8) and states that the change is duetoa moult. That all who read may each judge for himself which of the two writers has the best claim to credence, I make use of the ‘deadly parallel column, italicizing the important features. Mr. Millais’s remarks are given in the first column, Mr. Chapman’s in the second. Mr. MILLAIs. “Tllustrations are given (Plate X, figs. 8-12) showing the gradual change of a feather from the back of the neck during the period ex- tending from Marck to August. « ... Mr. Allen’s chief argument seems to be that a feather once completed is dead and retains no further power of transmitting color through the quill from the epider- mis. Now if this were the case how is it that we find a feather like that of figs. 9, 10 and 11—feathers which are to be found in the plumage of the bird during successive months? According to Mr. Allen the bird would have to renew its feathers every month which is a manifest impossibility. As there can be no reasonable doubt that the feather goes through the changes exhibited in figs. 9-12 (decause there zs no moult during that period), and as we have the proof of all interme- diate changes of the feathers taking same place, there seems equally little reason to doubt that fig. 8 passes into fig. 9, for here again we have the transition shown. We know that many of the small perching birds assume their summer plumage by means of the gray edgings of the feathers wearing off; 7 do not, how- ever, think that this takes place Mr. CHAPMAN. “This brings us to the change from winter to breeding plumage, which Herr Gatke, as already de- scribed, asserts is accomplished without molt. “My series of twenty specimens illustrating ¢hzs change show that it begins late tn March or during the first half of April ard zs completed in May. They show, furthermore, that zt zs accomplished by a molt. In proof of this statement I will describe several of these birds. No. 3685 (Coll. Geo. B. Sennett, Corpus Christi, Texas, March 28, 1886) is to all outward appearances in the winter plumage of the adult, but examination shows molting that the molt zs im active progress over the entire body, in the scapulars, tertials, all but the greater series of wing-coverts, the upper and under tail-coverts. ... Am. Mus. No: 45485 (California, April 13, Xantus) closely resembles the preceding . . - - No. 6042 (Coll. Geo. B. Sen- nett, Corpus Christi, Texas, April 20, 1889, Singley) is slightly more advanced than either of the birds just described. Mew feathers are appearing not only over the whole body, tertials, lesser and median wing-coverts, but the molt extends to the outer pair of tail-feathers, Vol. XIV 1897 in the case of the Sanderling, in the change from fig. 10 to fig. 11, but that it matter moving down the feather and obli- terating the After change, / think that the edge of the feather then appreciable degree, causing its form to be altered as seen in fig. 12. is the colouring white. this wears away in an “To sum up, so far [see no reason whatever to differ from the opinion of many of our own naturalists, czd I maintain that Herr Gitke’s solu- tion of the Spring change of the Dunlin and the Sanderling tis per- fectly correct as regards an actual influx of pigment through the old feather, whilst Mr. Frank M. Chap- man’s observations on these two birds in the same journal as Mr. Allen’s require modification. We know well that new feathers come in place of the few that are cast, but that is no evidence that the whole bird undergoesa moult of all except the rectrices and remiges.” Recent Literature. iti which with the median pair are about half grown. Only seven of the twelve old tail-feathers remain, and it seems probable that all the rectrices are renewed. Am. Mus. No. 60007 (Micco, Florida, April 30, 1891; C. S. Allen) has nearly completed the molt, though new feathers are still appearing all over the body. The rectrices, tertials and lesser and median wing-coverts have apparently been Nearly all the newly-grown. or growing feathers of the upper parts renewed. are broadly tipped with ashy gray, which, as zuwmerous specimens show, ts later worn off, leaving the black and rufous of the full breeding plumage. It is evidently unneces- sary to describe other specimens in this series which skow the molt in every stage, and prove beyond ques- tion the manner in which the change from winter to summer plumage is accomplished.” Comment seems quite unnecessary, and such evidence as Mr. Chap- man’s can hardly be set aside as needing “ modification” by so uncom- promisingly biased a writer as Mr. Millais. The balance of his article need not occupy us seriously, for he states no facts which are not admitted by everybody, and figures no feathers which new growth could not have produced. He even admits that some of the feathers ave of new growth, but clings to the old idea of color change in others adjacent. He finds a moult in Harelda glaczalis, a winter resident, and only slight evidences of one in the transient migrants, Podicifes auritus and Calidris arenaria. The fact, that most birds largely complete their moult before migrating seems to have been quite overlooked in explaining these differences, In fact, the superficial views of the sportsman rather than the deductions of a careful ornithologist pervade the article, which smacks strongly of the very dogmatism the author so deprecates in others.— J. D., Jr. Auk Ieee? Recent Literature. jan, Wintle’s ‘ Birds of Montreal’.'—The work opens with a descriptive and historical preface of twelve pages, followed by (pp. 1-135) a copiously annotated list of 254 species, arranged in accordance with the classifica- tion and nomenclature of the A. O. U. Check-List, the names of the higher groups being included. The character of the ‘ List’ is sufficiently indicated by the descriptive portion of the title page, already transcribed in the accompanying footnote. This is succeeded by what is properly part two of the book, containing ‘“ Abridged Descriptions of the Birds of Mon- treal, specially given for the purpose of identification for persons not familiar with their general appearance,” occupying pp. =37-214, the exis- tence of which excellent feature the title page gives no intimation. These descriptions consist of about five to ten lines each, and for the most part give very well the distinctive features of the species. This is succeeded by a very full index of vernacular names (pp. 215-227), and by still a third part, also not indicated on the title page. This has an embellished title page of its own as an ‘ inset,’ with the title, ‘‘ Original Sporting Sketches, compiled by David Rennie, 1895.” It is paged continuously with the rest of the book (forming pp. 229-281), but is set in smaller type. The book appears to well meet the needs of a local, popular hand book. It is well printed in rather large type, on good paper, and typographically presents an attractive appearance. It is somewhat marred by the printer’s excen- tricities of punctuation in connection with the technical names, but typographical errors are not numerous.— J. A. A. Oberholser’s Birds of Wayne County, Ohio.?— The list proper includes 183 species, and is followed by a ‘Hypothetical List’ of 82 species, which ‘The | Birds of Montreal | By | Ernest D. Wintle, | “Associate Member of the American Ornithologists Union.” | Birds observed in the vicinity of Mon- treal, Province of Quebec, | Dominion of Canada, with annotations as to whether they | are “ Permanent Residents,” or those that are found | regularly throughout the year; “ Winter Visitants,” | or those that occur only during the winter season, | passing north in the spring; ‘“ Transient Visitants,” or those that occur only | during migrations in spring and | autumn; ‘‘Summer Resi- dents,” | or those that are known to ! breed, but which depart southward be- fore winter; and “Accidental Visitants,” or strag- | glers from remote districts ; giving | their relative abundance as to-whether | they are rare, scarce, common or abundant ; | data of ests and eggs when found, and especially | noting the species that breed in the C7ty and Mount | Royal Park ; also data of migratory arrivals and de- | partures, and other notes, all of which are deduced | from original observations made during the past fifteen years. | — | Montreal: | W. Drysdale & Co. | — | 1896.—8vo., pp. xiv + 181, with an outline map and several plates. * A Preliminary List of the Birds of Wayne County, Ohio. By Harry C. Oberholser. Bull. of the Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station. Technical Series, Vol. I, Number 4, July, 1896, Art. xxiv, pp. 243-354. Vol. XIV 1897 Feecent Literature. 113 includes species of probable occurrence in the region, but not as yet positively known to the writer to have been found there. As most of them are natural to the region, the conservatism here shown is the more commendable. As said in the ‘Introduction’: ‘‘ That the present paper may serve as a basis for future observations is the chief excuse for its existence. With this purpose in view much care has been exercised to avoid the inclusion of any but perfectly reliable records. All but four species have been personally identified by the writer, either in the field or from specimens in local collections; and these four exceptions have been admitted only upon what has been considered satisfactory evidence of their occurrence.” The paper is based mainly on observations made by the writer between February 8, 1890 and April 9, 1894. Of the 183 species noted, 30 are classified as permanent residents, 61 as summer residents, and 57 as transient visitors, and these latter are further subdi- vided in accordance with their manner of occurrence. The annotations are often quite extended, relating to the nesting habits of the species as well as to their relative abundance and seasons of occurrence. The nomenclature is that of the A. O. U. Check-List, and includes the names of the higher groups as well as those of the species. Also various fami-~ liar text illustrations are introduced.— J. A. A. Publications Received.— Bocage, J. V. Barboza. Aves d’Africa de que existem no Museu de Lisboa os exemplares typicos. (Jorn. de Scien. Math., Phys. e Nat., Lisboa, IV, No. XV, pp. 179-186, 1896.) Chamberlain, Montague. Nuttall’s Ornithology, 2d rev. ed., 2 vols., crown 8vo., Boston, 1896. Little, Brown and Co. (Cloth, $7.50, net; Levant mor., $13.50, net.) Chapman, Frank M. Notes on Birds observed in Yucatan. (Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. VIII, Dec. 1896, pp. 271-290.) Committee Brit. Assoc. Adv. Sci. Digest of the Observations of the Migrations of Birds at Lighthouses and Lightships, 1880-1887. 8vo., pp. 27. 1896. Knowlton, F. H. The Carolina Paroquet. (The Feather, Oct., 1896 pp. 32, 33-) Lee, Oswin A. J. Among BritisheBirds in their Nesting Haunts. Illustrated by the Camera. Part I. Folio, pp. 39, pll. x. David Douglass, Edinburgh, 1896. Lucas, Frederic A. The Cranium of Pallas’s Cormorant. (Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., XVIII, No. 1095.) North, Alfred J. A List of the Insectivorous Birds of New South Wales. 8vo., pp. 18, 10 col. pll. 1896. Oberholser, Harry C. A preliminary List of the Birds of Wayne County, Ohio. (Bull. Ohio Agr. Exper. Station, I, No. 4, pp. ii, 243-254, July, 1896. ) 15 Il4 Recent Literature. we Rood, Mrs. E. Irene, editor. Papers presented to the World’s Congress on Ornithology. 8vo., pp. 207. Chicago: Charles H. Sergel Company. 1896. Salvadori, Tommaso. (1) Descrizione di una nuova specie del genere Rhamphocelus di Chiriqui. (Boll. Mus. di Zool. ed Anat. comp. della R. Universita di Torino, XI, No. 249, 1896.) (2) Catalogo di una col- lezione di uccelli delle vicinage di Deli in Sumatra. (Jdb7d., No. 250.) Sharpe, R. Bowdler. Catalogue of the Limicole in the Collection of the British Museum. S8vo., pp. xii, 794. London, 1896. Shufeldt, R. W. (1) Fossil Bones of Birds and Mammals from Grotto Pietro Tamponi and Grive-St. Alban. (Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadel- phia, 1896, pp. 507-516.) (2) On the Photography of Woodpeckers. Parts land II. (Shooting and Fishing, Sept. 24 and Oct. 1, 1896.) Thompson, Ernest E. Seton. Studies in the Art Anatomy of Animals. Folio, pp. viii, 87, pll. xlix. Macmillan Co., 1896. Townsend, C.H.Taylor. Onthe Biogeography of Mexico, Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona. (Transact. Texas Acad. Sci., 1895, pp. 71-96.) Wintle, Ernest D. The Birds of Montreal. 8vo., 1896. Montreal: W. Drysdale & Co. (Price, $1.25.) Abstract of Proc. Linnzan Society of New York, No. 8, 1895-96. American Journ. Sci., Oct.—Dec., 1896. American Naturalist, Oct.Dec., 1896. Australian Museum, Report for 1895. Anales del Museo nacional de Montevideo, V, 1896. Annals of Scottish Natural History, Oct., 1896. Bulletin British Orn. Club, Nos. 38, 39, 1896. Bulletin of the Wilson Orn. Chapt. Agassiz Assoc., Nos. 10, 11, 1896. Canadian Record of Science, VII, Nos. 1, 2, 1896. Field Columbian Museum, Ann. Report, 1895-96. Forest and Stream, XLVI, Nos. 14-26, 1896. Medical Age, XIV, Nos. 18-23, 1896. Naturalist, The, Month. Journ. of Nat. Hist. for North of England, Oct.— Dec., 1896. Nidologist, The, IV, Nos. 1, 2, 1896. Oregon Naturalist, III, Nos. 11, 12, Nov.—Dec., 1896. Ornithologische Jahrbuch, VII, Heft 6, Nov.—Dec., 1896. Ornithologische Monatsberichte, IV, Nos. 10-12, 1896. Osprey, The, I, Nos. 2-4, 1896. Ottawa Naturalist, Nos. 7, 8, 1896. Our Animal Friends, XXIV, Nos. 2-4, 1896. Proceedings Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, pt. 2, April-August, 1896.. Science, New Ser., IV, Nos. 91-103, 1896. Shooting and Fishing, XX, Nos. 22-26, XXI, Nos. 1-10, 1896. Transactions Nat. Hist. Soc. Glasgow, IV, pt. 2, 1894-95. Zodlogist, The, Nos. 238, 240, 1896. ee Notes and News. I1t5 NOTES AND NEWS. Mr. Howarp GARDNER NICHOLS, an Associate Member of the A. O. U., and for a number of years a Resident Member of the Nuttall Ornithological Club, died June 23, 1896, at the early age of 25 years, at Atlanta, Georgia, from injuries received several weeks before by the fall of a piece of machinery in a cotton mill at Alabama City, Alabama. He was a gradu- ate of Harvard in the class of 1893. After graduation he went into the business of cotton manufacturing, and at the time of his death was the manager of a large plant for the weaving of cotton at Alabama City. He was very successful in this undertaking, and had every prospect of a brilliant future. What leisure time he had was largely devoted to the study of birds, and the same zeal and earnestness which he carried into all his work promised much of value as the result of his investi- gations of the little-known fauna of the region in which he was situated. At the time of his death he was mayor of Alabama City, where his death was mourned as an irreparable public loss, and where he was honored and respected for “his sterling worth, strict integrity, and noble charity.” Tue Action on the Amendments to the By-Laws of the A. O. U. pro- posed at the Thirteenth Congress, and referred to the Fourteenth Con- gress, resulted as follows: The first and third proposed changes were not adopted, but the proposed addition of the words ‘‘ together with the Ex-Presidents” to the second amendment was adopted. The first paragraph of Article II, Section I, as amended, reads as follows : — “ Article II, Section I, The Officers of the Union shall be a President, two Vice-Presidents, a Secretary, a Treasurer, and seven Councillors These Officers, together with the Ex-Presidents, shall constitute the Board of Management or Council of the Union, for the transaction of such business as may be assigned to it by the By-Laws or by the Union.” THE ornithological collection formed by the late Dr. William Wood, of East Windsor Hill, Conn., has been presented by his widow and children to the Hartford (Conn.) Scientific Society, and will soon be placed on exhibition in the rooms of the Society. The collection is mostly mounted, and contains many excellent specimens of the rapacious birds found in Connecticut. Davib DouG-as, Edinburgh, has issued a prospectus of ‘ A History of Fowling, being an account of the many curious devices by which Wild Birds are or have been captured in different parts of the World,’ by the Rev. H. A. Macpherson. It will form a quarto volume of about 450 116 Notes and News. Auk Jan. pages, with numerous illustrations in the text. As a ‘considerable amount of antiquarian lore” is interwoven with the general narrative, the book is likely to interest other readers besides ornithologists. Subscription price, 21s. As WE go to press we are in receipt of Part XVI—the last and con- cluding part—of Mr. H. Nehrling’s excellent ‘North American Birds,’ with plates xxxv and xxxvi, pp. 337 to 452, and index and title pages. The work forms two large quarto volumes, beautifully printed, and illus- trated with thirty-six colored plates. In ‘ScrENcE’ for Jan. 1, 1897 (N.S. Vol. V, p. 26), is a short commu- nication from H. Helm Clayton, of the Blue Hill Meteorological Observatory, Readville, Mass., on ‘The Velocity of a Flight of Ducks obtained by Triangulation.’ From observations made with specially con- structed theodolites, used in determining the heights and velocities of clouds, Mr. S. P. Fergusson and the writer of the article in question succeeded in obtaining measurements of the height and velocity of flight of a flock of Ducks which crossed their field of observation on the morn- ing of December 8, 1896. The height of the Ducks was 958 feet, and the rate of flight 47.8 miles per hour. This record is of special interest, there being as yet so few trustworthy observations of the velocity of flight of birds. Tue A. O. U. Committee on Protection of North American Birds has increased its membership with a view to more effective work, and is at present constituted as follows : WiLiiaM DutcHer, Chatrman, 525 Manhattan Ave., New York, N. Y. GrorGE H. Mackay, 218 Commonwealth Ave., Boston, Mass. E. H. Forsusn, Ornithologist State Board of Agriculture, Malden, Mass. Mrs. Orive THoRNE MILLER, 628 Hancock St., Brooklyn, N. Y. WITMER STONE, Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, Pa. Mrs. JULIA STOCKTON ROBINS, 114 So. 21st St., Philadelphia, Pa. Miss FLoreENCE A. MERRIAM, 1919 16th St., N. W., Washington, D. C. Dr. T. S. PALMER, Biological Survey, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D. C. RUTHVEN DEANE, 24 Michigan Ave., Chicago, III. O. WIDMANN, Old Orchard, Mo. Mrs. E. IRENE Roop, Fort Worth, Texas. Leverett M. Loomis, Academy of Sciences, San Francisco, Cal. A. W. ANTHONY, 1929 Front St., San Diego, Cal. A large edition of the Annual Report of the Committee for 1896 has been published for free distribution. The Committee will gladly receive the co-operation of individuals, Committees or Societies interested in the better protection of our native birds. as moms Eighth SUPE TEM ERE to the A. O. U. Check-List. I Ly) EIGHTH SUPPLEMENT TO THE AMERICAN ORNITH- OLOGISTS’ UNION CHECK-LIST OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. Two yEArs have elapsed since the publication of the Seventh Supplement to the A. O. U. Check-List of North American Birds, during which period the Committee on Classification and Nomen- clature has held three sessions,—one in Cambridge and two in Washington. Five of the decisions reached by the Committee at its first Washington meeting were incorporated in the second edition of the Check-List, published in December, 1895. These are included below with the others, and are distinguished by an asterisk prefixed to the marginal number of the species. In the subjoined list are included all of the cases published in ‘The Auk’ for January, 1897, they having come before the Committee at its last session, in proof sheets of this number of ‘The Auk’. As heretofore, the numbers at the left of the scientific names facilitate collation with the Check-List. The interpolated spe- cies and subspecies are numbered in accordance with the provi- sion made therefor in the Code of Nomenclature (p. 14, last paragraph). ( WILLIAM BREWSTER, Chairman. | J. A. ALLEN. Committee ~ ELLIOTT COUEs. | C. Harr MERRIAM. | Ropert RrpGway. I; ADDITIONS. 108.1. Oceanodroma socorroensis TowNSEND. Socorro Petrel. Oceanodroma socorroensis TOWNSEND, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. XIII, 1890, 134. [B—, C—, R—, C—.] Geroc. Dist.— Islands off west coast of Mexico, north to San Diego, Cal. (Cf. AntuHony, Auk, XIII, Oct. 1895, 387.) me Auk Jan. 118 Eighth Supplement to the A. O. U. Check-List. Genus MERGUS LINN«&Uvs. Mergus Linn. S. N. ed. 10, 1758, 129. Type, by elimina- tion, Mergus albellus LINN. [131.1,] Mergus albellus Linn. Smew. Mergus albellus LINN. S. N. ed. 10, 1758, 129. [B 614, C—, R—, C—.] Geoc. Dist.—In summer, northern Europe and Asia; in winter, south to the Mediterranean, northern India, China and Japan. Accidental in northern North America. (C/ SaLvaporI, Cat. Bds. Br. Mus. XX VII, 1896, 467, 468.) Genus CASARCA Bonaparte. Casarca Bon. Geogr. & Comp. List, 1838, 56. Type, Anas rutila PALL.= Anas casarca LINN. [141.1.] Casarca casarca (LINN.). Ruddy Sheldrake. Anas casarca LINN. S. N. ed. 12, III, App. 1768, 224. Casarca casarca ALLEN, Auk, XIII, 1896, 164, 243. [ B—, C—, R—, C—.] Groc. Disr.— Southern Europe and southern Asia, south to northern Africa. Accidental in Greenland, Iceland, and the Scandinavian Peninsula. (Cf ALLEN, Auk, 7 ¢.) [171.1.] Anser fabalis (LarTu.). Bean Goose. Anas fabalis LatuH. Gen. Syn. Suppl. I, 1787, 297. Anser fabalis SaLvap. Cat. Bds. Brit. Mus. XXVII, 1895, 99. [B—, C—, R—, C—.] Geoc. Dist.— Northern Asia, eastward into northern Europe ; in winter south to southern Europe and northern Africa. Acci- dental in Greenland. (C/ SaLvaporI, ¢. ¢.) ‘we | Eighth Supplement to the A. O. U. Check-List. 119 201c. Ardea virescens anthonyi MEarNs. Anthony’s Green Heron. Ardea virescens anthonyi MEARNS, Auk, XII, July, 1895, 257. [B 493, part, C 457, part, R 497, part, C 663, part] Geoc. Dist.— Arid region of southwestern United States, and southward into Mexico. SuBGENUS ASARCIA SHARPE. Asarcia SHARPE, Cat. Bds. Brit. Mus. XXIV, 1896, 86. Type, Parra variabilis LINN. 1766 = Fulica spinosa LINN. 1758. (Cf. Cougs, Auk, XIV, Jan. 1897, 88.) The genus Asarcia SHARPE is accepted as a subgenus. 302d. Lagopus rupestris townsendi ELvior. Townsend’s Ptarmigan. Lagopus rupestris townsendi ELLIOT, Auk, XIII, Jan. 1896, 26. [B—, C—, R—, C—.] Geroc. Dist.— Kyska and Adak Islands, Aleutian Chain. 302.1. Lagopus evermanni ELLior. Evermann’s Ptarmigan. Lagopus evermannit ELLioT, Auk, XIII, Jan. 1896, 25, pl. iii. [B—, C—, R—, C—.] Groce. Dist.— Attu, one of the Aleutian Islands, Alaska. SUBGENUS BREWSTERIA Maynarp. Brewsteria MAYNARD, Bds. East. N. Am. pt. 40 [1896], 691. Type, Archibuteo ferrugineus (LICHT.) . Accepted as a subgenus of Archibuteo. 375c.— Bubo virginianus pacificus Cassin. Pacific Horned Owl. Bubo virginianus var. pacificus Cass., Ul. Bds. Cal., Texas, etc., July, 1854, 178. 120 Eighth Supplement to the A. O. U. Check-List. is Jan. [B 48, part, C 3176, R 4054, part, C 464.] Geoc. Dist.— Southern California (exact range not known). 394c. Dryobates pubescens medianus (Swains.). Downy Woodpecker. Picus (Dendrocopus) medianus SwAtns. in Swans. & RICH. Faun. Bor.-Am. II, 1831, 308. Dryobates pubescens medianus BREWSTER, Auk, Jan. 1897, 82. [B 76, part, C 299, part, R 361, part, C 440, part.| Groc. Dist.— Middle and northern parts of eastern United States and northward. No. 394, Dryobates pubescens, the Southern Downy Wood- pecker, thus becomes restricted to the South Atlantic and Gulf States, from South Carolina to Florida and Texas. (Cf. BREw- STER, Z/. ¢.) 394d. Dryobates pubescens nelsoni OBERHOLSER. - Nelson’s Downy Woodpecker. Dryobates pubescens nelsont OBERHOLSER, Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus. XVIII, 1895, 549. [B 76, part, C 299, part, R 361, part, C 440, part.| Geroc. Dist.— Alaska and northern British America. 407. Melanerpes formicivorus (SwaIns.). Ant-eating Woodpecker. Picus formicivorus Swans. Phil. Mag. I, 1827, 439. Melanerpes formicivorus BONAP. Consp. Av. I, 1850, 115. [B 95, part, C 310, part, R377, part, C 454, part.| Geroc. Dist.— Western Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona, thence southward over the tablelands of Mexico. (The numeration of Nos. 407 and 407a hereby becomes changed to 407a@ and 4076 respectively.) 414a. Colaptes chrysoides brunnescens ANTHONY. Brown Flicker. Colaptes chrysoides brunnescens ANTHONY, Auk, XII, Oct. 1895, 347: vie | Eighth Supplement to the A. O. U. Check-List. T2T [B 99, part, C 313, part, R 379, part, C 458, part.| GeEoc. Dist.— Northern Lower California. 420c. Chordeiles virginianus sennetti (CovuEs). Sennett’s Nighthawk. [Chordiles popetue| sennetti Cours, Auk, V, Jan. 1888, 37- Chordeiles virginianus sennetti BisHop, Auk, XIII, April 1896, 134. [B 115, part, C 267a, part, R 3574, part, C 400, part.] Geoc. Dist.— Treeless region of the Great Plains, from the Saskatchewan south to Texas. 498c. Agelaius phoeniceus floridanus Maynarp. Florida Red-wing. Agelaius pheniceus floridanus MAayNarp, Bds. East. N. Am., pt. 4o [1896], 689. [B 401, part, C 212, part, R 261, part, C 316, part.| Geoc. Dist.— Florida. 544.1. Ammodramus sanctorum CouEs. San Benito Sparrow. Passerculus sanctorum Cours, Key N. Am. Bds. 2d ed. 1884, 364. Ammodramus (Passerculus) sanctorum Cours, Auk, XIV, Jan. 1597, 92% [B-——, C—, R—, C—.] Geoc. Dist.— San Benito Island, Lower California. 550c. Ammodramus maritimus macgillivrayi Aub. Louisiana Seaside Sparrow. Fringilla macgillivrayt Aup. Orn. Biog. II, 1834, 285; IV, 1838, 394, pl. ccclv. Ammodramus maritimus macgillivrayt Ripcw. Man. N. Am. Bds. 2d ed. 1896, 602. [B—, C 165, part, R—, C 238, part. | Geroc. Dist.— Coast of Louisiana, to coast of Texas in winter. 16 ° 122 Eighth Snpplement to the A. O. U. Check-List. Pes Jan. 5817. Melospiza fasciata juddi Bisnop. Dakota Sone Sparrow. Melospiza fasciata juddi Bisuor, Auk, XIII, April, 1896, 132. [B—, C—, R—, C—.] Geoc. Dist.— Turtle Mountain, and vicinity, North Dakota. 5814. Melospiza fasciata merrilli BREwsTER. Merrill’s Song Sparrow. Melospiza fasciata merrilli BREWSTER, Auk, XIII, Jan. 1896, 46. [B—, C—, R—, C—.] Geroc. Dist.— Type locality, Fort Sherman, Idaho. * 581.1. Melospiza insignis Barrp. Bischoff’s Song Sparrow. Melospiza insignis BairD, Trans. Chicago Acad. Sci. I, 1869, 310, pl. xxix, fig. 2: (Cf. Ricumonp, Auk, XII, Apr. 1895, 144. Also Check-List, 2d ed. 1895, 243-) 585d. Passerella iliaca stephensi ANTHONY. Stephens’s Sparrow. Passerella tliaca stephenst ANTHONY, Auk, XII, Oct. 1895, 348. [B 376a, part, C—, R 2354, part, C 285, part. | Geroc. Dist.— Mountains of southern California (type locality, San Jacinto Mts.). 593d. Cardinalis cardinalis floridanus Ripcw. | Florida Cardinal. Cardinals cardinals floridanus RipGw. Man. N. Am. Bds. 2d° ed. 1896, 606. a [B 390, part, C 203, part, R 242, part, C 299, part.| GrEoc. Dist.— Florida. tee | Eighth Supplement to the A. O. U. Check-List. 123 648a. Compsothlypis americana usnez Brewster. Northern Parula Warbler. Compsothlypis americana usnee BREWSTER, Auk, XIII, Jan. 1896, 44. [B 168, part, C 58, part, R 88, part, C 93, part.| Geoc. Dist.— New England, New York, and westward along the northern tier of States, and northward into the Maritime Provinces and Ontario, migrating southward beyond the United States in winter. 6526. Dendroica zstiva rubiginosa (PALL.). Alaskan Yellow Warbler. Motacilla rubiginosa Patias, Zoogr. Rosso-Asiat. I (1811 ?), 1831, 496. Dendroica estiva rubiginosa OBERHOLSER, Auk, XIV, Jan. 1897, 76. [B 203, part, C 70, part, R 93, part, C 111, part.] Geoc. Dist.— Alaska and British Columbia, southward through western United States in migration. 654a. Dendroica czrulescens cairnsi CouEs. Cairns’s Warbler. Dendreca cerulescens cairnst CouEs, World’s Cong. on Orn. of 1893, Nov. 1896, 138. Dendroica cerulescens cairnst CouEs, Auk, XIV, Jan. 1897, 97. [B 193, part, C 76, part, R 94, part, C 117, part.| Groc. Dist.— Higher parts of the Alleghanies, from Virginia to Georgia. SuBGENUS CHAM A:THLYPIS Rincew. Chamethlypis Ripcw. Man. N. Am. Bds. 1887, 525. Geothlypis poliocephala BatrD. (Accidentally omitted from the Check-List, 2d ed., 1895.) Type, 124 Eighth Supplement to the A. O. U Check-List. aie Jan Il. CHANGES OF NOMENCLATURE. 13a. Fratercula arctica glacialis (Temm.) Check-List, 2d ed 1895, 5. The first reference should be as in the original edition, viz. - Mormon glacialis “ Leacu,’ TEmMM. Man. d’Orn. 2d ed. II, 1820, 933- (G& Sroneg, Auk, XIII, Apr. 1896, 185; ALLEN, zbzd. 189.) 89. Puffinus major Fazer. This becomes Puffinus gravis (O’ REILLY). Procellaria gravis O’REILLY, Voy. to Greenland, etc. 1818, 140, pl. 12,41. ©. Puffinus gravis SaLvin, Cat. Bds. Br. Mus. XXV, 1896, 373. _ The name gravis O’ REILLY (1818) has four years’ priority over major FABER (1822). 93. Puffinus gavia (Forsr.). This becomes Puffinus opisthomelas CouvEs. Puffinus opisthomelas Cours, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1864, 139, 144. Considered as specifically distinct from Pufinus gavia (ForsvT.). (C/% Ripcway, Man. N. Am. Bds. 2d ed. 1896, 60; SALvin, Cat. Bds. Br. Mus. XXV, 1896, 380.) 114.1. Sula gossi Goss. This will stand as Sula nebouxii MILNre-Epwarbs. Sula nebouxit MILNE-EDwarps, Ann. Soc. Nat. Zool. 52, Ann. Vi, Ser TI, XII, 1882, No. 2—4, Art. 4, 37, pl. xiv. The name zebouxit MILNE-EDwaRDs has priority over gossz Goss. (Cf Ripeway, Man. N. Am. Bads. 2d ed. 1896, 584.) Genus CLANGULA Leacu (Check-List, 2d ed. p. 55). This becomes Genus HARELDA StTeEPHENs. Flarelda STEPHENS (ex LEAcH, MS.?) in Shaw’s Gen. Zool. XII, pt. ii, 1824,174. Type, Anas glacialis Linn. (1766= A. hyemalis LINN. 1758). bide sk Eighth Supplement to the A. O. U. Check-List. 125 154. Clangula hyemalis Linn. hence becomes Harelda hyemalis (Linvn.). Anas hyemalis Linn. S. N. ed. 10, I, 1758, 126. flarelda hiemalis L. BREHM, Vogelfang, 1855, 386. Genus GLAUCIONETTA Srejnecer (Check-List, 2d ed. p. 54). This becomes Genus CLANGULA LEAcu. Clangula LracH, in Ross’s Voy. Discov. 1819, App. xlviii, (ex GESNER). Type, Anas clangula LINN. (Cf. SALVADORI, Cat. Bds. Br. Mus. XXVII, 1895, 376.) 151. Glaucionetta clangula americana (Bonap.) hence becomes Clangula clangula americana Bonap. Clangula americana Bonar. Geog. & Comp. List, 1838, 58. Clangula clangula americana A. O. U. Como. MS. 152. Glaucionetta islandica (GmMEL.) becomes Clangula islandica (GMEL.). Anas islandica GMEL. S. N. I, 1788, 541. Clangula islandica BONAP. Cat. Met. Ucc. Eur. 1842, 74. 163. Oidemia americana Sw. & Ricu. The authority should be Swains. Hence, Oidemia americana Swains. The reference should stand as follows: Oidemia americana SWAINS. in SwaIns. & RicH. Faun. Bor.- Amer: Ll, 18305 450. (Cf Strong, Auk, XIII, Apr. 1896, 186, and ALLEN, zdzd. 190.) 167. Erismatura rubida (Wits.). This becomes Erismatura jamaicensis (GMEL.). Anas gamaicensis GMEL. Syst. Nat. I, ii, 1788, 519. Erismatura jamaicensis SALVAD. Cat. Bds. Br. Mus. XX VII, 1896, 445. 126 Eighth Supplement to the A. O. U. Check-List. Auk Jan. The name Azas rubida Witson (1814) is antedated by 4. Jamaicensis GMELIN (1788). Suscenus STEGANOPUS VierLLtor (Check-List, 2d ed. p. 83). This is raised to a full genus. No. 224 will hence stand as 224. Steganopus tricolor VIcILL Steganopus tricolor ViEtLu. Nouv. Dict. d’Hist. Nat. XXXII, 1819, 136. SuBGENUS SQUATAROLA Cuvier (Check-List, 2d ed. p. 99). This is raised to a full genus. Hence No. 270 will stand as 270. Squatarola squatarola (LINN.). Tringa squatarola Linn. S. N. ed. 10, 1758, 149. Sguatarola squatarola Cuv. Régne Anim. I, 1817, 467. [322.] Geotrygon martinica (Linn.). This becomes Geotrygon chrysia Bonap. Geotrygon chrysia BoNAP. Consp. Av. II, 1854, 72. Geotrygon martinica (LINN.) is restricted to the Lesser Antilles. G. chrysia, a very different species, occurs in Cuba, Haiti, the Bahamas, and on the Florida Keys. (Cf Satvaport, Cat. Bds. Br. Mus. XXI, 1893, pp. 570-572-) 3946. Dryobates pubescens orececus Barco. This becomes Dryobates pubescens homorus (Cas.). Dryobates homorus CABANIS, Mus. Hein. pt. iv, 1863, 65. Dryobates pubescens homorus Ripcw. Man. N. Am. Bds. 2d ed. 1896, 597. 422. Cypseloides niger (GmeL.). This becomes Cypseloides niger borealis (KENNERLY). Cypselus borealis KENNERLY, Proc. Ac. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1857, 202. Cypseloides niger borealis Drew, Auk, II, Jan. 1885, 17. [B 108, part, C 270, R 350, part, C 404.] Geoc. Dist.— Rocky Mountain region (Colorado), west to the Pacific coast; north to British Columbia, and south to Lower California, Mexico, and Costa Rica. ee | Eighth Supplement to the A. O. U. Check-List. 127 453. Myiarchus mexicanus (Kaur). The second reference under this species should be Myiarchus mexicanus LAWRENCE, Ann. Lyc. N. Y. IX, May, 1869, 202 (as in the orig. ed. of the Check-List). (& Cours, Auk, XIV, Jan. 1897, 92.) *465 Empidonax acadicus (GMEL.). Acadian Flycatcher. This has become Empidonax virescens (VIEILL.). Green-crested Flycatcher. (Cf/..BRewstER, Auk, XII, Apr. 1895, 157. Also Check-List, 2d ed. 1895, p. 188.) *466. Empidonax pusillus (Swains.). Little Flycatcher. This has become Empidonax traillii (Aup.). Traill’s Flycatcher. (Cf Brewster, Auk. XII, Apr. 1895, 159. Also Check-List, 2d. ed. 1895, 188.) * 4660.2 Empidonax pusillus traillii (Avup.). Traill’s Flycatcher. This has become Empidonax traillii alnorum Brewst. Alder Flycatcher. (Cf. Brewster, Auk, XII, Apr. 1895, 161. Also Check-List, 2d ed. 1895, 188.) 474j.] Otocoris alpestris pallida Townsenp. The authority should be Dwiuut, and the reference changed to Otocoris alpestris pallida Dwicut (ex Towns. MS.), Auk, VII, Apr. 1890, 154. (Cf. Stone, Auk XIII, Apr. 1896, 185, and ALLEN, 7077, 188.) 128 Eighth Supplement to the A. O. U. Check-List. ae Jan. 498a. Agelaius phoeniceus sonoriensis Ripcw. This be- comes Agelaius phoeniceus longirostris (SALvap.). Agelaius longirostris SaALvap. Atti del Reale Accad. Sci. Torino, IX, Apr. 26, 1874, 632. Agelaius pheniceus longirostris RipGw. Man. N. Am. Bds. 2d ed. 1396, 370: The name /ongirostris SALVADORI (1874) antedates sonoriensis RipGway (1887). (Cf Ripcway, ¢. c.) 499. Agelaius gubernator (WacL.). This becomes Agelaius gubernator californicus NELSson. Agelaius gubernator californicus NeELSON, Auk, XIV, Jan. 1897, 59: [B 402, part, C 2124, part, R 2164, part, C 317, part.| 5676. Junco hyemalis shufeldti CoaLr. This becomes Junco hyemalis connectens CovEs. Junco hiemalis connectens COUES, Key N. Am. Bds. 2d ed. 1884, 378 (and later eds.) ; Auk, XIV, Jan. 1897, 94. (Cf Cougs, punks 2; C2) y 568. Junco annectens Bairp. Pink-sided Junco. 568.1. Junco ridgwayi Mearns. Ridgway’s Junco. Junco ridgwayt MEARNS proves to be a synonym of /unco annectens BAIRD, but not the /. amnectens of recent authors and of the Check-List, while the species commonly known as /. annectens requires anewname. (C/ Ripcway, Auk, XIV, Jan. 1897, 94.) Hence Nos. 568 and 568.1 will stand as follows : 568. Junco mearnsi Ripcway. Pink-sided Junco. ee Eighth Supplement to the A. O. U. Check-List. 129 568.1. Junco annectens Bairp. Ridgway’s Junco. Genus ARREMONOPS Ripeway. Arremonops Ripcw. Man. N. Am. Bds. 2d ed. 1896, 434. Type, Embernagra rujfivirgata LAWR. 586. Embernagra rufivirgata Lawr. hence becomes Arremonops rufivirgata (Lawre.). Embernagra rufivirgata Lawr. Ann. Lyc. N. Y. V, May, 1851, 112, pl. v, fig. 2. Arremonops rufivirgata Ripcw. Man. N. Am. Bds. 2d ed. 1896, 435. GENUS OREOSPIZA Ripcway. Oreospiza RipGw. Man. N. Am. Bds. 2d ed. 1896, 439. Type, 2ringilla chlorura AUD. 590. Pipilo chlorurus (Towns. = Aup.) hence becomes Oreospiza chlorura (AUD.). fringilla chlorura Aup. Orn. Biog. V, 1839, 336. Qreospiza chlorura RipGw. Man. N. Am. Bds., 2d ed., 1896, 605. The authority for the specificname should be AUDUBON and not TOWNSEND, in accordance with the rule followed by the Committee in other similar cases in the revised edition of the Check-List. (Cf Stone, Auk, XIII, Apr. 1896, 185; ALLEN, zdzd. 188). 594, Pyrrhuloxia sinuata Bonar. This becomes 594a. Pyrrhuloxia sinuata texana Ripew. Texas Pyrrhuloxia. Pyrrhuloxia sinuata texana Ripcw. Auk, XIV, Jan. 1897, 95: 130 Eighth Supplement to the A. O. U. Check-List. rae [B 389, part, C 202, part, R 243, part, C 298, part. | GeEoc. Dist.— Southern border of the United States, from the valley of the Lower Rio Grande, south to San Luis Potosi, Puebla, etc. North casually to the coast of Louisiana. 594a. Pyrrhuloxia sinuata beckhami Ripcw. This becomes 594. Pyrrhuloxia sinuata Bonap. Arizona Pyrrhuloxia. The references stand as at present under No. 594, but the con- cordance and Groc. Dist. require to be changed, as follows: [B 389, part, C 202, part, R 243, part, C 298, part.| Gros. Dist.— Southern Arizona, east to western Texas, and south into western Mexico. Genus Habia Reicu. (Check-List, 2d ed. p.250). This becomes Genus ZAMELODIA Coves. Zamelodia COuUES, Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, V, Apr. 1880, 98. Type, Loxia ludoviciana Linn. (Cf. Covers, Auk, XIV, Jan. 1897, 39-42.) Hence the following : 595. Habia ludoviciana (Linn.). This becomes Zamelodia ludoviciana (LInN.). Loxta ludoviciana LINN. S. N. ed. 12, I, 1766, 306. Zamelodia ludoviciana Covers, Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, V, Apr. 1880, 98. 596. Habia melanocephala (Swains.). This becomes Zamelodia melanocephala (Swains.). Guiraca melanocephala Swatns. Philos. Mag. I, 1827, 438. Zamelodia melanocephala Cours, Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, V, Apr. 1880, 98. 645. Helminthophila ruficapilla (Wits.). This becomes Helminthophila rubricapilla (Wits.). Mee Al Eighth Supplement to the A. O. U. Check-List. 135 Sylvia rubricapilla Wits Amer. Orn. VI, 1812, 15. flelminthophila rubricapilla Faxon, Auk, XIII, July, 1896, 264. Sylvia ruficapilla Wits. (1810), is preoccupied by Sylvia rufi- capilla LATH. (1790) = Dendroica ruficapilla (LATH.). (Cf. Faxon, t63) 645a. Helminthophila ruficapilla gutturalis Ripcw. hence becomes Helminthophila rubricapilla gutturalis (Ripcw.). Helminthophaga ruficapilla var. gutturalis RipGw. in Hist. N. Am. Bas. I, Jan. 1874, 191. Flelminthophila rubricapilla gutturalis Faxon, Auk, XIII, July, 1896, 264. 658. Dendroica ceerulea (Wits.). This becomes Dendroica rara WILs. Sylvia rara Witson, Am. Orn. III, 1811, 119, pl. 27, fig. 2. Dendroica rara RipGway, Auk, XIV, Jan. 1897, 97. Sylvia cerulea WILSON (1811) is preoccupied by Sylvia cerulea LATHAM (1790)=Ffolioptila cerulea (LINN.). (Cf. Ripeway, 7. ¢.) *714. Heleodytes affinis (Xantus). This has become 7136. Heleodytes brunneicapillus affinis (Xanrtus). (Cf. AntHony, Auk, XII, July, 1895,280. Also Check-List, 2d ed. 1895, 296). 719. Thryothorus bewickii bairdi (Satv. & Gopm.). ‘This becomes Thryothorus bewickii leucogaster Bairp. Thryothorus bewicku leucogaster Baird, Rev. Am. Bds. Aug. 1864, 127. Changed on the ground that a prior Zrog/odytes leucogaster GOULD (1836 =Hemiura leucogastra) does not preclude the use of the name J/eucogaster in the genus Zhryothorus. (Cf. Cours, Auk, MET, Oct. 1896, 345.) 132 Eighth Supplement to the A. O. U. Check-List. uk Jan. 726a. Certhia familiaris alticola MILLER. This becomes Certhia familiaris albescens (BERLEPSCH). Certhia mexicana albescens BERLEPSCH, Auk, V, Oct. 1888, 450. Certhia familiaris albescens OBERHOLSER, Auk, XIII, Oct. 1896, So" 739. Parus cinctus obtectus (Cas.). This becomes Parus cinctus alascensis (PRAZAK). Pecila cincta alascensis PRAZAK, Orn. Jahrb. VI, March—April, 1895, 92. 766a. Sialia sialis azurea (Swains.). The authority should be changed to Barrp, as given in the first reference under this mame in the Check-list, 2ded.. p. 322: (But “13384 imsthe reference should be 1864.) (Cf RipGway, Man. N. Am. Bds. 1887, 581.) rt. CONSIDERED, AS (NOT ENTITLED TO KECOG= NITION. Callipepla gambelii deserticola SrepueEns, Auk, XII, Oct. 1895, 371- Considered as not separable from Cadlipepla gambelit (GAMB.). Bubo virginianus occidentalis Sronr, Auk, XIII, Apr. 1896, 155- Not admitted, on the ground that the type, from Mitchell County, Iowa, proves to be an intergrade between A. virginianus and B&B. v. arcticus, and not the interior form which Mr. Stone in- ended to recognize. Melanerpes formicivorus aculeatus Mearns, Auk, VII, July, 1890, 249. (Cf. Third Supplement A. O. U. Check-List, in Auk, Jan. 1891, 88, and RipGway, Man. N. Am. Bds. 2d ed. 1896, 597)- This is now referred to Me/anerpes formicivorus (SWAINS.) . (Cf. antea, p. 120.) eee Eighth Supplement to the A. O. U. Check-List. 133 Otocoris alpestris hoyti BisHop, Auk, XIII, April, 1896, 130. Considered as not sufficiently distinct from Ofocoris alpestris leucolema (COUES). Junco danbyi Couves, Nidiologist, III, Oct. 1895, 14. Proves to have been based on immature examples of /wnco atkeni Rivew. (Cf. Coves, Auk, XIV, Jan. 1897, 94.) Minus [sc] carolinensis grisifrons [sc] Maynarp, Bds. East. N. Am. pt. 40 [1896], 710. The alleged character of gray frontlet is not distinctive, being of frequent occurrence in Gadeoscoptes carolinensis from any locality. IV. PROPOSED CHANGES OF NOMENCLATURE REJECTED. 92. Puffinus auduboni Finscu, zs. Puffinus obscurus (GMEL.). Cf. Savin, Cat. Bds. Br. Mus. XXV, 1896, 382. Change not required, the two names representing, in the opinion of the Committee, two sufficiently distinct birds. Genus Aythya Botr, 7s Nyroca FLeminc. Cf SALvADort, Cat_sbds. Br..Mus. XXV Uierso5, 334. Aythia is rejected by Satvaport because not defined. Genus Actitis ILLIGER, 1811, vs. Tringoides Bonap. 1831. Cf. SHARPE, Cat. Bds. Br. Mus. XXIV, 1896, 456. The type of Actitis is, by elimination, Zringa hypoleucos LINN., which is also the type of Zrimzgoides, of much later date. 236. Tringa couesi (Ripcw.), 7s. Arquatella maritima couesi (Ripcw.). Cf. SHARPE. ¢. ¢., 583. 243a. Tringa alpina pacifica Cours, vs. Tringa americana (Cassin). Cf SHARPE, Cat. Bds. Br. Mus. XXIV, 1896, 608. Tringa alpina, var. americana CAssIN (1858) is antedated by Tringa americana BREHM (1855 = Zringa fuscicollis VIEILL.). 134 Eighth Supplement to the A. O. U. Check-List. ees 374a. Megascops flammeola idahoensis MEeErrIAM vs. Megascops idahoensis. Cf Wm. Parmer, Nidologist, III, May, 1896, 103. After careful reconsideration of the case, it was decided not to change the status of the bird as now recognized in the Check-List. 375 a. Bubo virginianus subarcticus (Hoy). This proves to be a synonym of #ubo virginianus arcticus (Swains.). (Cf Stone, Auk, XIII, Apr. 1896, 153-156.) 378a. Speotyto cunicularia floridana Rincw. vs. Speo- tyto floridana. C/ Ws. Parmer, Auk, XIII, April, 1896, 108. An examination of a large amount of material from Florida and from the central and western parts of North America shows that while the Florida form, as at present known, is geographically isolated from that of the Great Plains and the western United States at large, the differences between the two forms are so slight and inconstant that the relationship of the Florida form to the western one is most satisfactorily expressed by the use of a trinomial, as in the Check-List. Genus Lucar Coves ex BArTRaM (Cf. Cours, Auk, XIV, Jan. 1897, 97-) Rejected as being not only practically a xomen nudum, but as debarred under Canons XLIV and XLV of the A. O. U. Code, which require that names shall be identifiable by the contem- porary literature of the subject. Many proposed changes of names not here formally treated are covered by the following resolution, adopted by the Committee at its session in Cambridge, Nov. 13, 1896. “ Resolved: ‘That changes of names from those adopted in the Check-List, due to taking the 12th instead of the roth edition of Linnzus’s ‘ Systema Naturz’ as the starting point for the law of priority, do not require consideration by this Committee.” This has especial relation to cases occurring in Vols. XXIV, XXV, and XXVII of the ‘ Cat. Bds. Brit. Mus.’ Vs | Lighth Supplement to the A. O. U. Check-List. 135 V. CASES DEFERRED. 86a. Fulmarus glacialis minor (KJ&RB.) vs. Fulmarus glacialis. Cf. SALVIN, Cat. Bds. Brit. Mus. XXV, 1896, 426. 866. Fulmarus glacialis glupischa STEJN. vs. Fulmarus glupischa. Cf; SALVING (16.0429). 86c. Hulmarus glactalis rodgersi (Cass.) vs. Hulmarus rodgerst Cf. SALVIN, ¢.c. 427. Fulmarus glacialis columba ANTHONY, Auk, XII, 1895, 372- 85. Puffinus borealis Cory vs. Puffinus kuhli (Bork). Cf. SALVIN tle 375: 94. Puffinus stricklandi RivGw. vs. Puffinus griseus (GMEL.). Cf. SALVIN, 2.¢. 386. 148. Aythya marila nearctica STEJN. vs. Aythya marila (LINN.). Cf. BisHop, Auk, XII, July, 1895, 293. Oidemia carbo (Pauuas). Reported as occurring in Alaska, Cf. SALvapor!, Cat. Bds. Br. Mus. XXVII, 1895, 412. 277a. égialitis meloda circumcincta RipGw. vs. Aigialitis meloda (OrD). Cf SHARPE, Cat. Bds. Br. Mus. XXIV, 1896, 294. Speotyto cunicularia obscurus STEPHENS, Auk, XII, Oct. 1895, B72. Dryobates villosus montanus ANTHONY, Auk, XIII, Jan. 1896, 32), While this subspecies is admissible, the tenability of the name monfanus is in question. « 1 A ANE I fs wey ih . . ve in i ’ as x er \ " | ' os . | . . f 4 i : Ph \ = i . ; ’ i ‘Cn ¥ t! f s ; f f,"! ' ri 7 ' i : , , ! ti B ° oa y ; » : | \ wy a % rf < : x . a. ® " . a rs ‘ . ! 1 a is 4 : : #9 cre avtetid q ri i i : + r ; a 2 Lh ‘ ‘a p rs ‘ i = mM | ow ; wast ‘ ' : ; , = ’ Y : r . . rey ‘ u 7 ' ‘ F : J aj “ =# re = ‘ 1‘ ao 7 , } ‘ é /— £ 5 Tn n - a v . ¢ = - _— = ine 7 ‘ 7 i 1 5 _ ~ ~ 5 > i ‘ ‘ i ‘ i ‘ ’ “= F 2 re a i . 4] fi 3 a¢ 7 i va > = ee eh Se = ai _ ; : ak : vs > ~ . ; 4 een C ‘ 7 } : a 2 : : . 1 ms ‘ = > MOF 6 Oe + 4, i to } ' ; L ‘ eh ri i "4 ' ' A i j * 1 + : P = a ; aa * 2 ‘i i aoe, Leas ' ot . ' + A 4 ! F A i = ay 7 : ’ ‘ 7 ‘ 1% it ‘ are ed aad A a y ab he: - ‘0 ST Pees hb ye > — i ae os rod THE AUK, VOL. XIV. yn LBL. aM wae SR p™euw - COLOR -CHANGESIN THE BOBOLEE THE AUK: AY QU ahi Reka | OUR N AL OF ORNITHOLOGY. VO be cry. APRIL, 1897. NOw2. THE SPRING PLUMAGE OF THE BOBOLINK, WITH REMARKS ON ‘COLOR-CHANGE’ AND ‘MOULTING.’! BY ARTHUR P. CHADBOURNE, M.D. Plate Ia. In a recent note ‘On the Spring Plumage of the Bobolink’? Dr. Allen has apparently overlooked a record (Skillen, Auk, XI, 1894, p- 180), which shows that the change to breeding dress is not always accompanied by an increased feather-loss, nor in this case at least was new feather-growth evident. In short there seems to have been not even a ‘partial moult,’* and hence the individual feathers must have changed in color. My own experience with captive Bobolinks confirms the above statement ; but unfortunately of three Bobolinks kept during the winter of 1894-5, only one proved to be a male, while six males ‘Read before the Nuttall Ornithological Club, May 17, 1896. > Bull. American Museum Nat. Hist., VIII (March 18, 1896), pp. 43, 44. 3In the present paper the word ‘ moult ’is to be understood as meaning that during or about the time of the renewal of the plumage, there is an ¢creased shedding of the feathers, an evident growth of ‘pin-feathers,’ or both com- bined; but it vwfplies nothing as to feather-color and color-change. 18 x : . ne bys Auk I 38 CuHapBouRNE, Spring Plumage of the Bobolink. April taken in June 1895, escaped by tearing a hole in the cloth top of the cage. However, through the kindness of Messrs. Allen, Batchelder, Brewster, Merriam, and others, I have been able to compare a series of more than 175 male Bobolinks, probably covering about the same localities and dates as the material used by Mr. Chapman in the preparation of his articles on this subject.!. Among the skins loaned by the American Museum of Natural History was the specimen from Corumba, Brazil, on which the hypothesis was originally based shat the black and white dress > without any ‘color-change’ in the was entirely due to *moulting individual feathers. ‘The assumption being that ‘moulting’ is conclusive proof of the absence of any color-change,— a supposi- tion which has been frequently used by writers on this subject, but one which is absolutely without proof of its correctness as yet, while it is shown to be untenable by examination of the Corumbaé bird, as will appear later. First as to my pet Bobolink, which was kept from January until the breeding plumage was complete : — The bird always seemed well and strong, and the co/or-change was NOT accompanied by any increase in feather-loss, ¢. é., not greater than during the winter and often for several days in succession there were no cast-off feathers at all to be found. ‘The total during the three weeks that the change was in progress was (¢hirteen,—namely two broken rectrices and eleven contour feathers. It is hardly possible that any stray specimens were unnoticed, for even had they fallen outside of the cage they would have been found in the room, and a wire netting protected the window. ‘ Pin-feathers’ could hardly have been overlooked, if present; for I often held the bird in my hand and carefully examined it, blowing back the plumage until the skin could be seen. It is also safe to say, doubtless, that the cast-off feathers were not eaten by the bird itself. Hence it follows that unless the previous plumage was made up of only two tail and eleven body feathers, both of the former on the same side, — which was certainly not the case,— my Lobolink was unquestionably an instance of color-change in the plumage without ‘moult.’ 1Cf. Auk, VII, 1890, pp. 120-124 ; also zééd., X, 1893, pp. 339-341. eee | CHADBOURNE, Spring Plumage of the Bobolink. 139 The possibility of a spring ‘moult’ being entirely overlooked is worth considering at this point. If we assume for the moment that none of the old feathers change to the color of the breeding dress, and that all which are unlike those of the preceding plumage, have replaced old feathers already ‘moulted,’ can we then form any idea of the loss during the development of the spring dress of the male Bobolink? In other words, how many feathers would a Bobolink lose during a complete ‘moult’? I have tried to estimate this approximately in a male Bobolink, killed May 30, by carefully pulling out, one by one, all the contour feathers from the two ventral feather-tracts, including the ‘ inner lateral,’ but neither the ‘humeral’ nor the ‘gular tracts’ of Nitzsch;! and then gluing each separately on sheets of paper. Both my patience and mucilage gave out by the time I had finished the sheets in question,— about one third of the under parts of the bird.” The contour feathers on the sheets amounted to 439 in all, none of which, judging from their color alone, could have formed a part of the winter dress. The feathers on the upper breast, neck, and throat are smaller, and must be relatively more numerous ; and it is certainly safe to estimate the total loss from the abdomen, breast, and throat, at three times actually counted, making the total 1317. The back and upper parts must increase this number by at least one half; and ¢he hypothesis of a ‘moult without color-change’ would therefore imply a loss of 2634 Jeathers for the development of the full spring plumage of the mate Bobolink. If the process lasted from three to six weeks — (it was three weeks from the time the first black spot appeared, until the full plumage of my Bobolink has been attained by color-change 'Pterylographia. (English translation by Sclater.) Publications of the Ray Society, London, 1867, p. 26, seq. * Tt will be noticed that in this estimate the plumage of the head, wings, legs, and tail has not been included. The flight feathers, because they are often broken accidentally, and cast off by cage-birds when not ‘moulting’; those of the head and legs, because they are so small as to be easily over- looked; while by omitting the remainder of the wings and tail, and counting the total loss from the upper parts as only one half that from the gastrzeum, my result must be an underestimate. 140 CHADBOURNE, Spring Plumage of the Bobolink. Apa alone),—there would be between 115 and 57 additional cast-off SJeathers in or near the cage each day. It is hardly supposable that anyone at all interested in the question of a spring ‘ moult’ could fail to detect its presence with such evidence daily before him during at least three weeks. In the living bird, accurate data of the loss before and during the progress of a complete ‘moult,’ are, I believe, unpublished, for any of our native species certainly none are known to me for the Bobolink; and as my bird did not ‘moult,’ it is impossible to supply the deficiency. But the record of a pair of tame Screech Owls (Megascops asio), shows well how sudden may be the onset, and how great the loss during the period of a complete feather-change; and it will also be noticed, that in this, —the only species of which we have exact data, — the total number of loose feathers found while the change was most active, exceeds our ¢heoretical estimate based on the skin of the Bobolink. AVERAGE NUMBER OF FEATHERS FOUND PER OWL.! From July 24 to July 31 —ave. daily 4 feather. “« August 1 to Aug. 7 —ave. daily 5 feathers. «Aug. 8 to Aug. 31 —ave. daily 94 feathers. “September 1 to Sept. 30 — ave. daily 9 feathers. “October 1 to Oct. 28 —ave. daily 94 feathers. ss ‘¢ 29 to Nov. 2— ave. daily 9} feathers. “November 3 to Nov. 30—ave. daily go04 feathers, varying between 81 and 95. From December 1 to Dec. 7 —ave. daily 174 feathers. st 8 to Jan. 11 — ave. daily 4 feathers. During the time that ‘moulting’ was most active, — namely from Oct. 29 to Nov. 30,—a total of 2806 feathers were actually found* for each of the two Owls; yet their cage was much of the time out of doors and exposed to the wind, while being made of ‘As there were two Owls, the numbers given are one half the feathers actually found in the cage. *It may be well to state here that almost without exception the cast-off feathers were practically without any brown or tawny shades, though the bird was in well marked intermediate plumage; while the feathers in which there was considerable brownish, usually showed some mechanical injury, on careful examination. a eer —————— = oo Vol. XIV ep | CHADBOURNE, Spring Plumage of the Bobolink. I4I half inch wire netting, some of the smaller specimens were doubt- less blown away and lost, which could not have occurred in the case of the Bobolink. I was curious to know how closely the number of feathers of the ‘Scops’ agreed with that of the Bobo- link, and therefore counted the corresponding pterylz of the Owl in the way already described. The agreement was unexpected : — the Owl having 501 feathers on the sheets, and an estimated total of 3006 as needed for a complete ‘moult’; contrasted with 439, and 2634 of the Bobolink. Even Dr. Allen’s note itself furnishes additional proof that a spring ‘moult’ would not escape detection. He says: “the molt was in all stages from birds showing only here and there the tip of a black feather on the breast to those that were in nearly full breeding plumage. A large number of these were in the highest stage of molt, pin feathers being distinctly visible . even when the birds were several feet distant.” Again in the Corumba bird ‘ moulting’ was so apparent that in the illustration for ‘The Auk,’ it was decided to assist Nature by having the ‘ moult’ of the wings and tail completed by the artist. A convincing proof that a ‘moult’ could not have been over- looked, though hardly so of scientific accuracy; especially as it was also intended to change such of the under parts as were white to black or brown, had a slight mistake not prevented !! All the evidence at hand is therefore against the possibility of error of observation in regard to the spring ‘moult’ of the Bobo- link; and there seems to be no reasonable doubt that the apparently contradictory statements of Allen,t Chapman,” Ord,’ Skillen,* and others are correct, though perhaps not yet satisfac- torily explained. It follows that Bobolinks differ as to ‘ moulting’ in spring,—one bird attaining the full plumage by a ‘true color- change, another perhaps passes through a complete ‘moult, while in a third both processes are combined. It is however generally taken for granted, that because a certain bird has been found ‘ moulting’ in spring, all individuals of the VEG Da Ads 2 LZ. ¢., antea. 3 Trans. Amer. Philos. Soc. III (1830), pp. 292-299. 4L. ¢., antea. Auk 142 CHADBOURNE, Spring Plumage of the Bobolink. eri same species must ‘moult’ also; but have we any proof that this is the case? None whatever! The physical condition must vary in different individuals, be they men or birds; and hence the need of new feathers and the power of producing them, must vary also; and it is certainly more probable that Nature would be guided by the condition of the individual bird, than that the rulings of modern systematists would be followed. In short some Bobolinks ‘moult’ in spring, others do not. To return to my Bobolink: — The first black spot appeared on March 28 and consisted of a single feather, which macroscopic- ally and microscopically, was evidently not of recent growth, the edge being quite uneven and no remains of the enveloping sheath being present. (Plate Ia, fig. 3.) Subsequent specimens were similar to it in all essential details. In some of the changing feathers the black first developed around several foci, scattered about the surface of the vane, from which the dark effect spread, until the isolated spots became confluent and the whole was the uniform black shade of the spring dress. In other examples the dark color gradually extended towards the periphery, starting from the proximal portion of true vane and medially from along the rhachis.! In about three weeks from the time the first black feather was noticed the full black and white breeding dress of our familiar songster was complete. No chestnut was at any time seen on the breast or under parts, nor was there the white on the centre of the breast and abdomen, which is so prominent in the Corumba bird.? 1 As there was no feather-loss it seemed unnecessary to mark and follow up the intermediate steps through which any one feather passed; moreover, it is impossible to mark a feather without injuring it, and my previous attempts had not been encouraging. (Cf Auk, XIII, Oct. 1894, p. 323.) * The majority of the white feathers on the breast of the Corumba bird showed no color except white in the vane proper — 7. ¢., exclusive of the downy parts of the feather, which were a pale slate color. Some of these white’ feathers were vot fully mature, while others are more or less worn and of o/d growth. Even supposing that all the worn white feathers would have been ‘moulted’, those which were still immature would hardly be cast off before the time the Bobolink appears in the South when no such completely white feathers are normally found. My Bobolink showed none of this white marking on the breast or abdomen, nor did it have the chestnut shading, which is so prominent in Vol. XIV cage CHADBOURNE, Spring Plumage of the Bobolink. 143 The buff edging of the breast feathers was never more than a narrow line, evidently owing to the absence of the long fugacious tips, which are so characteristic of the newly developed feathers, and it is therefore probable that spring males showing much _ buff suffusion beneath, have recently passed through a ‘spring moult,’ or at least through a partial ‘feather-change.’ The dealer from whom I bought the bird told me, that “last fall he (the Bobolink) lost lots of feathers”; and added: “ In spring Bobolinks don’t often lose any feathers to speak of. Sometimes I don’t believe they lose any feathers at all; and you can’t see any pin-feathers either while they are getting black. But in autumn the pin-feathers stick out all over them. Once in a while though, I’ve seen one have a regular moult, just as they do in fall.” The above was written verbatim at the time, and is further proof that decause one individual of a given spectes has ‘moulted, it does not necessarily follow that all individuals of that species ‘moult’ also. Turning next to the series of skins :— The only early spring material is from Corumba, Brazil. The male already referred to (Coll. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., No. 32783,) taken March 1, shows new feather-growth in a marked degree ; and as was pointed out by Mr. Chapman, ‘ moulting’ was in full progress. It is however quite another matter to prove that no color-change was also going on simultaneously in any of the feathers; for ‘hough without the loss of old feathers from the tracts concerned, — or in other words, in the absence of * moulting, — an alteration in color must be due toa color-change in the same feathers ; yet tt does NOY follow, on the other hand, that because a bird ts ‘ moulting,’ a color-change in the individ- wal feathers — be they old or new — is thereby excluded. In fact the Corumba bird itself furnishes conclusive proof that just the reverse is the case; and on careful examination one finds here the Corumba specimen, and Dr. Allen says nothing of any similar coloring among the birds seen by him. When we call to mind the fact, — to be referred to later, —that the black of the Bobolink is really due to brown, instead of black coloring matter, —it is at once clear that the excess of chestnut and white show a lack of the normal quantity of pigmented matter; and it seems almost sure that in the Corumba bird, we have not a normal example, but a partial albino! Auk 144 CHADBOURNE, Spring Plumage of the Bobolink. Avail and there old-growth feathers, which are black, like the breeding- dress (ff. fig. 1); and others of the new-growth, which are the color of the Reed-bird plumage (cf fig. 2). Male Bobolinks in autumn, after the cares of the breeding- season are over, would probably require a complete renewal of the plumage, and a color-change in the old-growth would hardly be expected to occur. Pin-feathers typical of the black summer dress can be occasionally found, however, if carefully looked for (f. fig. 4), and apparently change to the color of the autumn plumage later (f fig. 5). We have now seen that feather-change and color-change in some cases at least, do take place separately and entirely independ- ent of each other, though the two are also often in progress at the same time. fence it necessarily follows that neither can be the direct cause of the other; but that color-change must be recognized as an independent process, entirely distinct from so-called ‘ moulting, The color-changes in the feathers of the Bobolink, of which I have now I think given sufficient proof, are the less surprising, in view of the fact that the black feathers apparently contain very little or no black coloring-matter. ‘Thin transverse sections through the exposed portion of the vane of black breast-feathers, when examined with a high magnifying powerand a strong zw/z/e! light, show that the seemingly deep black color is really due to a drown- ish pigmented material,” generally (always ?) grouped superficially near the surface of the vane; to some extent also to the thickness of the part, and to the effect of the underlying structures. Thus in the black spring specimen the granules are peripheral and comparatively close together, though a smaller number are also found in the deeper parts; while in the autumn the granular 'The most satisfactory light I have tried for color work with the micro- scope is that from a clear sky, reflected froma mirror covered with a white, highly glazed paper, and hung at an angle outside of a north window. ° To show that there is a very large amount of brown coloring matter even in breast feathers of the deepest black, it is only necessary to place such a specimen between two pieces of clear glass, and hold it against a strong light. The greater part, —sometimes the whole, — of the contour portion will appear ochraceous, being brightest along the edges of the barbs and barbules, where the parts are thin. This last, however, cannot be seen without a good magni- fying glass. Vol. XIV 1897 | CHADBOURNE, String Plumage of the Bobolink. 145 pigmented matter is more uniformly scattered throughout. (Com- pare figs. 6 and 7.) No difference between the pigmented matter of the spring and fall feathers was detected by the usual chemical and microchemi- cal tests, which will be described more fully in another connection.! RESULTS : — Summing up the more important points brought out by our study of the spring plumage of the Bobolink, we have seen that : — 1. Color-change in the individual feather is fact, not theory. Ne ‘Color-change of the plumage without moulting ’ is also Jact, not theory ; and the change to breeding dress in the male Bobolink sometimes takes place without a so-called ‘ moult.’ 3. Different individuals of the same species vary as to ‘moulting’ when assuming the spring plumage; and the fact that one Bobolink ‘moulted’ is no proof that all Bobolinks do the same. 4. The contradictory statements of writers are accounted for by this individual variation; and such statements are not to be passed over as so-called ‘ errors of observation.’ 5. Color-change and feather-change are two distinct pro- cesses, neither being the direct cause of the other; and each occurs separately, as well as both together. 6. So-called ‘moulting’ (whether based on pin-feathers or on feather-loss), does not prove the absence of color- change ; but to be valid, the proof must be based on the loss of all the old feathers from the tracts concerned. No such evidence has as yet been recorded. 7. Microscopically, the black and the buff feathers of the Bobolink differ only in the massing of the brown pigmented matter nearer the surface of the former ; while it is more uniformly distributed in the latter. The usual tests fail to distinguish the pigmented material of the breeding from that of the fall plumage. 1 Since the above was written, I have obtained similar proof that the Indigo Bunting ( Passerina cyanea) also shows a like “ individual variation ” in regard to its spring change of plumage, — a male having developed the full breeding dress without appreciable feather-loss ; while another male, which I saw sev- eral times, had a considerable number of pin-feathers, and also many cast-off feathers in the cage. 19 Auk mM a a ry 2 . , 2 ? y 146 CHADBOURNE, Spring Plumage of the Bobolink. April In conclusion, I wish to add a few words on the subject of ‘MOULTING’ in its wider application : — First, it is most important to have an exact definition of the word ‘ mou/t, which has often been used with very different meaning ; namely, for new feather- growth, of the whole, or of a part of the plumage, for feather-loss, for complete, or slight changes of color whether caused by feather- change, by true color-change, or simply from mechanical ‘ wear and tear,’ and the shedding of the deciduous tips. The word ‘moult’ is too firmly established, and too convenient to be aban- doned, but its use should be restricted to ‘he regular seasonal feather-change, WITHOUT REGARD TO THE COLOR OR COLORATION OF THE PARTS CONCERNED; and when not farther qualified, the shedding of all the feathers, including the large flight feathers, should be understood. ‘The expressions, ‘ feather-loss,’ ‘new feather-growth’ and ‘ feather-change, are scientifically exact, they define them- selves, and are the equivalents of German terms, already in use. Why should not these, or some similar words be adopted by us. Second : — The meaning of ‘ COLOR—CHANGE”’ would seem to be sufficiently clear, yet it has been very differently interpreted by writers on the colors of feathers; and such sentences as, “ color- change, aside from the effects of exposure and fading ”’, are often used. Moreover, as a rule, those who are sceptical on the subject of ‘color-change without moult,’ refuse to admit that an alteration from a darker shade to a lighter tint is an instance of a change in color. Yet obviously, the development of a lighter color may be either a “vue color-change, in the most strict sense, or it may be purely mechanical with resulting loss of substance. As applied to feathers therefore, any perceptible departure from the former shades and tints, or from their previous distribution, is a color-change. \When used in connection with the subject of ‘color-change without moult,’ however, it is clearly intended to exclude alterations due to causes, acting from out- side the body, and mechanically; and thus limited, a TRUE COLOR-CHANGE ¢s wholly, or in part due to conditions within the organism, or within the feather itself ; to alterations in the coloring- matter, or in its distribution in the feather. Third: sive change from a darker shade to a lighter tint, resulting from Fapinc, as already stated, implies a gradually progres- < conditions external to the body. Vol. XIV coe ] CHADBOURNE, Spring Plumage of the Bobolink. 147° Without a definite understanding on these points, any rational discussion of the colors and color-changes in feathers, must of necessity be both unprofitable and misleading. SUPPLEMENTARY Norte. — It has been suggested that an outline of the results of a more detailed study of the alterations on which changes in color in the feather depend is needed to complete the present paper. 1. Zhe mature feather (t. e. one which has reached _ full functional development), is far from being “dead and dry,” ‘a foreign body no longer connected with the vital processes in the rest of the organism,” as has sometimes been asserted ; for during its life it receives a constantly renewed supply of fluid from the parts around it. In strong contrast to this is the really dead feather, in which this fluid matter is deficient, as for example, the majority of uninjured cast-off feathers. Some of the evidence in support of these facts may be of interest: —(@) The fatty or oil- like droplets on the surface of the feather can be shown by microchemical tests (staining, etc.), to be, some of them identical with the oil from the so-called ‘ oil-gland’ ; while others are totally unlike that secretion, and these latter are alone found exuding from the pores on the surface of the rami, radii, and shaft. The pores, some with drops of varying size issuing from them, show best at the distal ends of the segments of the downy rays. (4) In the living bird the imported fluid can be colored, its progress noted, and the feather stained intra vitam. Soon after death this becomes no longer possible. To see the stain the microscope is usually necessary. Call this ‘ osmosis,” “ capillarity,’’ or what you please, it is none the less a wta/ process, in that it ceases soon after death, and must be studied in the fresh feather. (c) The broken tips of the rays forming the vane are, when fresh, capped by a mass of the fluid, which has escaped, leaving the part imme- diately below the stump pale from the loss of the fluid pigmented matter. (2) In museum skins this fluid matter gradually dries and by its consequent increase in density, and that of the feather tissues, the colors darken; while the freshness and gloss of life disappear. (ec) The evanescent tints of some species, — notably the fading of the rosy ‘blush’ of some of the Terns, soon after life is extinct is due to the drying up or escape of this fluid, while the lost tint was Auk 145 CHADBOURNE, SAring Plumage of the Bobolink, April due to the physical effect of structure, the shrivelling and change of form would act on the light rays, and the former colors would be lost in consequence. Comparison of specimens of Sterna paradisea, S. dougali’ and other ‘Terns in my collection, shows that examples having the ‘blush’ ‘most marked are those in which the feathers are the least dry. Absolutely fresh specimens are hardly obtainable, owing to the destruction of these birds for the demands of fashion. It is probable that the same explanation will be found to be true in the fading of other species. (/) Other substances than red pepper (cf Auk, XIV, 1896, p. 33) when given with the food, also produce changes in the color of the feather and in its composition, recognizable by proper tests. This applies to other species than the Canary. 2. Change of color in the individual feather after maturity. — How the colors of feathers can change; the modus operandi of the process, has long been an ornithological stumbling block, but the explanation is, | believe, neither incredible, nor complicated, and in fact most simple and easily accounted for by well known physi- ological laws. It may be briefly summarized as follows :—(@) As the result of retrograde or other activity within the cells, and with or without the action of the imported fluid, new pigmented products are formed, which may be solid matter or may be in solution, but are unlike those previously present. (4) Vital con- ditions within the organism determine the composition of the fluid supplied to the feather, as well as the amount of the supply ; and hence indirectly regulate the character of the new compounds in the feather, into which the fluid enters or which depend upon its influence. ‘Thus at the mating season there would be an alteration in the amount and character of the fluid received by the feather, and a freshening and often a color-change quite distinct from a more or less complete feather-change, and in some cases without any associated ‘moulting,’ which would be a separate process, even if present. EXPLANATION OF PLATE la. (Nore: —Figs. 1, 2, 4, and § were first photographed, and the prints from the negatives then colored from the original specimens ; thus insur- ing absolute accuracy in outlines. They are about twice the natural size. Fig. 3 was outlined with a camera lucida to secure exactness, and Pie CuapmMan, Spring Moult of the Bobolink. 149 then colored from nature. It is a little enlarged. Figs. 6 and 7 were drawn and tinted from specimens under the microscope. It is a pleasure to acknowledge my indebtedness to Mr. Baldwin Cool- idge for the care and skill with which he has reproduced the original colors. Fig. 3 is by the author.) Figure 1. Spring color-change without ‘moult’ of the feather. An old feather of the color of the spring plumage. (March 1, Brazil, Corumba. Coll. American Mus. Nat. Hist., No. 32783.) Figure 2. Spring ‘moult’ without color-change in the feather. A new-growth feather the color of the winter dress. (March 1, Brazil, Corumba. Same skin as preceding. ) Figure 3. Spring color-change without ‘ moult’ of the feather. The first black feather seen on my Bobolink. (March 28, cage-bird. ) Figure 4. Fall ‘moult’ without color-change of the feather. A new feather, but the color of the preceding plumage. (August 29, Minne- sota. Coll. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., No. 52326.) Figure 5. Fall ‘moult’ with partial color-change of the feather. A new-growth feather, showing the ‘foci’ of darker shade, partly obscured by the yellow of the fall dress. (August 2, New York. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., No. 32785.) Figure 6. Spring feather, transverse section. From a deep black feather of the breeding dress, in its terminal third. Granules of coloring matter, chiefly massed peripherally, producing the effect of black. (May 30, Mass. Coll. A. P. C., No. 2672.) Figure 7. Fall feather, transverse section. Like Fig. 6, but of the Reed-bird type. Granules not massed peripherally, but scattered through- out. (September 17, Mass. Coll. A. P. C., No. 3522. (Figs. 6 and 7 with Zeiss 4mm. apochromat. objective, and No. 6 comp. ocular. ) REMARKS ON THE SPRING MOULT OF THE BOBOLINK. BY FRANK M. CHAPMAN. In his paper on “ The Spring Plumage of the Bobolink, with Remarks on ‘ Color-Change’ and ‘ Moulting,’”’ published in this number of ‘The Auk,’ Dr. Chadbourne has shown that captive tt B 150 CHAPMAN, Spring Moult of the Bobolink. rea Bobolinks may change from the winter or Reedbird plumage to the black, buff and white dress of the breeding male without moult- ing. The discovery is of such importance and has so wide a bearing upon problems connected with changes of color in the plumage of birds, that, having handled a large part of the material which Dr. Chadbourne has studied, it has seemed advis- able to follow his paper with remarks upon several questions he has therein discussed. Laying aside for a moment the fact that the change observed occurred in a caged bird, we have here for the first time a definite description of a change in the color of a bird’s plumage without moult with an explanation of its cause in certain feathers. ‘This change, it should be noted, is not due to repig- mentation, or “influx of new pigment,’ which has so often been spoken of as an observed fact, nor even to a chemical change in the pigment, but to a redistribution in the shaft or barb of the feather, of the existing pigment. Dr. Chadbourne says: “Thus in the black spring specimen the granules are peripheral and comparatively close together, though a smaller number are also found in the deeper parts; while in the autumn the granular pigmented matter is more uniformly scattered through- out.” It will be observed therefore that no vascular connection between the feather and the dermal papilla in which it is set is claimed, nor is there any evidence to show that the feather can renew itself either by repigmentation, or by a fresh growth restoring a worn or ragged feather to its perfect shape, as claimed by Herr Giitke and other theorists. It is these two theories, repigmentation and new growth in an old feather, that Dr. Allen and others have combated as physiologically impossible, and Dr. Chadbourne alone of all the advocates of color-change with- out moult, has shown that this change may take place by a comparatively simple process, which nevertheless accomplishes remarkable results. In demonstrating his point Dr. Chadbourne has placed in our hands a very dangerous tool. It is evident that extreme care is necessary in conducting observations of the kind he has made, and that satisfactory results can only be obtained through con- tinued observation of the same individual. foaeee CHAPMAN, Spring Moult of the Bobolink. ISI It is of course well known that cage-birds may moult very irregularly, and this is particularly true of Bobolinks. Dr. Allen' records numerous individuals moulting in the spring while Dr. Chadbourne’s specimen lost practically no feathers at that season. In a bird store in New York City at this time (November) are two male Bobolinks still wearing the black breeding dress. Before admitting, therefore, that the changes which occur in the plumage of a cage-bird may also take place in birds in a state of nature, it will be well to examine that part of Dr. Chadbourne’s paper relating to the specimens of wild Bobolinks he has studied. ‘This refers largely to the Corumba, Brazil, specimen (Am. Mus. No. 32783) figured in a previous number of this journal.? In describing this specimen,’ [ have said that it was passing from the Reedbird to the black Bobolink plumage by a compete moult. * In fact the only feathers of the old plumage remaining are the first primary and five inner secondaries of the right wing, four inner secondaries of the left wing, the primary coverts and scapularies of both wings, and some of the under wing-coverts. Old contour feathers may be found in the centre of the back and in small numbers about the head, neck, and upper breast. In all these parts the moult is in progress and these old feathers would evidently soon have been replaced by those of the new plumage. The centre of the lower breast and the centre of the abdomen are still occupied by the old plumage, the feathers of this part being, as in the adult Reedbird, white tinged with yellow. An August moult- ing, adult Bobolink has nearly acquired the Reedbird plumage but, as in the CorumbA bird, the feathers of the middle of the abdomen have not as yet been moulted, apparently showing that these feathers are the last to be shed. "Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., VIII, 1896, p. 44. *The Auk, X, 1893, p. 309. Dr. Chadbourne’s remarks upon this plate (antea, p. 141) would imply that acting under my instructions, the artist had partially completed the moult of the Corumba bird therein figured, and I must confess that my own statement regarding it would lead one to the same con- clusion; but as I was not in this country when either the drawing or lithograph was made and, beyond the fact that the plate was contemplated, knew nothing whatever about it, I can hardly be held responsible for its inaccuracies. 3The Auk, VII, 1890, p. 120. 152 CHAPMAN, String Moult of the Bobolink. rea Dr. Chadbourne has examined this Corumba specimen, but his conclusions differ from my own. In brief, he says that the moult is not a complete one, but that certain feathers of the winter plumage have changed to the color of the breeding plumage, and that in the white area of the abdomen there are some white feathers not fully mature. He further says: ‘‘My Bobolink showed none of this white marking on the breast or abdomen, nor did it have the chestnut shading, which is so prominent in the Corumbdé specimen, and Dr. Allen says nothing of any similar coloring among the birds seen by him. When we call to mind the fact, to be referred to later, — that the black of the Bobolink is really due to brown, instead of black coloring matter, — it is at once clear that the excess of chestnut and white show a lack of the normal quantity of pigmented matter; and it seems almost sure that in the Corumbé bird, we have not a normal example, but a partial albino!” In attempting to explain the reason for this difference in Dr. Chadbourne’s opinion and my own, let us first consider the question of change in the color of an old feather (figure 1 of the plate accompanying his paper). ‘The plumage of the Reedbird, especially of adult specimens, often contains black feathers, the terminal yellow tips of which show them to be new. Dr. Chadbourne figures such a feather in his plate (fig. 1). What becomes of these feathers? In an adult male taken September 25, in Jamaica, W. I. (Am. Mus. No. 42134) nearly all the feathers of the breast and sides are so marked. ‘The bird could not well lose them without these parts becoming featherless. There is no reason to doubt, therefore, that they are retained until the spring moult, and in my opinion it is on one of these black feathers that Dr. Chadbourne bases his statement of spring color change without moult of the feather in the Corumb4é specimen, when in truth there is no evidence whatever to show that this feather was not black when it was acquired at the preceding moult. * which Dr. Chadbourne reports finding in the white area on the lower breast and abdo- men of the Corumbaé bird, one of which he figures (fig. 2), I As to the “ not fully mature feathers ’ must confess that after the most careful search I have failed to remens CHAPMAN, Spring Moult of the Bobolink. 5:3 find a single new white feather in this or any part of the bird’s plumage. I do find, however, new black feathers appearing, and there is in my mind, no doubt but that in due time these yellowish white feathers of the fall plumage would have been replaced by the black ones of the spring plumage. And this brings me to Dr. Chadbourne’s statement that these white feathers and a “chestnut shading” are evidence of albin- ism in the Corumbaé specimen, neither of them being shown in his cage-bird. As for the white feathers in the abdomen, allow- ing for a slight fading and abrasion due to their having been worn for a longer time, they are exactly like those found in the same part of several Reedbirds in the collection of the American Museum. In other words, they appear perfectly normal and are in no way albinistic. The “chestnut shading’’ mentioned by Dr. Chadbourne as an evidence of albinism in the Corumba bird, and as not shown by his cage-bird, I am unable to detect. In any event, it is obvious that the two birds are not comparable. With the exception of the white abdominal area the few old feathers remaining in the plumage of the Corumba bird do not materially effect its color, which is that of the newly grown feathers, while Dr. Chadbourne’s cage-bird was acquiring its spring dress not by moult, but by change of color in the old feathers. I think, therefore, that Dr. Chadbourne is mistaken when he states that the Corumba bird is “ apparently a partial albino,” and I must again assert my belief that this bird is acquiring its breeding plumage by a complete moult. Admitting this, it may be said that one moulting specimen does not prove that all wild Bobolinks moult in the spring, and, in replying to this objection, I am very glad to find that Dr. Chad- bourne and myself are in accord as to what constitutes evidence of spring moult in the Bobolink. Speaking of his cage-bird he says: “The buff edging of the breast feathers was never more — than a narrow line, evidently owing to the absence of the long fugaceous tips, which are so characteristic of the newly developed feathers, and it is therefore probable that spring males showing much buff suffusion beneath have recently passed through a “spring moult,’ or at least through a partial feather change.” It is these tips which give the freshly moulted Corumbé bird so 20 154 RICHMOND, New Birds from East Africa. pee singular an appearance, and they are undoubted proof of new growth. In the Corumba bird they form about the terminal fifth of the feather. Thus a breast feather measures, from tip to insertion, .75 of an inch, of which the buff tip occupies.15 of aninch. A feather from the same region in a June Bobolink, from which the tip has fallen, and which is further worn, measures only .50 of an inch. There can be no reason to question therefore that feathers having these tips are recently grown. I emphasize the point, for I have yet to see an April Bobolink, and I have examined numerous specimens, in which these tips were not prominent. It is, there- fore, not alone upon the Corumba specimen but upon these April birds that I base my theory of a spring moult in Dodichonyx. How or when a caged Bobolink may change plumage no man can predict but among wild birds there is as yet no recorded evidence that the breeding plumage is not acquired by a complete moult. DESCRIPTIONS OF TEN NEW SPECIES OF BIRDS DISCOVERED BY DR. W. LU. ABBOTT IN GHEE KILIMANJARO REGION OF EAST AFRICA! BY CHARLES W. RICHMOND. A very valuable collection of birds made several years ago in the Kilimanjaro region of East Africa and presented to the United States National Museum by Dr. W. L. Abbott, not only supplied to the Museum many species previously unrepresented in its collections, but contained numerous species new to science: Various causes, mainly lack of material for comparison, have prevented the correct determination of a large part of the col- lection, although recently, through the generosity of Mr. A. ‘By permission of Mr. F. W. True, Executive Curator, U. S. Nationak Museum. Vol. XIV Eee RicHMonD, Wew Birds from East Africa. 155 Boucard, the Museum series has been greatly enriched by the addition of many African birds as well as by a large number of specimens (several thousand) from various parts of the world. In the meantime, however, the great activity shown by Eng- lish and German naturalists in the ornithology of this region resulted in the discovery of many new species, among them sev- eral of those first collected by Dr. Abbott. In order to reserve for Dr. Abbott the credit of discovering a few new species in the Kilimanjaro region, it is thought best to publish with as little delay as possible descriptions of the ten species presented below, which were identified in a recent partial examination of his col- lection. It is hoped that a full catalogue of this very interesting collection may be given in the near future. 1. Crithagra kilimensis, new species. Type. — No. 118331, U. S. N. M.; male adult, Mount Kilimanjaro, 6000 feet, August 11, 1888; Dr. W. L. Abbott, collector. Top of head (including forehead), sides of neck, back, scapulars, rump, and upper tail-coverts almost uniform olive grayish brown (between olive and hair brown), most of the feathers with very slightly darker centres ; the head slightly darker than the back, the latter and upper tail-coverts with a slight greenish wash; lores blackish, a minute supraloral white spot, only noticeable on disturbing the feathers; feathers around the eye blackish, some of them with white bases; a narrow supra-auricular streak, white, interrupted with dusky; cheeks, chin, and sides of face near base of bill blackish, the feathers with more or less concealed white at bases, except at base of chin; fore throat with some white on bases of feathers : rest of throat, chest, sides ot breast, ear-coverts, and remainder of cheeks, hair brown, with a slight olive tinge; some of the feathers of chest with darker centres ; centre of breast, abdomen, sides of body and flanks butt, darker on the first named, where obscurely streaked with hair brown, the streaks becoming more pronounced, broader and darker on sides of body and flanks; under tail-coverts dusky brown, broadly edged with buff; thighs dusky brown, tipped with buff; wings and tail blackish brown, each feather (except first primary and outermost tail feather) edged with greenish yellow; tertiaries with greenish white tips, mostly on outer webs; lesser wing-coverts olive green; middle coverts blackish brown, with olive green edges, and greenish white tips, forming a bar; greater coverts blackish brown, edged with greenish yellow, and tipped with greenish white, forming a second wing bar; alula and primary coverts blackish brown, narrowly edged with olive green; axillaries maize yellow ; 156 RicumMonp, New Birds from East Africa. Avril edge of wing light olive yellow; under wing-coverts light grayish, tipped with maize yellow; inner webs of primaries on under surface grayish white. In the dried skin the bill is dark brown above, whitish below; feet and tarsi light brown. Wing, 3.25 inches; tail, 2.70; tarsus, .77; culmen, .63. A second male measures: wing, 3.28; tail, 2.75 ; tarsus, .76; culmen, .61. This specimen is a trifle more olive on the back, rump, and upper tail-coverts ; the chest and breast are browner; buff of under parts deeper, and under tail-coverts almost wholly of this color. It was collected April 16, 1888, while the type, described above, was taken in August. This new species finds its nearest ally in the recently described Crithagra albifrons Sharpe, from Kikuyu and Mount Elgon, and both species are more or less closely related to C. burtoni from the Cameroons. From C. a/bifrons it differs in the absence of a white band across the base of the feathers above the lores, but the various more or less concealed white markings about the upper throat, cheeks, and below the base of the ear-coverts is an indica- tion of close relationship with that species. The chin is black in C. kilimensis instead of dusky gray asin C. a/bifrons,; the tips of the middle and greater wing-coverts are greenish white instead of white ; the tips of the greater series are not narrower than those of the median coverts. In both size and color C. kilimensis stands between C. durtoni and C. albifrons. Only two specimens of this species were obtained by Dr. Abbott, the type at 6000 feet, and the other at 7000 feet. Other explorers of Kilimanjaro have apparently not observed this species. 2. Crithagra striolata affinis, new subspecies. Type. — No. 118319, U. S.N. M.; male, adult, Mount Kilimanjaro, 6000 feet, June 12, 1888; Dr. W. L. Abbott, collector. Upper surface, from forehead to rump yellowish olive, mixed with yellowish butt on nape, occiput, and to a less extent on back, all of the feathers with dark brown centres, giving a streaked appearance ; centre of forehead and crown with a decided yellowish wash; sides of forehead naples yellow, passing into buffy white on a broad superciliary streak which extends to sides of neck; lores, feathers around eye, ear-coverts, cheeks, and a line from gape to ear-coverts brownish olive; line above cheeks, and a spot at base of upper mandible and under eye buffy white, tinged with yellow; throat buffy white, with a pronounced wash of wax yellow ; sides of neck pale buff, streaked with dark brown; rest of under surface buff, much deeper on flanks; breast and sides of body conspicu- es a Vol. XIV P : De my Se Ricumonp, New Birds from East Africa. 7 ously streaked with dark brown; feathers of under tail-coverts with dark brown centres; thighs pale brown, with a yellowish tinge, some of the feathers indistinctly streaked ; wings and tail blackish brown, the feathers (except outermost tail feather and first primary) edged with olive yellow on the outer webs; tertiaries with paler, whitish edges; lesser wing-coverts greenish olive; middle coverts blackish brown with whitish tips; greater series blackish brown, edged externally with olive yellow with whitish tips; primary coverts and alula blackish brown, narrowly edged externally with olive yellow; axillaries brownish buff, mixed with yellow; edge of wing yellow; under wing-coverts pale wood brown. Wing, 2.58 inches ; tail, 2.44; tarsus, .83; culmen, .51. Three other specimens in the collection, all females, obtained at altitudes of 5000 and 7000 feet, in April and May, 1888, and October, 1889, resemble in color and size the adult male described above, but they are slightly duller in appearance. This form has been observed in East Africa upon several occasions and Dr. Sharpe has twice directed attention to differ- ences between specimens from this region and Abyssinia (the type locality of C. stviolata). He observes,! “the specimen from Kilimanjaro has a yellowish chin and more olive-yellow on the wing-coverts, but as some of the Abyssinian specimens also show a little of the latter colour, there is probably no real difference between birds from the two localities’; and again in his report on Mr. Jackson’s collections? he writes of specimens from Mount Elgon and Kikuyu, “taken as a whole the members of the present series, as well as the Kilimanjaro birds in the British Museum, are darker than Abyssinian examples.” In addition to the differences mentioned by Dr. Sharpe the Kilimanjaro birds are smaller, and I have separated them accordingly. 3. Estrilda cyanocephala, new species. Type. — No. 118252, U.S. N. M.; male, adult, Useri river, near Mount Kilimanjaro, January 12, 1889; Dr. W. L. Abbott, collector. Whole head, breast, sides of body, rump, upper tail-coverts and tail nile blue, somewhat darker on the inner webs of the tail feathers; nape, back, scapulars, wing-coverts, and sides of neck wood brown; wings ashy brown, edged with wood brown; lower breast, abdomen, under tail-coverts, ' Catalogue of Birds Brit. Mus., XII, 1888, 364. ? Ibis, 1891, 258. Auk T 58 RICHMOND, New Birds from East Africa. aril thighs, axillaries, and under wing-coverts cinnamon butt; edge of wing nile blue. “ Bill and irides red.” Wing, 2.08 inches; tail, 2.14; tarsus, -58; culmen, .36. This species is closely related to 4. angolensis, but the entire head is blue; the brown of the upper surface and wings is darker, and the abdomen and under tail-coverts are of a deeper color. A second specimen in the collection, also an adult male, was collected on the plains east of Kilimanjaro, October 5, 1888. 4. Cinnyris nectarinioides, new species. Type. — No. 118227, U. S. N.M.; male, adult, Plains east of Mount Kilimanjaro, October 1, 1888, Dr. W. L. Abbott, collector. Entire head, neck, back, rump, and lesser wing-coverts metallic brassy green; upper tail-coverts metallic steel blue; lower throat narrowly edged with metallic deep blue; breast with a broad band of orange-ver- milion ; yellow pectoral tufts present; abdomen, under tail-coverts, wings and wing-coverts (except least), under wing-coverts, and tail, black, the latter with the feathers (central ones particularly) edged with purple basally, and with green on terminal half. Bill, feet, and tarsi black in dried skin. Wing, 2.03 inches; tail 1.47; narrow central feathers, 2.25 ; tarsus, .60; culmen, .7o. Another adult male, obtained October 22, 1888, at Aruscha-wa-chini, southwest of Kilimanjaro, measures: wing, 2.07 inches; tail, 1.47 (central pair of feathers narrow but not fully grown) ; culmen .72. This specimen agrees very closely with the type, but the greater wing- coverts are narrowly edged with metallic green. This species seems to be related to C. mariguensis, or to one of its subspecies, but differs from all of them in the possession of moderate yellow pectoral tufts, and in the very narrow long central tail feathers, which project three quarters of an inch beyond the rest of the tail. Captain Shelley has called attention to an occasional tendency in C, mariguensis to the development of long central tail feathers, but in the specimen observed by him the central feathers were only o.15 inch longer than the rest of the tail, while in the present case they are fully 0.75 inch. 5. Amydrus ? dubius, new species. Type. — No, 118112, U. S. N. M.; female, adult, Taveita, East Africa, August 17, 1888; Dr. W. L. Abbott, collector. Vol. XIV 1897 RicHMoND, New Birds from East Africa. 159 Entire head, nape, rump, upper tail-coverts, and whole under parts slate gray, with a slight greenish purple gloss; feathers of rump, and upper tail-coverts with blackish centres; lores and a narrow ring around eyes black ; thighs blackish; back and scapulars glossy purplish black, with a slight bronzy wash; wings and tail black; primaries with the greater part of the inner webs cinnamon rufous, and a narrow line along the outer web, next the shaft, of the same color, but not visible externally when the wing is closed; wing-coverts black, like upper surface of wing; lesser coverts a trifle more glossy; under wing-coverts and axillaries like under surtace of body but without gloss; edge of wing black. Wing, 3.85 inches; tail, 3-07 ; tarsus, .So; culmen, .73; width of bill at base, .38; length of first primary (exposed portion), .7o. “ Irides light yellow.” A single specimen of this interesting bird was obtained by Dr. Abbott. It is referred with some doubt to Amydrus, since it differs from the known species of this genus in its small size, circular nostrils, and concealed (instead of exposed) rufous of the wings. It has been carefully compared with descriptions of related genera, but differs from the majority of them in having the wings longer than the tail. This last character is apparently all that separates it from Cabanis’s JZjopfsar! | = Peoptera|. In describing his JZyiopsar cryptopyrrhus, Dr. Cabanis expressly states the tail to be longer than the wing and to resemble that of Calornis metallica; also that the nostrils are small, round and open. Dr. Sharpe, however, in a note? on Pwoptera lugubris, redescribes the birds after an examination of the type, and gives measurements (‘wing 3.5, tail 3.3”) which indicate exactly the opposite state of affairs. It is quite possible a typographical error has crept into the figures given by Dr. Sharpe. This ornithologist considers P. dugubris and P. cryptopyrrhus to be very distinct, but I am unable to find the latter in Shelley’s ‘ Birds of Africa.’ In some respects Amydrus dubius resembles a diminutive A. wallert; the gray of the head is quite similar, but a trifle lighter, and with a slight purplish rather than a greenish gloss; the bill, much smaller than in wad/erz, of course, is of very much the same shape, but the culmen is less keeled, and the nostrils are small and circular; the subterminal notch on the maxilla is as far from ' Journal fiir Ornithologie, 1876, 93. > Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., 1878, 804. 160 RicHMOND, New Birds from East Africa. rl the tip as in A. wadlleri, thus being proportionally more distant than in that species. The rictal bristles are weak; first primary quite pointed; rufous color on under surface of wing occupies almost exactly the same area as in 4. wa/leri, but on the second primary the inner half of the inner web only is rufous; second and third primaries almost equal in length ; fourth primary longest ; tail considerably graduated, distance between longest and shortest feathers .60 inch, ‘Tarsus scutellated. 6. Pholidauges femoralis, new species. Pholidauges fischeri SHELLEY, Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., 1889, 368 (Kilimanjaro, 6000 feet). Type. — No. 118111, U. S. N. M.; male, adult, Mount Kilimanjaro, 6000 feet, June 12, 1888; Dr. W. L. Abbott, collector. Entire upper surface (except wings and tail), sides of head and neck, throat, chest, breast (extending down to a blunt point in the centre), thighs and femoral region, black, with a purplish gloss; sides of lower breast, sides of body, abdomen, and under tail-coverts cream color, some- what mixed on sides of breast and body with dull black; lesser and middle wing-coverts like the back; greater and primary coverts greenish black edged with a purplish gloss; wings and tail greenish black, with a slight edging of purplish on the outer webs; feathers of both wings and tail rayed or ribbed in certain lights; longer feathers of upper tail-coverts greenish black with slight purplish edges, and rayed when held in proper lights; axillaries dull blackish with a purplish gloss on some of the feathers; edge of wing glossy purplish black; under wing-coverts dull slaty black, with a purplish edging on some of the outer feathers, anda small creamy white spot formed by the tips of some of the middle ones. Length (skin), 6.75 inches; wing, 3.75; tail, 2.80; tarsus, .92 ; culmen, .70 (.35 from distal end of nostril); first primary (from point of insertion), 82. This species appears to be very distinct from any one previously described. It at first occurred to me that it might be the male of P. fischeri, with which, indeed, Captain Shelley identifies it, but upon referring to the description and colored plate of the latter it is seen that the female of P. fscheri has the middle tail feathers and the inner tertiaries green, with a pronounced metallic sheen, in strong contrast with an otherwise dull plumage; the male here ce ee ta ly RicHMomD, Mew Birds from East Africa. 161 described, on the other hand, has only a slight gloss on these feathers. It is hardly probable the female of P. fschert is more brilliant in any portion of its plumage than the male. In size the present species agrees very closely with the female of P. jéschers, but for that matter it is of nearly the same size as P. /eucogaster, with which it is only distantly related. It is structurally almost identical with the last named bird, but lacks the brilliant metallic color. Compared with a specimen of P. /ewcogaster the bills are almost precisely alike ; the tails are very slightly forked; the first primary in /emoralis, is slightly longer and more rounded at the tip ; the third and fourth primaries are longest in P. deucogaster ; the fourth and fifth in ?. femorads ; the under tail-coverts are not as long as in P. /eucogaster. 7. Laniarius abbotti, new species. Type.— No. 119168, U. S. N. M.; male, adult, Mount Kilimanjaro, 5000 feet, October 18, 1889; Dr. W. L. Abbott, collector. Back, scapulars, rump, upper tail-coverts, wing-coverts, and upper sur- face of wings and tail green (between oil and olive green), shafts of the feathers black, the secondaries and tail very slightly more olive; tail feathers, except middle pair, very narrowly tipped — mostly on the inner webs — with buffy yellow; wing feathers, except exposed upper surface, brownish black, the inner webs of all (including base of first primary ) broadly edged with straw yellow, less pronounced on the tertiaries, and occupying only one-third the length of the second primary, one-half of the third, and increasing on the inner ones; axillaries and under wing- coverts canary yellow. ‘Top of head, nape, sides of neck, and upper back, slate gray, passing somewhat gradually into the green of the back; fore- head, lores, line above and below eyes, upper part of cheeks, and ear- coverts, black, passing into the gray of sides of neck, but elsewhere sharply contrasted with adjacent colors; throat, lower part of cheeks, chest, and breast, bright orpiment orange (the feathers bright yellow below the surface), passing into greenish canary yellow on the abdomen ; under tail-coverts greenish-yellow like abdomen; sides of body darker; thighs greenish, like back. Length (skin), about 7.30 inches; wing, 3-50; tail, 3.42; tarsus, .97; first primary, from insertion, 1.09. Bill black; feet brownish (in skin); ‘‘irides red.” The bill is injured by shot and measurements cannot be given; the under mandible, however, measures -40 inch from the mental apex. The feet and tarsi are considerably smaller than those of the few species of Lanéaréus (in its broad sense) now before me, and the first primary is decidedly shorter. 21 162 RicuMonp, New Birds from East Africa. Aw The pattern of coloration is in general so much like that of L. multicolor of the Malaconotus group (a species not accessible to me except through the colored plate in Gray’s ‘Genera of Birds’), that I think it must be nearly related to this species. It differs very decidedly, however, as a comparison with the above description will show. The rictal bristles are weak: the nostrils are rounded and almost entirely hidden by the black feathers at the base of the culmen ; nuchal hairs are present. The tail is slightly grad- uated, the difference in length between the middle and outermost rectrices being .40 inch. One specimen only of this handsome species was obtained ; it appears to be quite distinct from any known species, and it is with great pleasure that I dedicate it to Dr. Abbott, who has labored so assiduously in the last few years to increase the col- lections of the U. S. National Museum. 8. Prionops vinaceigularis, new species. Type. — No. 118136, U. S. N. M., male, adult; Plains east.of Mount Kilimanjaro, October 1, 1888; Dr. W. L. Abbott, collector. Crest grayish white, only slightly developed; fore crown grayish white, passing into dark vinaceous-cinnamon on the hind crown, this color con- tinuing down on sides of head over ear-coverts, narrowly over eyes to lores, and on cheeks, passing into lighter vinaceous-cinnamon on throat ; the color of the cheeks, ear-coverts, superciliary line and lores mixed with white, the latter almost pure in a patch below the eyes; lower throat and rest of under parts white, this color passing up on sides of neck and over nape, where somewhat broken by a black patch continuous with that of the back; back, rump, and upper tail-coverts black, some of the feathers of the latter narrowly edged with butt ; wings black, with an oblique, white bar across primaries (except the first), visible only on under side; secondaries and inner primaries tipped narrowly with brownish buff, some of the former also indistinctly edged on outer webs with the same color; wing-coverts black, some of the inner feathers of the middle and greater series tipped with white; alula and primary coverts edged and tipped with whitish buff; under wing-coverts and axillaries black; tail black, middle pair of feathers wholly so, next pair slightly notched with white at tips; three following pairs with increased white terminal notches, and outer pair wholly white on outer web, but basal two-thirds of inner web black. ‘‘Feet red; bare skin around eyes green; irides yellow.” Wing, 4.02 inches; tail, 3.30; tarsus, .84; culmen, .82. Vol. XIV ion RicHMOND, New Birds from East Africa. 1623 Two other specimens, females, collected at the same _ place, October 6, agree with the bird just described, but have a blackish instead of white spot below the eyes, and the black of the back extends up to the crown. One of these females also has a number of dusky blackish feathers scattered on the sides of the crown, and the ear-coverts are prouts brown. ‘The iris and skin around the eye are stated to be ‘ yellowish green’ on one of the labels. This species seems to agree with /. créstatus in not having the conspicuous wing band, formed by the white edges on wing- coverts and secondaries, but I have no specimen of the latter with which to carry the comparison farther. Dr. Sharpe! gives the irides of P. cristatus as grey, while in the present species they are yellow or yellowish green. g. Chloropeta similis, new species. Type. No. 118065, U. S. N. M.; female, adult, Mount Kilimanjaro, 10000 feet, July 29, 1888; Dr. W. L. Abbott, collector. Upper surtace of head, nape, sides of neck, back, scapulars, rump, upper- tail-coverts, lesser wing-coverts, edges of middle and greater coverts, edges of primaries and of tail feathers, and bend of wing, uniform brown- ish green (between olive and olive green), lighter on rump ; wing and tail feathers dark brown; outermost pair of tail feathers edged with yellowish green; under surtace, including cheeks, under wing-coverts and axillaries, bright lemon yellow, deeper on bend of wing; line above lores lemon yellow; sides of face, and ear-coverts, like upper parts; sides of breast yellowish green; thighs yellow anteriorly, brownish posteriorly ; sides of body with a greenish tinge; inner webs of wing feathers edged with pale butfy yellow. Wing, 2.15 inches; tail, 2.20; tarsus, .go; culmen, .59; first primary, .72. Four specimens of this bird were collected on Kilimanjaro, at altitudes of Sooo and 10000 feet, during June and July, 1888. Its nearest relative appears to be C. ¢cferina, but from this it differs in the wing formula, in smaller size, and apparently in the color of the thighs and upper parts. In C. s¢mit¢s the third primary is equal to the eighth, not to the seventh (as in C. éctferina), nor to the sixth (as in C. xatalensis). The fourth primary in our bird is equal to the seventh. The first primary is rather broad, and in one example is .89 inch long (exposed portion) ; in the type it is comparatively short. 'Tbis, 1891, 6or. 164 Antuony, New Birds from Lower California. reel It might naturally be thought that our bird would be C. massaica of Fischer and Reichenow, which comes from the base of Kilimanjaro, but this species is said to be nearly related to C. natalensis; it is also considerably larger than C. s¢mz/is, and has the top of the head dark brown. The single male collected by Dr. Abbott is not quite adult, and a female has therefore been chosen for the type. 10. Melanobucco abbotti, new species. Type. —No. 117957, U. S. N. M.; female, adult, Plains of Taveita, July 22, 1888. Entire head, nape, sides of neck, throat, breast, upper portion of abdo- men, under tail-coverts, rump, upper tail-coverts, and entire tail (even concealed portion of base) white, with a faint sulphur yellow tinge on the rump, breast and upper abdomen; sides of breast, sides of body, lower abdomen, and flanks, brownish black, most of the feathers with whitish tips or triangular shaft spots of the same color. Scapulars brownish black, with whitish triangular shaft streaks; back and wings brownish black, the feathers of the former and of the wing-coverts and tertiaries faintly tipped with whitish or pale brown; thighs white, with a slight admixture of brown; under wing-coverts dark brown, with a slight mottling of white; axillaries dark brown; under surtace of wings dusky brown, the inner webs of the wing feathers (except first primary) with basal half or more edged with white. Wing, 3.90 inches; tail, 2.26; tarsus, .98; culmen, 1.02. This bird is closely related to both JZ. albicauda and M. senex, but differs from the former in having a white breast and white tail (even to the base), and from the latter in the blackish brown abdomen, sides of body, and scapulars. ‘The three species appear to have the same dimensions. NEW BIRDS FROM THE ISLANDS AND PENINSULA OF LOWER CALIFORNIA. BY A. W. ANTHONY. THE past summer a small collection of birds was made by the writer, assisted by Mr. Horace Gaylord, along the west coast of Ma ae Antuony, Mew Birds from Lower California. 165 Lower California, north of 27°. In advance of a more complete paper on the avifauna of this interesting region the following new species are described. Carpodacus mcgregori, sp. nov. McGrecor’s House FINCH. Sp. char.—Nearest C. amplus but slightly smaller, with more com- pressed and laterally flattened mandible, longer tail and different color- ation; larger than C. menicanus frontalis, bill much larger, its lateral outlines viewed from above, parallel for nearly half the length. Red colors replaced by orange tints. Type, ad. @, No. 7393 coll. A. W. A., San Benito Island, Lower California,' Sept. 7, 1896. Above dark olive gray heavily streaked with blackish slate; rump pinkish orange; forehead, superciliary stripe, and malar region orange vermilion; chin, throat and breast lighter, approaching orange chrome; rest of lower parts whitish, heavily streaked with slaty; wings and tail dusky brown, primaries and tail-feathers edged with whitish; wing-coverts edged and tipped with buffy white. Wing, 81 mm.; tail, 73; culmen, 13; depth of bill, 11. Habitat, San Benito Islands, Lower California. A. Carpodacus amplus. B. C. megregori. C. C. mexicanus frontalis I take great pleasure in naming this very strongly marked species in honor of my friend Mr. R. C. McGregor of Palo Alto, Cal., in recognition of valuable assistance he has often rendered me. ‘lhe basal third of the bill is slightly compressed laterally so that viewed from above the lateral outlines are parallel for nearly one half of the length. Further Notes on Trinidad Birds, with a Description of a New Species of Synallaxis. Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 1895, VII, pp. 321-326. el Knicut, The Horned Larks of Matne. wie! onym of 7. cérrhatus, as one of his specimens agreed with skins from Guiana. Two specimens in my collection agree with the Demerara skins, but not with the examples from Trinidad, with the exception of the single one mentioned by Mr. Chapman. The degree of individual vari- ation in this species must be worked out before the synonymy can be established. Amazilia erythronota (Zess.). The most abundant Hummer. [ Comparing six specimens collected by Mr. Phelps with eight speci- mens in the American Museum, including two authentic Trinidad examples, I can find no grounds for the continued separation of the Venezuelan and Trinidad birds. The alleged character of difference in the color of the lower tail-coverts proves, as Mr. Salvin has remarked,! to be inconstant, this character in the Venezuelan specimens before me ranging from dusky to cinnamon- rufous. Nor is the color of the tail of value, the Trinidad examples being exactly matched by those from the mainland. I have seen no specimens of A. ¢obac¢ from Tobago and therefore adopt the name erythronota provisionally. — F. M. C.] Steatornis caripensis Humb. The famous cave, near the town -of Caripe, where this species was discovered by Humboldt, was visited on August 5 and6. The birds were found in great numbers and a thorough exploration of the large cave was made. Picumnus obsoletus Ad/ex. [Three males essentially resemble the type of P. obsoletus except in the color of the crown-spots, which are lemon-yellow instead of orange-red. Two young specimens of Prcumnus guttifer have both yellow and red feathers in the crown and it seems probable therefore that Mr. Phelps’s specimens are immature. In respect to the squamation of the under parts they agree with the type of odsoletus in beirig more lightly marked than P. sguamudatus of which I have examined seven specimens, including three kindly loaned me by Mr. Charles W. Richmond, Assistant Curator of the Department of Birds in the U. S. National Museum.— F. M. C. ] THE HORNED LARKS OF MAINE. BY O. W. KNIGHT. Untit the present year, 1897, Otocoris alpestris had been the only variety of Horned Lark which had been recorded from Maine, but in view of the fact that O. a. praticola had been reported 1 Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., XVI, p. 225. 372 KniGHT, The Horned Larks of Maine. ae from the neighboring New England States it seemed highly probable that it would ultimately be taken in this State. In a letter written in the fall of 1896, my friend, Arthur H. Norton of Westbrook, predicted that the subspecies in question would soon be taken in the State. This prediction was verified by a record in the Maine ‘Sportsman’ for April, 1897, of the capture of four specimens at North Bridgton, Cumberland County, by J. C. Mead. Some time previously Mr. Mead had written me that he had been looking for Horned Larks in his locality for nearly twenty-five years, but so far his search had been in vain. In March he again wrote that on the 13th he had observed a flock of about twenty- five individuals running along in the road near his residence, and had secured four specimens which from the lack of yellow mark- ings he was inclined to refer to fraticola. These were later sent to Mr. Norton and their identification verified. When I learned these particulars, I resolved to secure the loan of specimens of the genus O/ocoris from various collectors in the State with the hopes of discovering more specimens of fraticola among them, Sixteen specimens were obtained from seven different sources, and eight of these proved representatives of the subspecies in question, all but one being perfectly typical. Three of these, including the least typical one, were sent to Mr. Brewster in order to be absolutely certain of their identity. The Maine specimens of fratico/a, known to exist in collections are as follows: four taken at North Bridgton, March 13, 1897, by J. C. Mead. Two of these are males and one a female by dissection, while the fourth is a male by proportions and markings. A pair in the collection of the University of Maine were taken at Bucksport, Hancock County, in the winter of 1886 or 1887 by Alvan G. Dorr. -~¢—- NEW YORK ee te oe ee, THE SprRING PLUMAGE OF THE BOBOLINK, WITH REMARKS ON ‘ COLOR-CHANGE’ AND ‘ MouLtT- ING. By Arthur P. Chadbourne, M.D. (Plate Ia.) ? : < ; REMARKS ON THE SPRING PLUMAGE OF THE BoBoLink. By Frank WM. Chapuran. . aie hitAO DescrRIPTIONS OF TEN New SPECIES OF BIRDS DISCOVERED BY Dr. W. L. ABBOTT IN THE KILIMANJARO REGION OF East AFRICA. By Charles W. Richmond. & . 154 New BirDS FROM THE ISLANDS AND PENINSULA OF LOWER CALIFORNIA. By A. W. Anthony. 164 A PRELIMINARY LisT OF THE BrRDs OF OKANOGAN County, WASHINGTON. By /Vclliam Leon Dawson. . . 4 A 4 DESCRIPTION OF A NEw PINE GROSBEAK FROM CALIFORNIA. By William W. Price. N82 CriTICAL REMARKS ON Cistothorus palustris (WILS.) AND ITS WESTERN ALLIES. By Harry C. Oberholser. . 5 : , ; : : : : 3 3 : 3 : * : . 186 THE Unusuat OCCURRENCE OF BRUNNICH’S MurrRE (Uyia lomvia) FAR INLAND, WITH NOTES ON OTHER RARE Birps. By A. W. Butler. 5 é : . 5 : : = EGY, DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SPECIES OF GUILLEMOT FROM THE Kuri ISLANDS. By Leonhard Stejneger. . . : . : 200 GENERAL Notes. — Murres in Western New York, 202; Unusual Occurrence of Briinnich’s Murre at Beverly, New Jersey, 202; Briinnich’s Murre (Ura domvia) at Newberne, N. C..202; Briinnich’s Murre and King Eider at Cape Charles, Virginia, 202; Uréa lomvza in South Carolina, 203; ‘The Terns of Dyer’s and Weepecket Islands, 203; The Nostrils of Young Cormorants, 205; The Canvas- back Duck in Massachusetts, 206; Type Locality of /ligula collaris, 206; Dafilula,a New Sub- genus, 207; The Lesser Snow Goose in New England, 207; Branta bernicla glaucogastra, 207; The Wood Ibis in Virginia and Maryland, 208; A North American Snipe New to the A. ©. U. List, 209; The Occurrence of Tryngites subruficollis in the New England States, 209; Status of Helodro- mas ochropus in the A. O. U. List, 210; Status of the Redshank as a North American Bird, 211; The Avocet (Recurvirostra americana) at Ipswich, Mass., 212; The 1896 Migration of Charadrius dominicus and Numenius borealis in Massachusetts, 212; Validity of the Genus Lophortyx, 214 ; Notes on the Mexican Ground Dove, 215; Another Golden Eagle in Connecticut, 215; Northern Hawks in Massachusetts, 216 ; Swainson’s Hawkin Michigan, 216; Note on Elanus glaucus, 216; The Roadrunner as a Destroyer of Caterpillars, 217; How the Chimney Swift secures Twigs for its Nest, 217; Probable First Description of Ewzpidonax flaviventris, 218; Two New Birds for Maine, 219; The Redpoll in Maryland, 219; Bachman’s Sparrow in Maryland, 219; The Seaside Sparrow, (Ammodramus maritimus) at Middletown, R. I., 219; Henslow’s Bunting (A m0dramus henslowz) Found Breeding at Plymouth, Michigan, 220; Occurrence of Zonotrichia albicollis in California, 221 ; How about the Genus P7f7z/o now? 221; The Bahaman Swallow in Florida, 221; Geothlypis agilis a Possible Breeder in Northern Minnesota, 222; Untenability of the Genus Sylvania Nutt., 223 ; The Carolina Wren (7%ryothorus ludovicianus) at Inwood-on-Hudson, New York City, 224; The Mockingbird at Portland, Maine, in Winter, 224; Zurdus dawrencii Coues, 225: Some New Records for Central New York, 226; Lake Michigan Bird Notes, 227; Sundry Notes, 228; The most General Fault of the A. O. U. Check-List, 220. Recent LITERATURE. — Ridgway’s ‘ Manual of North American Birds,’ Second Edition, 232 ; Goode’s ‘The Published Writings of Philip Lutley Sclater, 233 ; Newton’s ‘ Dictionary of Birds’: Part IV, 234; Bates’s ‘The Game Birds of North America,’ 244; Butler on a Century of Changes in the Aspects of Nature in Indiana, 245; Elliots’ Catalogue of a Collection of Birds from Somali-Land, 245; Anderson’s Birds of Winnebago and Hancock Counties, Iowa, 246; Ricker’s Notes on the Birds of Hull, Mass., 246; Howe’s Birds of Brookline, Mass., 246; Tegetmeier’s ‘ Pheasants,’ 246 ; Bird-nesting with a Camera, 247; A List of the Birds of Florida, 247; Cory’s List ot the Birds of Eastern North America, 248; Schalow’s the Published Writings of Anton Reichenow, 248; Publica- tions Received, 248. CoRRESPONDENCe.— Captive Wild Birds, 251; A Desirable Substitute for Carbon Disulphide as an Insec- ticide, 251 ; ; Notes anp News.— Obituary: Charles E. Bendire, 353; Heinrich Gitke, 254; Platte M. Thorne, 254; New Publications, 255; Protection of Birds, 257; Errata, 258. ‘THE AUK,’ published as the Organ of the AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’ UNION, is edited by Dr. J. A. ALLEN, with the assistance of Mr. F. M. CHAp- MAN. TerRMs :— $3.00 a year, including postage, strictly in advance. Single num- bers, 75cents. Free to Honorary Members, and to Active and Associate Members of the A.O.U. not in arrears for dues. Subscriptions and Advertisements should be addressed to the publisher, L. S. FOSTER, 35 PINE SrrREET, New YorkK, N. Y. Foreign Subscribers may obtain ‘THe AuK’ through GURNEY AND JACKSON, 1 PaTERNOSTER Row, LONDON. All articles and communications intended for publication, and all books and publications for notice, should be sent to Dr. J. A. ALLEN, AMERICAN MusSEUM or NATURAL HisTory, CENTRAL PARK, NEw York CIry. AUTHORS’ SEPARATES. Authors of general articles will receive 25 separates of their articles gratis. Additional copies may be ordered, if desired, but such orders must always accompany the manuscript. The prices of separates are as follows: No. bf Number of pages of article. Cavers : 4 and copies. - 4 | 8 | 12 | 16 24 | 32 Title. 50 $0.50 | $1.00 | $1.50 | $2.00 | $3.00 | $4.50 $6.00 $0.50 75 165 eT § 1.75 eps | Gn25 | 5.00 6.50 Soe 100 80 | 1.30 fe eee BO 4 3-75 | 5-50 7.00 <7 eee . 137° : “A Old Series, Vol. XXIl | CONTINUATION OF THE New BULLETIN OF THE NUTTALL ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB ean The Auk A Quarterly Journal of Ornithology Vol. RIW — JULY, 1897 — Wo. S PUBLISHED -FOR The American Ornithologists’ Union NEW YORK ea ele ee i a ee, we CONT EN Tvs: A StTupy OF THE PHILADELPHIA VIREO ireo hoe TOES): By Jonathan Dwight, Jr., M.D. (Plate IL.) : : : P : “ A 3 THE TurKEY QuesTIon. By Dr. Elliott Comes. SomME ABNORMAL CoLoR MARKINGS. By Gerrit S. Miller. “ ; THE TERNS OF PENIKESE ISLAND, MASSACHUSETTS. By George H. Mask, : ; A List OF THE SPECIES OF ANSERES, PALUDICOLZ, AND LIMICOL OCCURRING IN THE Sakae oF Louistana.. By £. A. Mcelihenny. NESTING OF THE PARULA WARBLER Sigg aomericans) IN een Mae Coma New Jersey. By Mark L. C. Wilde. . 5 . , DESCRIPTION OF A NEw TOWHEE FROM Ceutonnin: By Foseph Grinnell An AppiTIon To NoRTH AMERICAN PEeTRELS. By /}clliam Palmer. DESCRIPTION OF A NEw TLE, witH NOTES ON Tin pelo eas By Harry C. Oberholser. : ; : A NoTeworTHY Brace (eee IN THE aoe Broek Weaee (Somateria desert) By Arthur H. Norton. Tue SumMER HoME OF Sasha: s Wa ARBLER NO"LONGER UNKNOWN. By 0. Wain : PRELIMINARY DeEscriPpTIONS OF New Brirps FROM Mexico: AND ARIZONA. By Frank M. Chapman. 7 : ; ei ; : Z - GENERAL Notes. — The Proper Generic Name of the Loons, 312; Ura lomvia,an Addition to the — Avifauna Columbiana, 312; Note on Pagofhila alba, 313; Arrival of Terns at Penikese Island in 1897, 313; Onychoprion, not Haliplaza, 314; Remarks on certain Procellariide, 314; Rectrices of — Cormorants, 316; Concordance of Merganser americanus, 316; The Scarlet Ibis in Colorado, 316; Little Blue Heron in New Hampshire, 316; Bob-white in Northwestern New York, 316; Additional Records of the- Passenger Pigeon (Actofistes migratorius), 316; Aquila chrysaétos n Central Min- nesota, 317; Breeding of the Goshawk in Pennsylvania, anys Peculiar Nest of the Great Horned Owl, 318; Disgorgement among Song Birds, 318; An Unusual Song of the Red-winged Blackbird, 319; Spring Molt in Sfznus prs, 320; An earlier name for Asmmodramus leconteit, 320; The Seaside Sparrow (A s220dramus maritimus) in Massachusetts, 320; What is Pringilla macgilli- vrayi, Aud.? 321; The Seaside Sparrow (A mwmodramus maritimus) at Middletown, Rk. I., 322; Breeding of the Seaside Sparrow in Massachusetts, ge Bachman’s Sparrow in Virginia; 322; Breeding of the Rose-breasted Grosbeak at Beverly, N.J., 323; On the Status of Lanzus robustus Baird as a North American Bird, 323; liveo flavoviridis in Nebraska — A Correction, 323; Reap- pearance of the Mockingbird at Portland, Maine, 324; A Mockingbird at Worcester, Mass., 324; Breeding of Sitta canadensis in Pennsylvania, 324; A Novel Idea of a Tufted Titmouse, 325; - Absence of Zvdus aonrlaschke pailasiz at Tadousac, Quebec, in 1896, 325; A Great Flight of Robins in Florida, 325; Rare Birds in the Vicinity of Philadelphia, 326; A Few Notes on the Avifauna Columbiana, 326; Northern New Jersey Notes, 326; Bird Notes from Massachusetts, 326; Three Birds rare in Framingham, Mass , 327; Bibliographical Note, 327: Recent Lirerature. — Ridgway’s Birds of the Galapagos Archipelago, 329; Cooke’s Birds of Colorado, 331; Miller on Construction of Scientific Names, 332; Chapman’s Notes on Birds observed in Yucatan, 333; ‘Upon the Tree-Tops,’ 333 ; The Sharp- tailed Sparrows of Maine, 334; The Story of the Farallones, 334; Bird-Nesting with a Camera, 334; Birds of Wellesley, 335; Nehrling’s Birds: Vol. II, 335; Chapman’s ‘ Bird-Life,’ 336: Publications Received, 338. CORRESPONDENCE. — The A. O. U. Check-List, 340. Notes anp News. — Obituary: Robert Hoe Lawrence, 342; Edward Drinker Cope, 342; Bird Pro- tection, 343 ; New York Zodlogical Society, 344. c ‘THE AUK,’ published as the Organ of the AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’ UNION, is edited by Dr. J. A. ALLEN, with the assistance of Mr. F. M. CHap-_ t MAN. oy TERMS :— $3.00 a year, including postage, strictly in advance. Single num- bers, 75 cents. Free to Honorary Members, and to Activeand Associate Members of the A.O.U. not in arrears for dues. : iy? Subscriptions and Advertisements should be addressed to the publisher, = L. S. FOSTER, 33 Pine SrreeT, New York, N. Y. Foreign Subscribers may obtain ‘THe AvuK’ through GURNEY AND JACKSON, 1 PATERNOSTER Row, Lonpon. All articles and communications intended for publication, and all books and publications for notice, should be sent to Dr. J. A. ALLEN, AMERICAN MusEUM oF NATURAL HisTory, CENTRAL Park, NEw York Ciry AUTHORS’ SEPARATES. Authors of general articles will receive 25 separates of their articles gratis. Additional copies may be ordered, if desired, but suck orders must always accompany the manuscript. The prices of separates are as follows: Nou af. Number of pages of article. Covers ; and eOpAS > 2 | 4 | 8 | 12 | 165 | eg 32 Title. 50 $0.50 | $1.00 | $1.50 | $2.00 | $3.00 | $4.50 | $6.00 $0.50 75 65 | Via Gis 1.75 2.25 | 3.25 5-00 6.50 50 100: .8o } 133 2.00 2.50 | Bur | 5-50 7.00 aes Old : CONTINUATION OF THE el New Series, Series Vol. XXII BULLETIN OF THE NUTTALL ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB Vol. XIV ‘The ae A Quarterly Fournal of Oriithology Vol. XIW — OCTOBER, 1897 — No. 4 \, Z WH, .~s ELS PUBLISHED FOR The American Ornithologists’ Union NEW YORK JO ee AST SS Yes BB sa CONTENTS. 15 aes THE WESTERN FIELD Sparrow (Sfizella pusilla arenacea CHADBOURNB). By Charles W. Richmond. (Plate III.) 2 ’ 5 : c : t ; ; : 345 Nores ON THE Brrps oF Fort eet ees ace By J. C. Merrill, Major and Surgeon U.S. Army. ‘ g A ‘ : a4, BrrpDs OBSERVED ON A Garine TP TO Reine Veo By William Henry Phelps. WxtTu Critica, Notes AND DESCRIPTIONS OF Two New Species. By Frank M. Chapman. x ‘ é : 2 : > 4 : i : : z 4 3 357 THE HorNeED LARKS OF Maines By O. W. Knight. . ‘ . F F f , 3 i 372 Notes ON THE AMERICAN BARN OWL IN EASTERN PENNSYLVANIA. By ¥. Harris Reed. 374 Tue Terns oF Muskecet IsLanp, MassacHuseTts. Part III. By George H. Mackay. : 383 CritTicAL Notes ON THE GENUS Aurifarus. By Harry C. Oberholser. . ; ; ; ; 390 DIRECTIVE COLORATION OF Birps. By Ernest Seton Thompson. (PlateIV.) . : : : 395 New RAcE OF SPINUS TRISTIS FROM THE Paciric Coast. By Joseph Grinnell. A . ; 397 THE SITKAN KINGLET. By William Palmer. 3 : : ; : : ~ - 5 399 GENERAL NOTES. — Early notice of Gavia adams?, 402; The Least Tern Breeding on Martha’s Vine- yard Island, Massachusetts, 4o2; The Terns of Penikese —a Correction, 4o2; Capture of the Little Blue Heron in Connecticut, 402; @gvalitzs nivosa in Florida, 402; Buteo albicaudatus in Arizona, 403; Additional Records of the Flammulated Owl (J/egascops flammeola) in Colorado; 403; Nesting of the Short-eared Owl in Southern California, 404; Partnership Nesting of Valley Partridge and Long-tailed Chat, 404; Nesting Habits of Ampidonax insulicola, 405; The White- throated Sparrow Breeding at Hubbardston, Mass., 406; Henslow’s Sparrow in Michigan —a Correction, 406; Nesting of Cardinalis cardinalis at Nyack, N. Y., 406; Notes on the Moult and certain Plumage Phases of Piranga rubra, 406; Purple Martins (Progne subis) Breeding in Electric Arc-light Caps, 407; The ‘Tree Swallow Breeding in Virginia, 408; Rough-winged Swallows (Stelezdopteryx serripennts)in Greene and Ulster Counties, N. Y., 408; Peculiar Nesting of the Maryland Yellow-throat, 408; The Namesof Two Mexican Wrens, 409; Rare Birds in the Vicinity of Philadelphia, 410; Notes on Some Ontario Birds, 410; Rare Birds taken in Toronto and Vicinity, 411; Disgorgement among Song-birds, 412; Disgorgement of Cherry Stones again Noted, 412; Birds’ Tongues in Pictures, 413. Recent LITERATURE. —‘ Citizen Bird,’ 413 ;\ Birds of Maine, 414; ‘Winge on Birds at the Danish Light- houses, 415; Cory’s Shore Birds of North America, 413; Chapman’s ‘ Handbook,’ 4th Edition, 419 ; Hartert on the Podargidz, Caprimulgide and Macropterygid, 419; Mearns on the ‘Ornithological Vocabulary of the Moki Indians’, 420 ; Papers on Economic Ornithology, 420; Whitlock’s Review of Herr Giatke’s Views on the Migration of Birds, 422; Suchetet on Hybrids among Wild Birds, 424 ; Publications Received, 425. CORRESPONDENCE. — The Treatment of ‘ Nomina Nuda,’ 427. Notes anp News.— Meeting of the Fifteenth Congress of the American Ornithologists’ Union, 430 ; Obituary, Sir Edward Newton 431; Memorial to Henry Davis Minot, 431; New Publications, 431; British Museum Collection of Birds, Nests, and Eggs, 432. ‘THE AUK,’ published as the Organ of the AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’ Unron, is edited by Dr. J. A. ALLEN, with the assistance of Mr. F. M. CHAp- MAN. TeErRMs :— $3.00 a year, including postage, strictly in advance. Single num- bers,75 cents. Free to Honorary Members, and to Active and Associate Members of the A.O.U. not in arrears for dues. Subscriptions and Advertisements should be addressed to the publisher, L. S. FOSTER, 33 PINE SrrReEET, NEw York, N. Y. Foreign Subscribers may obtain ‘THe AuK’ through GURNEY AND JACKSON, 1 PATERNOSTER Row, Lonpon. All articles and communications intended for publication, and all books and publications for notice, should be sent to Dr. J. A. ALLEN, AMERICAN MUSEUM oF NATURAL History, CENTRAL PARK, NEW YORK CITY AUTHORS’ SEPARATES. Authors of general articles will receive 25 separates of their articles gratis. Additional copies may be ordered, if desired, but suck orders must always accompany the manuscrift. The prices of separates are as follows: _— Nas af Number of pages of article. eG Covers : : and ey sae 2 | 4 | 8 | 12 | Toss ad. | 32 Title. | 50 $0.50 | $1.00 | $1.50 | $2.00.| $3.00 $4.50 $6.00 $0.50 75 OG | melal'G e715 2.25°| 3.25 | 5.00 6.50 50 Ico O028|| "Ie30 2.00 2.50 | 3-75 | 550 7. Owe 75 6. ye ee WY as aR AG 1 A Wat A ae re fez ae A tee Reem ia ek i ; ai eh 4 Aas atk ire On ake AN aa : Lt 1) _ Sie ~ i i 4 = ; ee a os ee oe a ert = si : =a = es ; - a < bs =a 4 ——- 28s rnc “ = re eS a : . 7 ee LS ae es a eae a ene cae ENS oe ala re roan Age eOtnes ns DEA aana VAAN "A AWAAAAAA pai ANA, “aes A WanhANAAM An A. AAAAAA San A AnAAan. arnne. Meyer ine aneag@@armnmh aaah