Full text of "Aves Hawaiienses : the birds of the Sandwich Islands"

See other formats

Cab eren sic oh ah thek Oh in ee eee (4 Fee DAY eye OMe hel
peers sth hed in 0 ips yacaenbed poe ona eect Te se eae Be wt insure eu ea bee TER? renter
“ paseaangy istiion cone Eee bar, pyar Tommie x: ial
ab se ee sy el i Soa at wea
ey 2 >t om x rig Fens wys Same oO we
’ ‘ roe) Cte A nee LET nl eae He ry ae
inte Sane by Beeviaueecpecemiaes read ar wba Paataaestnes

inchoate Wi)
Thad tr Bet i
Petras haley haters a r Ser ety “lst inncs opsiutebat mare aie S
ieee encarta aeons ene ee ear eet eee eg en eae
arate wise ase atdd lteter reer Sandia aud suis, aie es aenerenor pateatet: i ee
aba at eae hetieseratahy met ed ea Uncedbre ees eas a puawai, iw “ ne 1 The tebe,
Dip atrtoas toe a cauatioatne reas eatery sea heey ta Powers
Sr ern iy to faba’ Pea nber aes ue : aie ah reed Haw ov wey Bae oe on eat i
ieee tea vite siraraty sis ace ldge stm a Mier oats Mab ant ar "\ cores sn edad Sete
Spa feee smell wectrnu toto Meath hance SCRE a SSF AT Wa Aiea RN =
ira waamiusesauye wera eee ar nen Spcpiat eatarele naa a pret en oot ae e tnt Siete
Pees Pncnetteecetds tree Sasrta Seahieareansernesra iS tnpn weer ea rnaN eee esate es
we : st “te a: aye any tar Slane an ae a ed SO Ty Hh Wh cesta Pel sha ah 3 Mos " i Aco wm diay Teieey le wey ar St
eae epee ae rere okey nasty crete ae ae Ee Ee eR EIS
Racetee want racers Ria eis Sea Se MN mate Sac 6 on eer anes hae targa abnemahy : iets ote hie ry Asaarbansie PR escei aaeeat o
BS a Brier ates Ty Coote oye : ys ae wed Scans pect neat Seen estes may cl i Sie aceneen semen Ze aa s ir Peer tyne a
: Ny - ear wll, tatoos ames. lo wines rh lhotbpeedkeeet a ee my rep alae lg ea a ie tate ate im SSAA Taran ~e
Es bef earns et ar eh ey aa aigeage eal A a a ahh ae
Law erga wee eeooronminer yeaah LaSiene reteset:
"5 Oe, Gi Bik teldoab ov

at se 8 0s ate aes ”
: Seinen elena tamed orient eat ene eet ceapabe eas
or ee ay es Tues aa ee er Tr Powe eo | ae re ab, “~ . rere phew
be ee y SNS p naam Ged wom 0 8 nS Ppl w ae. tha atnhost, to lg Raps re at oe meee Siete esac
Parad me renean hare eee asa a Seated een aa il eS Soe
Abavske ly Lusiicemnvsceietee yD 2 We ah aed eae -ah Ye atic eri - y
' rat serpete eure genet at ; ie a
eine Sys en cap) ns eee oye wa
100 Fee Pa PT ae 8b ab ab gta rey LEAL DU OLY dey oe aa irene) ave
ete Sh earns tenner ste Sanbneucay aah ite hn oe inant iNeyon igen : oy
are Dae loner eran cee al aa gare ;
a ten eae NG hee Pee eV ere wetpeana ny a met
es Ay yet Woo BI Imre Mak te Sane Maan a eee eas Bd macnn
Sih ninutas, See Vaan gn aoe aa ediecber een arenes ie eacereeee “i
y 5 een a So eariite Paha eta aan oe ete ry .
fase vee day uae anata ans ed tonnes naaaantea mates keegan eee ee
sent Saige aie ar wamypaor beeen tn aa Se sate Se
a Ri koe rnd lens 3 rel ae FRY eth ke Half Lo.
ts ry W253 4h kmmaras trast a eras te ev
oS reasoner ect eave es Saten a vee ite HEV mince)

aw
Sb 0A he eA
ine Ni andete ed

=iF
2

ea erererir
a f Dy rvyhenits eh caer Lath nal tn er ert
mn: iran oar 7 res tes aA a Lind PADS ev toe Y ae ennidat
fa r my Ve sow rare ale 3s ayes ome ey ea SES ins os any et sh Dee TS x ae a eoatee ahah eae eae a 2 cn
z «i . nl Ys . jae . 3 Ea Atty Shale re -S ae 4 NAAT! ae
ef peat zresyreray ee nar aarti es of S “ SNe dl aah Wee eee ee nL ATY chen lh We toot ee
oe eens AR ae coy eee p chee n Sura poe Cn neering es as . i oye i : pee eainteinemasytes enero Syiathimeretenuenep aaa ta nares seo EN Sanwa
s = = - We sabyjaanancect apteeetet =
o thet hohe E>, 5 urn) hcg aimibe’ | dada
: “ ince oe Me yr saw draco ietncnenaiey ete ibe Laden Ka MAY apa

s Eo
% Pil eraser ibgrdn Pore sees pray chew ome ta
Boor ee oe Sh anaes Sarco hae Sonera R - * se aie ne
Nea in nn eT NA A ue Mtetec ins eames eae

yi - « ree
” gett . +e
Shae r noth eek ia i tn et ntl all BRS waibiine BUSey tee Sls insane Soin bitulr einer 9 nm
Se Rone celina ae aida Write aster seaiacthen eee
Se =

- = aj

—
enn

aS aa

ee
sew

es + « “
aly -
a ee ee
roreinss
“ huh +. WW
w are aid
SS a LE pi aera a
AA Aen aR a ts +
te eereaiaty” aa a a ae ee as
bee
pe
€
se
“z4

AC soe>
Wits
ph

pte

.
ad

2
fe
hs

aie

Se Q
vy fo 1090.0

S
eh

o ft

NY,

Iq vO02

(oan yy

VIN» 6
NWHIIN

SLLDPOULS!

* VOHAT

b= vautin Af
e > ELOBVUIBMBY

‘FY IV MVOIVE

AIMV1OOHV>

“4a 000°0L

02 dL 0 L
‘SOTA FO 8TRBOS

‘SCNV1SI

NVIIVMVH SHL 40 dvW
|

\)
y
Nv

pve OM Suk
OpDUDUD AA we m

nnyouUNng

NHVO c
pe ai

a yt
Val
et
sé Ay
(\e ee

oa HAWALIENSES:

THE BIRDS

OF THE

SANDWICH ISLANDS.

BY
SCOniea. WILSON; F.2.5,, FR.G.S.;

ASSISTED BY

Pema) VY AN'S, NA., FAs,

: IO ING DL OENS;
R. H. PORTER, 7 PRINCES STREET, CAVENDISH SQUARE, W.
1890-99.

ALERE § FLAMMAM.

PRINTED BY TAYLOR AND FRANCIS,

RED LION COURT, FLEET STREET,

ince
Beira et he

g QL

Cry
PAS OOS?
/&GO

SCWH CEE

PROFESSOR NEWTON,

WHO FIRST SUGGESTED MY EXPEDITION TO THE ISLANDS,
AND SUBSEQUENTLY ASSISTED ME IN THE KINDEST POSSIBLE WAY
TO LAY THE RESULTS BEFORE MY READERS
IN THEIR PRESENT FORM.

~~}
TITLEPAGE 5 5 A
DEDICATION . . 5 " 6b
CoNTENTS . .. Boe a) eae nes 6
List oF PLATES 5
PREFACE
INTRODUCTION : . ,
TABLE OF DISTRIBUTION OF PASSHRES . .. .
List oF ADDITIONAL SPECIES : ‘ Brak
ERRATA AND ADDENDA a :
Genera and Species *. Page
CoRVUS TROPICUS . >... 1
DREPANIS PACIFICA .. . Sf sees 3
DREPANIS FUNEREA . . 5 F ‘ 7
VESTIARIA COCCINFA .. . : 9
IPNGNGNREN MOE 5 4 6 . 15
HIMATIONE SANGUINEA ; 19
CIRIDOPS ANNA eee § i 5 23
( HIMATIONE STEJNEGERI . . ... . 25
HimationE cutoris, incl. H. cHLoripoiDEy } 27
(CHLORODREPANIS) < and H. KALAANA .
A
ISHOTARTOND Wi 5 56 5 6 « 6 4 29
\HIMATIONE WILSONI . ..... . 31
(RorHsoHILpIA) HIMATIONE PARVA. . . .... - 33
VIRIDONIA SAGITTIROSTRIS A . 35
OREOMYZA BAIRDI . .. . E i oT
( Loxors FLAMMEA . 39
| JEDIMOATIONIN WDWHONT 5 6 6 5 0 5 6 6 6 41
(Onzomyza) < HIMATIONH MACULATA . ....... 43
IETNUATIONT WOMAN 64 5 6 5 5 6 4 0o 45
\ HimavTIonE MANA . 47

* For changes of nomenclature see Introduetion.

CON LEN TES

Date of
Publication.

Jan. 1893.
Sept. 1891.
Apr. 1894.
Dec. 1890.
Apr. 1894.
Sept. 1891.
Jan. 1893.
May 1892.

July 1896.

Pb)

May 1892.
June 1899.
Sept.1891.
Dec. 1890.
July 1896.
June 1899.
May 1892.
Jan. 1893.

i 0 CONTENTS.

Genera and Species*.
Loxops COccCINEA
WWOMOPSURUPA- t;. 4. 20%, oo ieee a es aun
Loxors aUREA, vice HIMATIONE AUREA, cancelled
CHRYSOMITRIDOPS CHRULEIROSTRIS .
HEMIGNATHUS PROCERUS .
HEMIGNATHUS LICHTENSLEINI
HEMIGNATHUS OBSCURUS
HEMIGNATHUS LANAIENSIS : ;
( HEMIGNATHUS LUCIDUS .
| FIEMIGNATHUS OLIVACEUS .
(HETERORHYNCHUS) <
| HEMIGNATHUS AFFINIS .
| HEMIGNATHUS HANAPEPE
PSEUDONESTOR XANITHOPHRYS
PSITTACIROSTRA PSITTACHA
LOXio0ipES BAILLEUL
INEOMACMNENSH) IGNORE 5 5 56 6 6 o 5 0 © 0 4
RHODACANTHIS FLAVICEPS
CHLORIDOPS KONA
ACRULOCERCUS BRACCATUS
ACRULOCERCUS APICALIS
ACRULOCERCUS NOBILIS
ACRULOCERCUS BISHOPI
CHAETOPTILA ANGUSTIPLUMA ... .
PHAORNIS MYIADESTINA
PH#ORNIS LANAIBNSIS
PH#ORNIS OBSCURA
PH#ORNIS PALMERI
CHASIEMPIS SANDVICENSIS
CHASIEMPIS GAYI
CHASIEMPTS SCLATERI
ASIO ACCIPITRINUS .
STERNA FULIGINOSA . . .
STERNA LUNATA .
ANOUS STOLIDUS
ANOUS HAWAIIENSIS
GYGIS ALBA
NUMENIUS TAHITIENSIS
TOTANUS INCANUS
CALIDRIS ARENARIA .
HIIMANTOPUS KNUDSENI
STREPSILAS INTERPRES .
CHARADRIUS FULYUS

ARTA ANTas i oA Be A ee Wy Bod ey tg

(GUAT AEN DARE SANID VACENSISS © =. 3. 0 MuuNeGNl en Scale cree
AFSIENTNG IA AMEE G)ACTUATD AVIVA SN Dat aa otn re) ee

PMNNMEAES ANDY IOUNSIS! (0 ct ac ee 8 ee on es

Page

165
171
175

* For changes of nomenclature see Introduction.

Date of
Publication.

Dec. 1890.
July 1896.
Dec. 1890.
May 1892.
Apr. 1894.
May 1892.
June 1899.
Apr. 1894.
May 1892.
July 1896.
May 1892.
July 1896.
Sept.1891.
Dec. 1890.
Apr. 1894.
June 1899.
Jan. 1893.
Dec. 1890.
Apr. 1894.
Dec. 1890.
Apr. 1894.
Sept. 1891.

Dec. 1890.
July 1896.

Sept. 1891.
June 1899,

May 1892,

Jan. 1893.
May 1892.

Jan. 18938.

Apr. 1894.
June 1899.

CONTENTS. ili ¢

Date of
Genera and Species*. j Page Part Publication.
PENNULA WILSONI 176 VIl. June 1899.
BuUrEO SOLITARIUS 179 pile Sept. 1891.
Circus HUDSONIUS 185 ‘ 3
BERNICLA SANDVICENSIS 187 IAW Jan. 1893.
ANAS WYVILLIANA 191 6 »
DAFILA ACUTA 193 5) ”
SPATULA CLYPEATA . 195 % ”
PLEGADIS GUARAUNA 197 valle June 1899.
ARDEA SACRA . 199 4, 5
NYCTICORAX GRISEUS 201 A 6s
FREGATA AQUILA 203 =
IDA AMONGeTINEUHIRUSUMEEEM ew ws 205 53 3
PEOORONSIRUBEMOMUDAUNEE NE Goh Gel oy 8s 6 oe ee 207 55 5
OCEANODROMA CRYPIOLEUCURA . 209 ave Jan. 1893.
BULWERIA ANJINHO 211 VII. June 1899.
CHISTRDAMAG PHOPYGIANN 0 6 6 en 213 Vv. Apr. 1894.
PUFFINUS CUNBATUS 215 GV Jan. 1898.
DIOMEDEA IMMUTABILIS 217 Wall, June 1899.
* For changes of nomenclature see Introduction.
REMARKS ON THE STRUCTURE OF CDRTAIN HAWAIIAN BIRDS, WITH REFERENCE TO THDIR
Systematic Posrrion, By Hans Gapow, M.A., Pu.D.
Page
Pam i, 95° 6) ASSES Rae een oer 219-241
Paimm IL: 5 “So (6 SUS eonecs ie is eC eo ON oa Saat 243-249
Dolo

INDEX

26 LOXOPS AURBA and L. RUFA.

ile

isk OF PAA TES:

Mar or rap Hawatan I[snanps.
CoRVUS TROPICUS.
DREPANIS PACIFICA.
DREPANIS FUNEREA.
VESTIARIA CoccINEA. (Two Plates.)

Nest of VESTIARIA COCCINDA.

PALMERIA DOLII.

HIMATIONE SANGUINEA.

Nests of Himationr sangurnna and H. vineEns.
Eggs of Himarions, sp., and CaasruMris, sp.
CIRIDOPS ANNA.

HIMATIONE STRINEGERI.

HIMATIOND CHLORIS.

HIMATIONE VIRENS.

HIIMATIONE WILSON.

HIMATIONE PARVA.

VIRIDONIA SAGITTIROSTRIS.

OREOMYZA BAIRDI,

Loxors coccrnna and L, FLAMMBA.
HIMATIONE NEWTONI.

HIMATIONE MACULATA,

HiIMATIONE MONTANA.

HIMATIONE MANA.

(Iwo Plates.)
CHRYSOMITRIDOPS CHRULEIROSTRIB.
HEMIGNATHUS PROCERUS,

HEMIGNATHUS LICHTENSTHINI.

HEMIGNATHUS OBSCURUS.

HEMIGNATHUS LUCIDUS.

HEMIGNATHUS OLIVACEUS.

HEMIGNATHUS AFFINIS.

HEMIGNATHUS HANAPEPE,

PsEUDONESTOR XANTHOPHRYS,

PSITTACIROSTRA PSITTACEA. 1 ¢
LOXI0IDES BAILLEUI. ey
RHODACANTHIS PALMERI. 74/
CHLORIDOPS KONA. 39
ACRULOCERCUS BRACCATUS. ¢
ACRULOCERCUS APICALIS. “
ACRULOCERCUS NOBILIS.
ACRULOCERCUS BISHOPI. %?

CHETOPTILA ANGUSTIPLUMA. “4:

PHEORNIS MYIADESTINA and P. LANAIENSIS, Y &

PH#HORNIS OBSCURA. i.
PHHORNIS PALMBRI. ¥
CHASIEMPIS SANDVICENSIS. ~
Nest of CHASIEMPIS SANDVICENSIS.
CHASIEMPIS GAYI. ie
CHASIBMPIS SCLATHRI. :
ANOUS HAWAIIENSIS.

NUMENIUS TAHITIENSIS. s
TOTANUS INCANUS. S
HIMANTOPUS KNUDSENI. “
FULICA ALAT. 6
GALLINULA SANDVICENSIS. 5 %
PENNULA ECAUDATA, SE
PENNULA SANDVICENSIS.

PENNULA WIiLSONI. 20
Bureo sourrarius. (Three Plates.) 6', 62, 6?
BERNICLA SANDVICENSIS. ©
ANAS WYVILLIANA.

OcHANODROMA CRYPTOLEUCURA. 6 6
CESTRELATA PHEOPYGIA. 6 4
PUFFINUS CUNEATUS. é&

ANATOMICAL STRUCTURE OF CERTAIN Hawatian
Birps. (Three Plates.)

fa]

PREFACE.

Now that this difficult and prolonged task has come to an end, I am glad to have the
opportunity of putting on record my sincere thanks to all my kind friends in the
Hawaiian Islands for the assistance that they have given me in various ways during
my collecting-trips in the different island districts. Unfortunately, since the occasion
of my first visit in 1887-88, some of them have died. His Majesty King Kalakaua is
no more—a talented man and the author of several valuable works, who took the
greatest interest in my researches and gave me (through his Chamberlain, the Hon.
C. P. Jankea) letters to several prominent natives in Hawaii. Mr. H. N. Greenwell
and Mr. Frank Spencer, of the same island, have also died, both of whom were residents
of over 40 years standing and rendered me most valuable aid. As regards Oahu,
a most valued friend has been lost to Honolulu in the person of the late Judge R. F.
Bickerton, a son-in-law of Mr. Spencer’s; while Mr. Jesse Morehead is no more to be
seen on Lanai, and the news has just reached me of the sudden death on Maui of
Mr. Randal von Tempsky, by whom I was entertained not only on that island but also

on the adjacent and seldom visited one of Kahoolawe.

To the Hon. C. R. Bishop, who has, since the occasion of my first visit, taken up his
residence in San Francisco, but whose princely gifts to Honolulu are to be seen in the
Bishop Museum and Schools, and who has taken the greatest interest in the researches
of my friend Mr. R. C. L. Perkins, I must express my gratitude for many acts of
kindness. To Mrs. Francis Sinclair—a member of the family of that name in Niihau
and Kauai, who have been kindness itself to me—herself well known by reason of her

beautifully illustrated book ‘The Flora of the Hawaiian Islands’--I must tender my
b

Vi PREFACE.

sincerest thanks for having allowed my artist, Mr. Frohawk, in many instances to make
use of portions of the plates in that work as backgrounds, thereby enabling me to

reproduce the indigenous trees and plants at the same time as the birds.

To enumerate by name all those from whom I met with kindness in the islands
would be a well-nigh endless task; but I must refer, in conclusion, to a few friends
in England whose untiring assistance has been of the most valuable description: to
Professor Newton (to whom I have the very great pleasure of dedicating this work),
to the Hon. Walter Rothschild, to Dr. Hans Gadow, to the late Mr. Osbert Salvin,
and to Mr. R. C. L, Perkins.

S. B. WILSON.

Heatherbank, Weybridge,
May 19th, 1899.

INTRODUCTION.

So long as the English tongue is spoken by Britons, and so long as they hold in
honour the deeds by which the maritime glory of this country was established, so long
will the name of the SanpwicH IsLanps, almost the last discovery of the great English
navigator, remain a household word. The story of the death of Captain James Coox—
the discoverer whose character secured for him during a fierce war immunity from the
“ancient enemy ” of England—has been for more than a century part of the history of
this country, and thousands of English boys and girls have heard with the deepest
emotion how that great chief was stricken down in a miserable quarrel on the shore of
the “ Island of Owhyhee ”—one of the group which he had sighted but little more than
a twelvemonth before, and appropriately named after the English statesman to whose
influence and encouragement the undertaking of this last and fatal voyage was due.
For many years past this name has been set aside by their inhabitants, and the
designation of the “ Hawaiian Islands” has been substituted; but that bestowed by
Cook—the Sandwich Islands—can never be erased from English memories.

The group lies in the North Pacific, extending approximately from the 155th to
the 161st degree of W. longitude and from the 19th to the 23rd degree of N. latitude,
and the several islands, reckoning from the north-west, are Niihau (Oneehow), Kauai
(Atooi), Oahu, Molokai, Lanai, Maui, Kahoolawe, and Hawaii. The last-named is
divided into eight districts, namely, North Kohala, South Kohala, Hamakua, North
Kona, South Kona, Hilo, Kau, and Puna; Oahu contains five—Honolulu, Ewa (with
Waianao), Waialua, Koolauloa, and Koolaupoko; Maui four—Lahaina, Wailuku,
Hana, and Makawao; Kauai four—Waimea, Lihue and Koloa, Kawaihau, and Hanalei.
With the exception of Kahoolawe, which is almost entirely flat, all of the above are
more or less mountainous, though in parts at least of every member of the group
stretches of level beach lie around the elevated central area. Lehua, Kaula, and
Molokini are adjacent rocky islets, bare and uninteresting, while there are a few
others that are still smaller. On the east of Hawaii the cliffs attain a height of some
1600 feet, on the north-east of Oahu they rise to about 2000, while in some parts of
Windward Molokai they are said to be as much as 4000, and descend as sheer
precipices to the ocean.

The mountains were in olden times densely clothed with tropical vegetation and

trees of various kinds, and such is still the case to a considerable extent in most of the
62

vill INTRODUCTION,

islands; though in certain districts, especially of Lanai and Oahu, the primeval woods
have been completely destroyed by the agency of animals or man, Goats are the chief
offenders in Lanai, deer (introduced of course) in Molokai, and cattle in Hawaii, while
in the last-named the ground is being extensively cleared to make room for coffee-
plantations. At the present day there is no forest on Niihau or Kahoolawe, nor are
there any resident land-birds on either; but that the former was at one time covered
with trees, or at least bush, is indubitable, since the large land-mollusks of the genus
Carelia, which are found there in a sub-fossil condition, can only exist in damp
woodlands.

Besides the lowland zones, well-defined upper and lower forest-zones' may be
distinguished, which are characterized by the presence or comparative abundance of
special kinds of trees: the former, which includes all the heights from 3000 feet
upwards, being the chief natural habitat of the Koa (Acacia koa), the Mamdne (Sophora
chrysophytla), the Sandal-wood (Santalwm album), the Naio or Bastard Sandal-wood
(Myoporum santalinum), and the Lobeliacew generally ; the lower, which extends from
about 1100 to 3000 feet, furnishing Pandanus odoratissimus, the Kukui (Aleurites
triloba), the parasitic Leie (freycinetia arborea), and above all the Ohia (Metrosideros
polymorpha), though the two last-named are also met with on the higher slopes in a
dwarfish form. The summit of Kauai consists of an extensive plateau, boggy and
thickly wooded ; a like state of things occurs on the mountains of western Maui and
on the Kohala range in northern Hawaii; while Molokai and Lanai shew signs of
having formerly been similar in this respect, though in these two cases the ground has
now become comparatively dry. ‘Towards the coast the trees ordinarily diminish in
size, while nearer to the actual beach the prickly pear now covers considerable areas
in several districts. The heights of the zones, of course, vary somewhat in different
places.

As will be seen in the description of the various species of birds, many of them are
more or less restricted to the forests at particular altitudes; but no safe deductions

1 A more precise account of the zones may be found in the ‘Flora of Hawaii’ of Hillebrand. That
author distinguishes :—
1. A Lowland Zone, exhibiting Pandanus, Gossypium, and other plants in abundance.
2, A Lower Forest Zone, extending up to 1000 or 2000 feet. This is of a tropical nature, with rather open
woods. Aleuritcs is the characteristic tree, and Zingiber zerumbet covers the ground. Pandanus
odoratissimus reaches it, but goes no higher ; Freycinetia occurs here and upwards.

3. A Middle Forest Zone, attaining a height of 5000 or 6000 feet, and possessing many trees and shrubs
common to the regions above and below it. It lies within the region of clouds, and is especially

luxuriant in vegetation both as regards trees and jungle. The most representative forms are Dodonea
viscosa (the Alii), Pelea sp. (the Alani), Cheirodendron gaudichaudia (the Olapa), Acacia koa, and
Metrosideros polymorpha. ‘The arborescent Lobeliacee are there very fine, but solitary.

4, An Upper Forest Zone, extending up to 8000 or 9000 feet, with moderately heavy soil, covered with
liverworts, mosses, and sedges. It is characterized by stunted trees of Sophora, Myoporum, and so forth,
with shrubby Composite and the Ohelo (Vaccinium reticulatum).

5. Above the forests are found creeping forms of Metrosideros, Cyathodes, and the like.

INTRODUCTION. IX

can be made from observations of this description, since a large number of forms follow
their food, as the fruits ripen successively from the lower to the higher elevations.
Nor must it be assumed as certain that the regrettable extinction of certain of the rarer
woodland birds is due to the absence of the trees which supply a large part of their
diet; for other causes have undoubtedly contributed to their loss, and it has been well
remarked that, for all we know to the contrary, the destruction of some particular
insect might result in the simultaneous disappearance of one or more members of the
avifauna. Nevertheless to many species forests would seem to be a necessity, for
though Vestiaria coccinea and Himatione sanguinea are found on Niihau, when blown
across by strong winds from Kauai, they perish there in a very short time.

A characteristic feature of the scenery of the islands is the constant occurrence of
deep wooded valleys or gorges, descending from the knife-edged ridges above to the
comparatively level districts below, these glens branching again laterally into other
subordinate ravines: and herein to the ornithological collector lies one of his chief
difficulties ; for many specimens, when shot, fall among the dense scrub or fern with
which the banks are clothed, and are then, as will easily be understood by those
conversant with such localities, practically irretrievable, unless by foresight or an unusual
stroke of luck a good dog is at hand to secure them.

The trees in these islands average from 60 to 100 feet at most, and do not
attain to that stupendous height of which we read in still more tropical climates,
where the feathered tribes occupy, as it were, a level of their own far above
that of man; nevertheless the nests, save of a few of the commoner species, are
exceptionally difficult to procure, owing to the fact of their being usually built at the
very extremity of the slenderest branches, whether they be horizontal or vertical.
Strange though it may seem after the efforts of so many collectors, the only eggs
absolutely identified at present are those of Chasiempis sandvicensis and Himatione
virens. ‘The favourite sites for nidification are the Koa and the Ohia trees.

The equable climate and convenient geographical position of the islands lend
themselves naturally to facilities for trade and commerce. The average temperature
at the sea-level is 75° F., and there is no rainy season, though snow lies for at least two
months on all the higher peaks. Roughly speaking, the group lies about 2100 miles
from San Francisco, 8810 miles from Auckland in New Zealand, and 3440 miles from
Yokohama ; so that its central position bestows upon it a great advantage as compared
with many other countries.

The visible mountain-peaks, moreover, being but the projecting summits of a vast
and lofty submarine chain, the ocean surrounding them is asa matter of course of
great depth, and consequently little difficulty is experienced in landing at any sheltered
spot ; indeed from the Sandwich Islands to Japan the soundings only vary from 2500
to 3100 fathoms. As might be expected, however, disembarkation is often dangerous
on the windward coasts, where the trade-wind blows for some nine months in the year;
but this state of things is to a considerable extent remedied by the proximity of the
islands to one another, as they are in certain cases only separated by comparatively

x INTRODUCTION,

narrow channels. In ascending the hills, the trade-wind is said to be no longer felt
when an altitude of from 8009 to 10,000 feet is reached, a fact particularly observable
in the uplands of Kona; but it causes almost perpetual wet weather at the higher
elevations on the windward sides.

The whole archipelago consists of volcanic rocks of a basaltic nature’, with a few
remnants of raised sea-beaches composed of consolidated coral sands of a white colour,
especially noticeable on Hawaii; in consequence of this the traveller finds, along with
the thin layer of cultivated soil in various parts, large “flows” or stretches of hard
bare lava, not uncommonly extending to the shore, though more frequently in evidence
at the higher levels. Deep rich soils adapted to the growth of the sugar-cane form
some fortieth part of the whole area, and occur chiefly where there is dense forest, or
where such has been the case in former times; while the valleys provide a heavy clay,
suitable for the cultivation of rice and taro (Arum esculentum). Coral-reefs environ the
islands to a great extent, and narrow strips of coral limestone are to be met with along
some parts of the coasts; the craters of Mauna Loa and Kilauea, in Hawaii, are still
the outlets of active volcanoes, and others, such as Haleakala in Maui, or Hualalai in
Hawaii, are but recently extinct.

Taro is the staple food of the natives; but the chief industry is the cultivation
of the sugar-cane, which is usually raised on the windward side of the mountains,
in spots remarkable for their general humidity, and, at the greater elevations, for
their heavy rainfall. On the leeward side this plant can only be grown by the aid
of irrigation, for which the water is obtained from the hills or from wells sunk
for the purpose. The practice has been greatly extended of late years in Oahu and
Kauai. Coffee, the introduction of which has failed in Kauai, has, on the contrary,
succeeded in Hawaii, and may be considered to occupy the second place among the
exports. Oranges, lemons, limes, pine-apples, bananas, peaches, and other tropical or
subtropical fruits are chiefly used for home consumption ; a few cocoanuts are to be
found in places; sweet potatoes are a well-known product; while cotton, which has
never been largely grown, is now wholly abandoned. Many districts lend themselves
naturally to the cultivation of rice, that necessity of life to the Chinese and Japanese,
of whom there are vast numbers in the archipelago.

These islands, deeply interesting as they always must be to those engaged in the
study of ‘‘ Geographical Distribution,” have unfortunately only been appraised at their
true worth from a comparatively recent period. ‘This is the more remarkable since not
only does their avifauna contain many forms as extraordinary and highly specialized as
are to be found in any quarter of the globe, but, unlike other more isolated and
inaccessible regions, their shores have from time to time been visited by travellers who
should have served to keep alive the expectation of new discoveries. It must, however,
be admitted that the record was for long but a series of disappointments due to
neglected opportunities, while the meagreness of the information obtained and the

* The assistance afforded to the authors in this connexion by Capt. C. E. Dutton’s work on ‘ Hawaiian
Volcanoes’ (Washington, {884) must be gratefully acknowledged.’

INTRODUCTION. Xi

entire absence of any correct list of species in the accounts of the older writers are
much to be deplored. By the early voyagers the importance of exact information was
unfortunately little appreciated.

The following account of the discovery of the islands, and of their visitors down to
the year 1891, is from the pen of Professor Newton, who wrote in ‘ Nature’? after the
appearance of the second part of the present work, and has now most kindly allowed the
authors not only to utilize the greater part as originally published, but has, moreover,
furnished several further particulars, where information of a later date made modifica-
tions or additions desirable :—

‘The Sandwich Isles have not been fortunate in their Natural Historians, though
perhaps no worse off in this respect than many another group ‘lying in dark purple
spheres of sea.’ Discovered in 1778 by Cook, during the last of his celebrated
voyages, his ships communicated with one of the more western islands—Atooi, as
its name sounded to him and his companions, but since, and doubtless more correctly,
written, Kauai. The admiration of the visitors was excited by the cloaks and helmets
of the natives, beautifully bedecked with feathers, the more or less moth-eaten remains
of which may yet be seen in many a museum; and the scarlet birds which furnished
the most brilliant adornment of these ingenious works of art were duly mentioned by
Cook in his journal as published. After less than a fortnight’s stay, in the course of
which the existence of five islands was made out, his ships stood off to the northward to
prosecute their voyage of discovery. Towards the end of the year they returned, and Cook,
having had experience of the hospitable treatment of the islanders, designed to make
bis winter-quarters in the Sandwich Isles, as he had named them, after the then
First Lord of the Admiralty; but, keeping more to windward, the first land he made
was the most eastern of the group, one that he had not even seen on his first visit.
This was the historic Owhyhee—nowadays written Hawaii—which, being the largest
of them, and that which eventually produced the warrior-king and statesman who
eventually subdued all the rest, has given its official name to the Archipelago.

“Though Owhyhee was sighted on November 29, Cook’s course along its eastern and
southern coast was so deliberate that it was not till January 17, 1779, that he found a
safe anchorage, and that in Kealeakakua Bay, on its western side. What passed there
during the next three weeks need not be here recorded ; but those who know how to
read his narrative and the accounts since divulged from native sources will admit that
it throws an important and yet most lurid light on the history of superstition. To the
unprejudiced it must be doubtful whether even now the whole truth is, or ever can be,
known. ‘The ships sailed on February 4; but in making her way to the northward
the ‘ Resolution’ sprung her mainmast, and within a week returned to her old
anchorage. Three days later occurred the terrible tragedy which deprived the world
of one of its greatest seamen.

“A week after Cook’s death the ships sailed to the westward, touching at some of

1 Vol. xiv. pp. 465 et segq. (March 17th, 1892).

xil INTRODUCTION.

the intermediate islands—Mowee (Maui), Lanai, and Morotai (Molokai)—making once
more for Atooi (Kauai) and Oneehow (Niihau), the last famous for its yams. Then,
on March 15, they bore away again to the northward and did not return.

“Now the object of giving here these details is to shew that the natural-history
specimens obtained by Cook’s ships were procured only on the islands of Hawaii,
Kauai, and Niihau. This is the more needful because the first descriptions of any
of the birds of the Sandwich Isles were given, with two exceptions, by Latham in
his ‘General Synopsis of Birds,’ published in 1781-85, and most of the specimens
so described no longer exist. Some were in the British Museum or the collection of
Sir Joseph Banks, afterwards transferred thereto; the rest were in the Leverian
Museum. In the former, as is well known, not one remains; but fortunately, at
the breaking up of the last in 1806, a few were bought by the then Lord Stanley, who
(dying in 1851, as thirteenth Earl of Derby and President of the Zoological Society)
bequeathed his collection to the town of Liverpool, and there, thanks to the care
that has been taken of them, they still exist in fair condition. A few more were
bought for the private collection of the then Emperor of Austria, and are still
carefully preserved in the Museum of Vienna1. Of several of the species it is not
known that any other specimens were brought to Europe until some three years
ago. On both of Cook’s previous voyages qualified naturalists had been sent; but
the arrangements for publishing their discoveries were so imperfect that little
credit followed to anyone concerned. On this, his third and last voyage, there
was no expert, though Mr. William Ellis, who in an irregularly published narrative
calls himself ‘ Assistant Surgeon to both vessels, was somewhat of a draughtsman,
and made a series of sketches, which, becoming the property of Banks, subsequently
passed to the British Museum. ‘The commoner species of Sandwich-Island birds are
generally recognizable, but others are so unhappily limned that even the word
caricature (which always implies some likeness) seems too strong to apply to them.
Nevertheless Mr. G. R. Gray adventured to determine all of them.

“ More than a quarter of a century passed before any further progress was made in the
knowledge df the zoology of the Sandwich Isles, though they were visited by numerous
ships, and in 1794 were ceded to Britain under Vancouver. In 1814 an attempt was made
to seize them for Russia; and Kotzebue, whose voyage has so much scientific interest,
was there in 1816-17, but the accomplished naturalists, Chamisso and Eschscholtz, who
were with him, took little heed of the fauna of the islands ?.

“The year 1822 saw the arrival of the more celebrated William Ellis, whose missionary
labours throughout the Pacific and in Madagascar are so widely known. The Sandwich
Isles had by this time fallen under the sway of the conquering Kamehameha I., whose
son and successor, desirous of seeing Kuropean civilization, arrived in England in 1824
with his wife—both to die of measles within a few weeks. The British Government
determined to send their remains for interment in Honolulu, by that time become the

* See Von Pelzeln, ‘ Ibis,’ 1873, pp. 14-54; 1874, p. 462.
* «The same negative results attended his second visit in 1824-25,”

INTRODUCTION. xlil

capital of the islands; and accordingly H.M.S. ‘ Blonde,’ commanded by George Anson
seventh Lord Byron (first cousin and successor to the poet), was commissioned to
convey the dismal freight. ‘The duty was performed, and the islands again were ceded
to the British Crown, but again declined. On board the ‘ Blonde’ sailed as chaplain
Mr. Rowland Bloxam, together with his brother Andrew, who was somewhat of
a naturalist; and it was intended that the published account of her voyage should
contain a proper appendix on the natural history of the islands. An ‘ Appendix’
there indeed is, but one utterly unworthy of its reputed author, for the book was
edited by a lady ' who had nothing but a few of his notes to guide her, and though
assisted, as it is stated, by ‘the gentlemen connected with that department in the
British Museum,’ the Appendix is a disgrace to all concerned, since, so far from
advancing the knowledge of the subject, it introduced so much confusion as to mislead
many subsequent writers.”

Professor Newton, as above stated, wrote in 1892; but since that date, thanks to
Mr. A. Roby Bloxam, of Christchurch, New Zealand, son of the naturalist on the
‘Blonde,’ the authors have been allowed access to his father’s original notes, and
find from them that he obtained in the Islands 25 specimens of 9 species of Land-
birds—one of them bearing the MS. name ‘Turdus woahensis.’ 'This is just mentioned
in the ‘ Appendix’ to the ‘ Voyage’ (p. 250) as a variety of ‘ Zurdus sandwichensis’
(by which name Bloxam erroneously designated Pheornis obscura?) found on Oahu,
where no species of the genus has been before or since known to exist, and it
has doubtless been long extinct. Bloxam’s description of it is:—‘ Length 7$ inch.
Upper parts olive-brown, extremities of the feathers much lighter color; tail and
wings brown; bill bristled at the base’; while the corresponding description of
the species from Hawaii, P. obscura, is:—‘ Length 8 inches. Belly light ash ;
back, tail, and wings an ash-brown; bill slender, } inch long, bristled at the base. A
beautiful songster.’

All the specimens obtained by Mr. Andrew Bloxam, properly prepared and labelled,
were placed at the disposal of the Lords of the Admiralty, as shewn by a copy of the
letter he wrote to their Secretary, and probably all were sent, as some certainly were,
to the British Museum; but no other trace of this unique specimen of a vanished
species, which may be properly called Phwornis oahensis, is now forthcoming.

} « Mrs. Maria Graham, as we learn from Dr. Smiles’s ‘Memoir and Correspondence of the late John
Murray’ (London: 1891), vol. i. pp. 319-321, and vol. ii. p. 293. She was the daughter of Rear-Admiral
Dundas, and married, first, Captain Graham, R.N., nephew of James Graham, who wrote the ‘ Birds of
Scotland,’ and, secondly, Mr. (afterwards Sir) Angustus Calleott, R.A., and was the author of several
works.”

2 It is not possible to say with certainty what the ‘Sandwich Thrush’ of Latham (Gen. Syn. i.
p- 89), on which was founded the Turdus sandwichensis of Gmelin (Syst. Nat. i. p. 313), may have been ;
but its length, ‘54 inches’ according to Latham’s description, and its white forehead preclude its being
Pheornis obscura, though Ellis’s unpublished figure (no. 77), on which ‘ Turdus sandwichensis’ is written,
can hardly represent anything else. It seems just possible that the bird described by Latham may have been
Oreomyza bairdi; but the name Turdus sandwichensis has been purposely excluded from our synonymy.

XIV INTRODUCTION.

Professor Newton continues:—‘“‘Some years later another great opportunity was
missed, and this time by the American traveller Townsend, who, after crossing the
Rocky Mountains to the Columbia River, sailed, in company with Nuttall, the well-
known naturalist, for the Sandwich Islands, where they arrived in January 1835, and
stayed nearly three months, visiting Oahu and Kauai. Returning at the end of the
year, Townsend found the Prussian naturalist Deppe at Honolulu, and with him passed
some time in the pursuit of natural history, visiting most of the windward islands
before he left in March 1837’. Among the specimens obtained by Deppe for the
Berlin Museum were some of two species for which Lichtenstein rightly established
anew genus—the singular form Hemignathus—and, as it has since proved, both these
species were new, though he had not unnaturally identified one of them with a species
described by Latham.

“Of Townsend’s collection a considerable part was given to the Academy of Natural
Sciences at Philadelphia’, where it still remains; but he sent several specimens
to Audubon, at that time, I believe, in Edinburgh, and he parted with them to
Carfrae, a dealer there, who sold them to the late Sir William Jardine, at the dispersal
of whose collection I was so fortunate as to secure them—some of them bearing
Townsend’s label—for the Museum of the University. If Townsend had but published
a list of his captures, he would indeed have rendered a very good service; but of course
the value of island-forms, to say nothing of the fact that many of them were threatened
with extirpation by colonization and civilization, had not then been appreciated, if even
entertained, by naturalists.

‘In the year of Townsend’s departure the French frigate ‘ Vénus,’ in the course of
her troublous career under Du Petit-Thouars, arrived in the Sandwich Islands, with two

* As Townsend’s work is not commonly to be met with, the following extracts may be acceptable to the
reader. ‘The first (pp. 207-208) refers to the island of Kauai and to the month of February 1835; the
second (p. 269) to Oahu and to the date of January 15th, 1836 :—

“We made here several long excursions over the hills and through the deep valleys, without much success.
The birds are the same as those we found and collected at Oahu, but are not so numerous. They are
principally creepers ( Certhia) and honey-suckers (Nectarinia) ; feed chiefly upon flowers, and the sweet juice
of the banana, and some species are very abundant. The native boys here have adopted a singular mode of
catching the honey sucking birds. They lay themselves flat upon their backs on the ground, and cover their
whole bodies with bushes, and the campanulate flowers of which the birds are in search. One of these flowers
is then held by the lower portion of the tube between the fingers and the thumb; the little bird inserts his
long, curved bill to the base of the flower, when it is immediately seized by the fingers of the boy, and the
little flutterer disappears beneath the mass of bushes. In this way dozens of beautiful birds are taken, and
they are brought to us living and uninjured.”

“Several days ago Mr. Deppe and myself visited Nuano valley, where we hired a native house, in which we
are now living. Our object has been to procure birds, plants, &c., and we have so far been very successful.
[ have already prepared about eighty birds which I procured here.”

* “In mentioning these facts, I desire to record my deep gratitude to the authorities of both these
museums—Berlin and Philadelphia—for their obliging readiness in allowing me to have some of these

valuable specimens, one of them unique, for examination.”

INTRODUCTION. XV

naturalists, Léclancher and Néboux, on board ; and some years later the atlas of plates
illustrating the zoology of her voyage appeared, but the text was deferred for a long
while, and, indeed, was not completed till 1856.. Herein was figured and described,
though not for the first time, a species of the curious Hemignathus.

‘In the meanwhile the celebrated expedition of Commodore Wilkes took place, and
he, with some of his ships, wintered there. In the course of their six months’ stay, the
naturalists attached, Pickering and Peale, seem to have made large collections; but
nearly all was lost in the wreck of the ‘ Peacock,’ one of the ships of the squadron.
By 1848 Peale had completed his report on the specimens of mammals and birds col-
lected, and it was printed off. A few copies only had been distributed, when the rest
were destroyed by fire. It was by no means a bad performance ; and I cannot under-
stand why the late Mr. Cassin made so many changes in it when he, ten years later,
brought out a new edition of it. Some of them (I speak only of those relating to the
Sandwich Island fauna) were certainly not improvements. However, a distinctly
forward step was made by the Peale-Cassin labours ; and since few can obtain access to
the original work, I may mention that Dr. Hartlaub considerately published an abstract
of it *, just as two years later he did? of the French ‘ Voyage au Pole Sud,’ wherein,
having sorted out the different species observed by various voyagers on the several
Pacific groups, he gave a useful list of those found on each, and thus he assigned to the
Sandwich Isles ¢hirty species of birds, marking two of them as doubtful. One of them
is now known to be rightly included, but the other must be struck out, as well as, for
one reason or another, four more—leaving a total of twenty-five, only sixteen of which
are Land-birds and only fourteen Passeres.

‘Hitherto no list of the birds of the Sandwich Isles had been published, so that
Dr. Hartlaub’s met a great want, though it had of course been possible, since 1814, for
anyone to pick out for himself the species assigned to that group from the general list
compiled by Tiedemann (‘Anatomie und Naturgeschichte der Végel,’ ii. pp. 426-436),
and in like manner, since 1859, from Mr. G. R. Gray’s useful ‘ Catalogue of the Birds
of the Tropical Islands of the Pacific Ocean,’ printed by order of the Trustees of the
British Museum; but the former was obsolete, and the latter, as we now know, very
erroneous *. Mr. Gray’s references shew him to have been as usual a model of accuracy,
but his judgment as an ornithologist was frequently at fault.

“It was therefore with great pleasure that, some time in the winter of 1870-71,
I received a copy of a ‘Synopsis .of the Birds hitherto described from the Hawaiian
Islands, which had been communicated in February 1869 to the Boston Society of
Natural History by Mr. Dole, a resident in those islands, and had been published
in the Society's ‘ Proceedings’ (xii. pp. 294-309); and Mr. Sclater, who I knew

1 « Archiv fiir Naturgeschichte, 1852, Heft i. pp. 93-138.”

* «Journal fiir Ornithologie, 1854, pp. 160-171.”

° “Many of its worst errors are doubtless due to the loss, before mentioned, of the type specimens, which had
been suffered by the Museum long before Mr. G. R. Gray was connected with it. Latham, in 1821, had already
lamented their decay.”

RVi INTRODUCTION,

had long taken an interest in the ornithology of the group, lost no time in noticing
this very important publication (Ibis, 1871, pp. 356-362), adding thereto some
valuable observations. ‘This list has naturally proved a serviceable foundation for
future work. Forty-eight species were included, the author stating that this number
‘probably comprises but little more than half the avifauna of the group.’ That
the list should be free from error was not to be expected, and a revised version
of it, published in the ‘ Hawaiian Almanac and Annual for 1879’ (pp. 41-58),
corrected some of the mistakes; but it was an honest piece of work, doing credit to
its compiler.

“In the meanwhile, however, the historic voyage of H.M.S. ‘Challenger’ had
commenced, and one of the places at which she was to call was the Sandwich Islands.
Of course the main object of her voyage was the exploration of the depths of the sea;
nevertheless, the terrestrial zoology of the countries visited, though forming a very
subordinate part of the original plan, was not to be wholly neglected—nor was it in
this case, for during the three weeks she stayed in Hawaiian waters (July 27th to
August 19th, 1875) her officers availed themselves to some extent of the opportunity
of studying the ornithology of the islands, though it does not appear that they had
received any special instruction in regard to our imperfect knowledge of it. Here,
then, was another great chance lost ; for had those who drew up the directions for the
scientific members of the Expedition taken the trouble to acquaint themselves with the
particular points on which investigation was needed, so as to indicate the lines on which
further research was desirable, no doubt some one of the ‘ Challenger’s’ staff would have
supplied, even in the short time of her stay, some of the missing facts, or at least would
have thrown some light on the subject. As it was, the collection was reported as_
“small’ (twenty-four bird-skins and no specimen in spirit), and ‘containing nothing
absolutely new except a single species of Anas,’ afterwards named A. wyvilliana (Proc.
Zool. Soc. 1878, p. 350). ‘The Jate Prof. Moseley, in his ‘Notes of a Naturalist
on the ‘ Challenger,’’ stated (p. 514) that the last excursion on shore of his colleague,
Von Willemés-Suhm, was at Hilo in Hawaii with a native guide, ‘in pursuit of the
interesting endemic birds,’ and that ‘almost the last notes he wrote were some on
the Sandwich Islands, relating especially to the birds,’ but these notes, which have been
kindly entrusted to me by Sir John Murray, F'.R.S., unfortunately prove to contain no
information of a1y interest—for the writer had evidently never been informed as to the
many points to which his attention might have been profitably directed.”

What next followed may also best be recorded in Prof. Newton’s words :—

“ Having myself felt a good deal of interest in the avifauna of the Sandwich Isles—
which, like that of many other islands throughout the world, was, as I had learnt,
threatened with extirpation, chiefly in consequence of the destruction of the forests—
I could not fail to be disappointed at the meagre results obtained by our people on this
celebrated cruise, when it would have been so easy for them to have done better had
their attention been duly called, and I cast about in several directions to find some

INTRODUCTION, XV1i

suitable person to visit the islands with the view of investigating their ornithology in a
thorough way. My young friend Mr. Scott Barchard Wilson (son of the well-known
Mr. George Wilson, F.R.S.)—of whose taste for natural history I was well assured by
his residence in my own College, by his journey to Portugal with Dr. Gadow, and by
his subsequent sojourn in Switzerland (Ibis, 1887, pp. 130-150)—willingly took up
the enterprise, and left Liverpoo] on February 24th, 1887, for Honolulu, where he
arrived on April 8th, having on his way paid a visit to Washington to confer with
Dr. Stejneger, whose name had already appeared in connexion with the birds of the
Sandwich Isles. Mr. Wilson stayed in the islands until towards the close of the
following year. He brought back such a collection as had never before been made
there; but, rich as it was in some respects, defects became apparent as it was gradually
worked out, anil some of these defects were so grave that, until they were remedied,
no complete list of the avifauna could be formed. However, he had done a great deal
more than anybody before him?: he had ascertained the precise localities of nearly all
the birds hitherto known, and added to them not inconsiderably—fourteen new species
or local forms of Passeres, two of which required generic acknowledgment—all, it
needs not to say, being peculiar to the islands, and mostly to one particular island
only.

« But Mr. Wilson was not content, as so many collectors in foreign countries are, with
preserving only the skins of the birds he procured. He was careful to obtain specimens
in spirit of all the important existing types; and these, when properly subjected
to examination by Dr. Gadow, led to some remarkable results, They are contained in
a dissertation ‘On the Structure of certain Hawaiian Birds, with reference to their
Systematic Position,’ contributed by Dr. Gadow to Mr. Wilson’s work (Part II.). Most
of the land-birds of the Sandwich Islands had been, at one time, thought to belong to the
Meliphagide, or Honey-suckers—a family very characteristic of the Australian region,
and known to be very polymorphic. It was thought to be still more so; and the
surmise had been acted upon, so that some Finch-looking birds, Psittacirostra and
Loxioides, had been supposed to be Honey-suckers in disguise, and classed accordingly.
Dr. Gadow shewed that this supposition was wholly erroneous, and at the date of his
article considered, from the material in his hands, that these last, together with another
form, Chloridops—one of Mr. Wilson’s discoveries—were true Fringillide; while, out
of the whole Hawaiian avifauna, only two genera could be referred to the Meliphagide,
namely, Acrulocercus (Moho of some writers) and Chetoptila, the last being presumably

1 «] have no desire to overlook the services of Mr. Valdemar Knudsen, of Kauai, who sent thence to the
United States National Museum several collections, the most important of which was described by Dr. Stejneger
in the ‘ Proceedings’ of that institution for 1887 (pp. 75-102), the year of Mr. Wilson’s arrival in the islands
The Doctor’s paper is of the exhaustive character to which one is accustomed in all his productions, and has
been of considerable use in working out Mr. Wilson’s collections, while these haye enabled the latter to correct
several mistakes—under the circumstances quite pardonable—made by the former, who subsequently described
in the same ‘ Proceedings’ (xi. pp. 377-386) another collection from the same quarter.”

XViii INTRODUCTION.

extinct. All the other forms which had been - accounted Meliphagine presented
a peculiar structure of tongue forbidding that alliance, or any affinity to the
Prionopide, Dicwide, or Nectariniide, but revealing a_ distinct relationship to
the Cerebide—now known as a family characteristic of the Neotropical Region!
Hereby a beam of light was thrown on the origin and derivation of the ornithic
population of the Sandwich Islands. The distinct inference was that the first stock
of their existing avifauna was received from America, in days when the range of the
Corebide extended further to the northward than it does at present, and that certain
cognates or ancestors of the present Cwrebide colonized the islands, there differentiating
into the modern Drepanidide. The importance of this inference on views that are held
as to the geographical distribution of birds in North America is a subject into which
there is no need here to enter, for that would be a subject foreign to my present
remarks; but I doubt not it will receive due attention from American ornithologists,
whom it most nearly concerns.

“That these colonists, from what I have elsewhere ventured to term a ‘ Columbian ’
fauna—since it cannot literally be called a Neotropical one, and is certainly not ‘Nearctic’
—were the earliest settlers which have left descendants one can hardly doubt, for they
have existed in the Sandwich Islands long enough to undergo a great amount of
change. Subsequently there has been a small infusion of blood from the ‘ Australian
Region.’ I say subsequently, because Dr. Gadow has shewn that this immigration has
undergone comparatively little modification. We have (or had) the two Meliphagine
genera Acrulocercus and Chetoptila—the latter, indeed, beyond anatomical examination,
but shewing no very great external deviation from well-known Australian types; while
the former undoubtedly retains the normal Meliphagine tongue. To these may be
added Chasiempis, a well-marked genus; but, without question, very nearly allied to
the genus Rhzpidura, so widely spread over the Australian Region, and found also in
New Zealand. ‘Thus three genera constitute, so far as 1am able to see, the ‘Australian’
element in the avifauna of the Sandwich Islands—and what are they among so many
others ?1

“More recently than this Australian infusion has supervened an influx of Holarctic
types, and especially of the Mringillide. Whether these have arrived from America or
Asia, I do not pretend to say; but the long chain of islets running to the westward—
one of which produces a remarkable form (Telespiza cantans), the knowledge of which
we also owe to Mr. Wilson (Ibis, 1890, pp. 339-841, pl. ix.)—suggests the possibility
of an Asiatic origin, a possibility confirmed by the consideration that his fine Chloridops
kona may be the magnified descendant of the long-known Chloris kawarahiba, which
has already an enterprising relative, C. hittlitei (Ibis, 1890, p. 101), established in the
Bonin Islands. Still later must have been the appearance on the scene of members of
the genera Corvus and Buteo, both of which are, so far as is yet known, confined to

1 «Tn connexion herewith may be noticed the absence of Parrots, Kingfishers, and Doves—all families that
are very characteristic of an ‘ Australian’ fauna.”

INTRODUCTION, XIX

Hawaii, the most eastern of the islands, and therefore suggest an emigration from the
Nearctic area. ‘These have been settled long enough to assume recognizable specific
characters; but an apparently more modern colonist exists in Asio accipitrinus, the
common Short-eared Owl of Asia, Europe, and North America, which extends its
range over many islands in the Pacific Ocean, so far at least as the Galapagos,
and has found a permanent home in the Sandwich Isles, breeding there, as it
would seem, regularly—as it does in England, when permitted by the gamekeepers.
More than this, there is an indication that the tendency to colonization from the
Holarctic region still continues. Within an hour or two of his leaving the islands,
there was sent to Mr. Wilson a freshly-killed example of Circus hudsonius—the
American Hen-Harrier—a species which he had already ascertained to have before
occurred in the group; but, not being recognized by Judge Dole, it had been endowed
with a new name, and figures in his second list as Accipiter hawaii. The existence in
considerable numbers of a Californian species of Carpodacus is thought, and no
doubt rightly, by Mr. Wilson to be due to human agency, and accordingly I do not
attach any importance to that fact; but there is one very puzzling species, of which
only a few specimens seem to have been preserved, that needs particular attention.
This was described by Judge Dole under the name of ‘ Fringilla anna,’ but, of course,
is no true Pringilla. Mr. Wilson brought home but a single specimen, which he
owed to the kindness of the Hon. C. R. Bishop, it having been formerly in the Mills
Collection, and subsequently established for it a new genus, Ciridops—so named
because its bright coloration recalls the well-known Eméeriza ciris of Linnzus, the
Painted Bunting of authors, or ‘Nonpareil’ of bird-dealers. It is supposed to be
now almost if not quite extinct, but it was truly a native species. It probably belongs
to the fauna which I have above called ‘Columbian’; but I cannot suppose it to have
been so early a settler as the Drepanidide, since it has changed so little.

‘“‘ There remains of land-birds the genus Phwornis, which earlier systematists were
inclined to put among the Flycatchers (Muscicapide). ‘The examples in spirit, placed
by Mr. Wilson at Dr. Gadow’s disposal, have enabled the latter to set aside that view,
and to show that, of all the families to which this genus has been supposed to be
allied, ‘it differs least from the Turdide,’ and he would regard it ‘as a generalized
or rather primitive Thrush’ ”’ 1,

From the summer of 1889 Professor Newton had been urging Mr. Wilson to return
to the Islands and complete their ornithological exploration; for it was obvious that
much remained to do, and what he had done gave promise of still more important
results. Mr. Wilson being then unable to arrange for a second visit, Prof. Newton
brought the subject before the British Association at the Leeds Meeting in September
1890, and obtained the appointment of a Committee, with Prof. (now Sir William)

} « A minute anatomical comparison with the New Zealand Zurnagra would be desirable.”

xX INTRODUCTION.

Flower as Chairman and Dr. David Sharp as Secretary, to investigate the Fauna of the
Islands, the sum of £100 being voted to assist their labours. On this slender bene-
faction a gentleman offered his services to proceed immediately to the Islands as an
ornithological collector, and Prof. Newton was very anxious that they should be
accepted*; but the Committee thought it advisable to obtain further pecuniary help,
especially from the Hawaiian Government, and through the delay entailed in negotia-
tions to this end the grant was allowed to lapse, and thus a whole year was lost, though
meanwhile, in 1891, the Government Grant Committee of the Royal Society had
voted £200 for the same purpose. In August of that year the British Association
re-appointed the Sandwich Islands Committee, renewing the grant and empowering it
to co-operate with the Committee appointed by the Royal Society. The Joint
Committee thus formed met and, from several candidates, selected Mr. R. C. L. Perkins,
B.A., of Jesus College, Oxford, as their collector, and that gentleman accordingly left
England for Honolulu, where he arrived in March 1892, and remained diligently
exploring the various islands until the end of the summer of 1894, when he returned to
England; but, at the request of the Joint Committee, again departed early in the
following year, reaching Honolulu in March 1895, and stayed in the Islands for two
years longer, the expenses incurred during the later portion of his time being defrayed
almost wholly by the Trustees of the Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum. His collections
in all branches of zoology are very large, and the results are being by degrees published ;
but here it is only necessary to mention his ornithological achievements. ‘The loss of
the season of 1891 was unfortunate for the credit of the Joint Committee; for many
discoveries which its collector, had one been sent out in that year, could not have
failed making fell to the lot of the persons employed by Mr. Rothschild in 1890-92,
and the only new species of bird discovered by Mr. Perkins was the Drepanis funerea,
which, thanks to the Joint Committee, was first figured in the present work; but that
gentleman brought back a very fine series of almost every other species now existing in
the Islands, of which the first set has been deposited in the British Museum, the second
and third in the Museums of Cambridge and Honolulu respectively. The specimens
obtained by Mr. Rothschild’s collectors are, naturally, at Tring. Mr. Perkins was most
successful on his second visit in obtaining specimens of several species not found on his
first expedition, owing to want of time.

The “ Further Remarks on the Relationships of the Drepanidide” with which
Dr. Gadow has favoured this work contribute not a little to the difficulty of the
Authors in determining the systematic position of many of the forms of Passeres
described in the following pages. That these “Remarks” contain valuable considera-
tions is obvious; but it will be observed that the Doctor, in arriving at his latest
conclusions, expresses himself with some caution, and the Authors would exercise a

1 When it is mentioned that this gentleman was Mr, Lionel W. Wiglesworth, who subsequently compiled
the * Aves Polynesiz,’ and has been, with Dr. A. B. Meyer of Dresden, joint author of ‘The Birds of Celebes,’
the wish to accept his offer may be thought justified.

INTRODUCTION. xxi

similar becoming reserve in accepting those conclusions as final. Still it seems on the
whole best to follow them, based as they are on Mr. Perkins’s experience in the field.
It is a very old supposition that some of the Finch-like forms were Meliphagine, and
though that is now proved to be erroneous, those who accepted that view may well be
content to regard those forms as Drepanid; while Mr. Sclater will be pleased to
find his conclusions (Ibis, 1879, p. 91) as to their relationships to Drepanis and
Hemignathus corroborated. On the other hand, looking to the unsatisfactory way
in which the Passeres are unavoidably grouped at present, some systematists may
demur to the removal of such a genus as Chloridops from the Finches, until a far more
exhaustive study of the Fringillide and their presumed allies shall have been made.
Leaving this question for future solution, it must here be remarked that of the species
attributed in the present work to the genus Himatione, H. sanguinea, which is the type
of that genus, should in Mr. Perkins’s opinion alone remain in it1, while those with
straight bill (4. maculata, H. montana, H. mana, and H. newtoni)—though not
H. parva—together with Loxops flammea, should be referred to Oreomyza2, and
those with a curved bill should be placed in a new genus Chlorodrepanis, which he thus

characterizes :—

“Primaries pointed and not truncate at the apex; nasal opercula with bristles
at the base and not overhung by antrorse feathers; brush tongue thin and
tubular; second primary a little shorter than the third ; bill curved.”

Hence we have:—Chlorodrepanis stejnegeri, C. chloris, C. chloridoides, C. kalaana,
C. virens, C. wilson ; Oreomyza bairdi, O. flammea, O. maculata, O. montana, O. mana,
O. newtoni.

Himatione parva, though having a straight bill, Mr. Perkins now wishes to keep
apart from Oreomyza, and to place it in a genus by itself as Rothschildia parva, while
he would also recognize Heterorhynchus as a genus distinct from Hemignathus. On
the other hand he would include Chrysomitridops with Loxops, as would Mr. Rothschild,
and his idea of a natural arrangement of the Drepanidide is in two groups as follows :—

1. Drepanis, Vestiaria, Palmeria, Himatione, Ciridops.
2. Chlorodrepanis, Rothschildia, Viridonia, Oreomyza, Loxops, Hemignathus,
Heterorhynchus, Pseudonestor, Psittacirostra, Lowxioides, Telespiza, Rhoda-

canthis, Chloridops ;

for reasons which he thus assigns :—

“ Chlorodrepanis in reality is much more closely allied to Viridonia and Hemignathus than to Himatione,
the feathers of which, it may be observed, are in certain parts of very different structure. Oreomyza is at once

1 H. freethi of the island of Laysan forming a second species.
2 Mr. Rothschild, writing in 1893 (‘ Avifauna of Laysan’), and Mr. Perkins in 1895 (‘ Ibis’), for the most
part agree as to the species to be placed in this genus; so that although most of the experience of the latter

dates from 1892, Mr. Rothschild was first to publish the facts.
d

Xxil INTRODUCTION,

distinguished by the very different form of tongue, as well as external characters; Hemignathus by the long
beak, and absence of bristles at the base of the nasal opercula ; Lowops by the short thick beak and long forked
tail. Vzridonia is hardly more than a large stoutly built species of the genus, slightly more aberrant in one
direction than H. parva is in the other, both retaining the characteristic song of the normal species but little
modified. The truncate apices of the primaries throw together the genera Himatione, Vestiaria, Drepanis, and
probably Ciridops—the latter not being available for examination ; and it is noteworthy that the young of all
these birds are wholly or in part of black plumage, as also in Palmeria, which on that account, and for its
evident relationship to Himatione, must be referred to the same section, although differing in the form of the
primaries. All the other Drepanidide are green or greyish-green in the immature condition, and all have
pointed primaries.”

A tew words may here be added as to the progress of our knowledge of the Avifauna,
and in particular of the Passerine Fauna, of the islands. When Mr. Wilson first
visited them in 1887, the species of Passeres known to exist, or to have existed, were
those marked in the Table on p. xxii by a cross prefixed to them—Himantopus knudsen,
Chasiempis sclateri, Pheornis myiadestina, Oreomyza bairdi, and O. (Rothschildia)
parva having been recently described by Mr. Ridgway and Dr. Stejneger. To these
Mr. Wilson was enabled to add the following:—Chloridops kona, Chrysomitridops
ceruleirostris, Chasiempis gayi, Oreomyza mana, O. montana, Chlorodrepanis kalaana,
C. chloridoides, C. stejnegert (= Himatione chloris, Stejneger, from Kauai), Hemignathus
procerus, H. lichtensteim, Heterorhynchus wilsoni, H. hanapepe, Oreomyza flammea,
Pheornis lanaiensis. ‘Two Petrels mentioned by Mr. Dole have proved to be Oceano-
droma castro of Harcourt, and @strelata pheopygia of Salvin, and a Shearwater
described by Dr. Stejneger to be Puffinus cuneatus of Salvin.

Besides the above, Mr. Wilson had procured a specimen of another fine form (his
Telespiza cantans) which had been captured in Laysan, whence 7. flavissima was
subsequently brought by Palmer; and had shot in Maui a young example of a
bird, which he named at the time Himatione dolii, but which proved to be so distinct,
when the adult was secured by Palmer, that Mr. Rothschild created for it the genus
Palmeria. Chetoptila angustipluma and Acrulocercus apicalis were not obtained by
any of the explorers mentioned.

Mr. Perkins, as already stated, was fortunate enough to discover another member
of the genus Drepanis (D. funerea), and to procure many of the new species that
Mr. Rothschild’s collectors, Palmer and Munro, between them brought to light,
namely, the marvellous Pseudonestor xanthophrys, Rhodacanthis palmeri, R. flaviceps,
Oreomyza newtoni, Chlorodrepanis wilsoni, Hemignathus lanatensis, Heterorhynchus
affinis, Pheornis palmeri, Acrulocercus bishopi, and Viridonia sagittirostris.

? Described and figured in the present work as H. olivaceus, in the belief that it was the species so named
by Lafresnaye ; but subsequently shewn by Mr. Rothschild to be distinct, and called by him H. wilsoni.
Since the publication of Part V. (where, under the heading of H. lucidus, this matter is mentioned)
Lafresnaye’s type, which for a time was misplaced in the Boston Museum, has been discovered there
with the rest of his collection, and in December 1896 was kindly submitted to our inspexion by
Professor Hyatt.

INTRODUCTION. XXill

The appended Table, shewing the Distribution in the principal Islands of the species
of the Order Passeres, tells its own story ; but the fact must be emphasized that every
one of them is peculiar to the group—that is to say, not found elsewhere. In addition
to these (fifty-three in number), there is one peculiar species of Accipitres, two of
Anseres, one of Limicole, and apparently there were four of Rallide—two being now
extinct,—making the whole number of peculiar species of Birds amount to sixty.
Indeed, setting aside the sea-birds, there seem to be but two breeding species—the
Short-eared Owl (Aso accipitrinus) and the Night-Heron (Nycticorax griseus) —which are
also inhabitants of other lands, and these two have possibly the widest range of their
respective Families. This remarkable amount of peculiarity well deserves the attention
of all interested in the problems of Geographical Distribution, and especially of those
who study that subject in the light it casts on the history of the globe. Those students
must also be reminded, as already briefly stated by Prof. Newton, that of the resident
land-forms of the Sandwich Islands there is only one genus, Chastempis, which is allied
to any that are characteristic of the Islands of the Pacific Ocean in general, though
there are two, Acrulocercus and Chetoptila, not far removed from forms peculiar to the
continent of Australia. ‘These facts, combined with the absence of Parrots, Kingfishers,
and Doves—all so characteristic of the South Sea Islands,—are very significant, and
seem to indicate that the Hawaiian Archipelago should be no longer included in what
most authors have called the “ Australian Region.”

It remains to be stated that, as before announced to the Subscribers of this work,
Mr. Wilson made a second visit to the Islands in 1896, but no new species were then
discovered.

TABLE showing the Distribution of Birds of the Order Passerus in the
Sandwich Islands.

Corvip.2.

x Corvus tropicus

DREPANIDIDA,

x Drepanis pacifica
a funerea
x Vestiaria coccinea
Palmeria dolii
x Himatione sanguinea’
x Ciridops anna
Chlorodrepanis stejnegeri
chloris
chloridoides
kalaana
virens
3 wilsoni
x Rothschildia parva
Viridonia sagittirostris
x Oreomyza bairdi
flammea
newtoni
maculata
montana
a mana
x Loxops coccinea
x rufa
xX 4, aurea
Chrysomitridops ceruleirostris
Hemignathus procerus
lichtensteini
OUSCUTUS ALE +2700... keene ean ee
ss lanaiensis *
x Heterorhynchus lucidus
wilsoni
affinis
x hanapepe
Pseudonestor xanthophrys
x Psittacirostra psittacea
x Loxioides bailleui
Rhodacanthis palmeri
flaviceps
na

mo sade a0 o Mi potbed tote Ott 6
otro in so dw Oubttias PHS FOE toot re
SASHA TO oo oro do ou oS DOO ROOD
Hit) Che Oa utns HOO Stub of Gyro bo
Otro One b tage eyo oe ed AOS Goro At
PRA Do Yop Oi o oo Yb:
De OR OTK) PPC OLORISE Ree et pereer ats ioyedcest aceon eee
Gots ecto kd oo oped
Soe b bind dorama nuiaces

okt FT AVARCHSWIEPE Rey. perpen scr, 2 uate

CRO teer GS acer tye ie .ctety bio wid
reread eh eerdod te ouwbits ot
hs Sante teh fob'e foe Menel stra oee se
Goad onto uvotoSsandododgangaus
Pe SIGH INES Foe oo cop gomdsagstoducdo ed
Re Cea PORE paatey Sachi Fritts cho

soadsonuatOgugondsosécad
26) COOKO) CNN TER | hts cise otto ion madils bias
Jo rer Oe ha mat eb rot woh 0
Boone On SoM on Motdwoydad son4 0
Oe) PHONG Mee OR thh ery Ate daniel hand 4 i. A
shies Aheee piel uoBlegeeciah Lec bedse ee Sere ee
Pech either Seo.

aces Dae Blond ¢ tyce le Bel:sau_ se! ¢:Ftreire toh che Fole’

Ca a ri cy

29
Ce eC ey
Ci ee roritk SeewtoO Ouro Om oo oo
CC

9
a Pd
Sopa oder o ogo oe or
CeCe aC Ca TC Ter Yt eC ar er Pay
a(evine MogieNas oltuitslloiveile = clu 8a iets ialteae iors
Co erat ac et Wa Cnr Suc eC CS Se Tt er
Cy

Chloridops ko

CR ae

MELIPHAGID®.

x Acrulocercus braccatus
x apicalis
x nobilis

Ay bishopi
x Chetoptila angustipluma

2 Pr rs

99 MAONTTE tw eh ww et we ee ee ee ee we ew we

Cece ee sees sw see eee sees ee os

CC ee

TurDIDz (?).

Caer a rer ts creeds ce Cty t

x Pheornis myiadestina .
lanaiensis *
obscura
palmeri
oahuensis

99 ORSOUT MH ww ee ee ee ee ee ee ee eee eee eens

er cS D

Muscicarip”.

CC i Cr i Ce

x Chasiempis sandvicensis

gayi
sclateri

Niihau.| Kauai.) Oahu. Molokai.) Lanai. | Maui.
a eat
|
* *% * * * *
tg cle pit * On *
* * * * * *
*
*
FO *
*
wha *
*
*
*
ane *
*
0 *
; T
che *
*
*
-
mati *
. T
SP *
*
* * * 5
*
iP
5 *
*
* *
*
a6 if
ae *
*
2 13 10 9 ui 8

‘Hawaii.

* * kK *

All the species above-named are peculiar to the group, 7. e. not found elsewhere. A * indicates that the

species inhabits the island whose name heads the column.

extinct; a X that the species was known before Mr. Wilson’s visit in 1887.

See text for Mimatione freethi, Telespiza cantans, and T. flavissima of Laysan.
2 Mr. Dole, doubtless in error, adds Maui to the habitat.
* Mr. Rothschild states that he has strong presumptive evidence of the former occurrence of a species of

Heterorhynchus on Lanai,

* A species which formerly abounded in Maui was probably identical with this.

A + shews that the species is believed to be

INTRODUCTION. XXV

SPECIES OF BIRDS.

A. Obtained accidentally on the Sandwich Islands ; or found in the immediate neighbourhood,
and especially on the Laysan group.

SPECIES. AUTHORITIES. Locarry.
LAOS AG CUMEOS. canon couve Mr. SB Willen pe Me ato: eels ? Kittlitz (from Isen-
Se ee cae rom Falmer): beck), Mus.Senckenb. | > Laysan [sland
Telespiza flavissima ........ Ditto (ditto), Ann. & Mag. N.H.x.( 5 0 jo5 ; ) :
1892, p. 110. ape an
EL MAAONE HneCUt eet eae Ditto (ditto), tom. cit. p. 109. A Fr
Acrocephalus familiaris...... 5 3 4 3
UPS BO. WEB, oo c5s65006 Kittlitz, Mus. Senckenb. i. p. 124. Bo Ae Laysan group.
Porzanula palmert.........- Hon. W. Rothschild (from Palmer), ? Kittlitz (from Isen-| Laysan Island
Ann. & Mag. N. H. ix. 1892, beck), Mus.Senckenb. | and (ide Kittlitz)
p. 247. i, p. 124. Lisiansky.
Bernicla nigricans... 44+. Ditto (ditto), i lite.
Bernicla minima .......... , 9% Kauai.
(Originally recorded as B. munroi,
sp.n., Ann. & Mag. N. H. x. 1892,
p- 108.)
Chen hyper lone sme oc1. Hon. W. Rothschild (from Palmer),
wm litt.
Anas laysanensis J... 2... - Ditto (ditto), Bull. Br. Orn. Club, i. Kittlitz (from Isen-|Laysan Island
1892, p. xvii. beck), Mus.Senckenb. | and (ide Kittlitz)
i. p. 24. Lisiansky.
Sula leucogaster (sula) ...... Ditto (ditto), Avif. Laysan, p. 29. ? Kittlitz (from Isen-| Laysan group and
beck), Mus.Senckenb. | off Niihau.
Ms JO, L2G),
Sulacpiscat ome eemen ry Ree lees: 5 - a Do Mle 54 a
[SOU GOOOS oa00050000000% % * on p. 25. sees Laysan group.
Gistrelata hypoleuca ........ ” 55 ® p. 49. soe Laysan Island.
Puffinus natwitatis ........ 5 " , p. 45. Kittlitz (from Isen- BS
beck), Mus. Senckenb.
i, p. 124,
Dromedea albatrus (chinensis) .| 4, ” > p. 55. Kittlita (from Isen-| Laysan group and
beck), Mus.Senckenb.| off Nithau.
i. p. 120.
Diomedea magripes .......... Described by Audubon in 1839 (Orn. Biogr. y. p. 327) from | Lat. 30° 44’ N.,
a specimen obtained by ‘Townsend. long. 146° W., in
the Pacific.

B. Recorded, but not yet corroborated.
Storia Gengny ri tein ee | Mr. Dole, Pr. Bost. Soc. N. H. 1869, p. 306. | Sandwich Islands.

C. Apparently occurring, but of which the identity cannot be at present determined.

Charadrius “like O. hiaticula.”| Dr. Finsch, Ibis, 1880, p. 79. Maui, Sandwich
Islands.

29 99 wh)

Gallinago“ like G'. scolopacina.”

D. Imported from other Countries.

Passer domesticus.
Carpodacus frontalis.
Acridotheres tristis ?
Turtur chinensis.
Tame Pigeons.
Fowls, &e., &c.

ERRATA Ann ADDENDA.

ACRULOCERCUS NOBILIS, p. 6, 1. 2, add “ under tail-coverts yellow.”
PH#HORNIS oBscuRA, p. 1, 1. 14, add “ Specimens were obtained by the ‘ Challenger ’ Expedition.”
For CuRYSOMITRIDOPS CHRULEOROSTRIS (on Plate) read ‘‘ CHRYSOMITRIDOPS CAIRULEIROSTRIS.”

PsITTACIROSTRA PsITTacHA, p. 2, 1. 15, after “ Verzeichniss ” add “ der Doubletten.”
[The deduction is therefore erroneous. |

ACRULOCERCUS APICALIS, p. 2, 9 lines from bottom: ‘The striated appearance..... noticeable.”
This should be transferred to A. BISHOPI.

PW Frokawk del.et lth. 2 West, Newman imp

CORV US Peres be weoe

CORVUS TROPICUS.,
ALALA.

“Tropic Crow,” Lath. Gen. Synops. i. p. 384 (1781).

“ Raven,” King, Voy. Pacif. Ocean, iii. pp. 119, 161 (1784).

Corvus tropicus, Gmelin, Syst. Nat. i. p. 8372 (1788) ; Latham, Ind. Orn. i. p. 157 (1790) ; Donn-
dorff, Orn. Beytr. 1. p. 872 (1794); Shaw, Zool. vii. p. 355 (1809); Tiedemann, Anat.
Naturgesch. Vog. i1. p. 432 (1814) ; Bloxam, Voy. ‘ Blonde,’ p. 250 (1826) ; Hartlaub, Arch.
f. Naturgesch. 1852, 1. p. 183; G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Isl. p. 25 (1859).

? Cracticus ater, Vieill. N. Dict. d’Hist. Nat. v. p. 356 (1816).

Corvus hawaiiensis, Peale, U.S. Expl. Exped., Birds, p. 106, pl. xxvii.* (1848); Hartlaub, ué
supra, pp. 102, 183; Cassin, U.S. Expl. Exped., Mamm. & Orn. p. 119, pl. vi.* (1858) ;
G. BR. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Isl. p. 24 (1859) ; Dole, Proc. Bost. Soc. N. H. xii. p. 300 (1869) ;
id. Hawaiian Alman. p. 48 (1879); Sclater, Ibis, 1871, pp. 359, 360; id. op. cit. 1879, p. 92 ;
Sharpe, Cat. B. Br. Mus. iii. p. 18, note (1877).

Corvus (Physocorax) hawaitiensis et tropicus, G. R. Gray, Hand-l. B. ii. p. 14 (1870).

* Figure notabiles.

THERE can be no doubt that the “Ravens” mentioned by King in his account of
Cook’s last voyage as having been met with at Kakooa in Hawaii are to be referred to
this bird, specimens of which must have reached England about that period, for Latham
described his Tropic Crow in 1781 from an example brought from Hawaii in the collec-
tion of Sir Joseph Banks, which from the details appears to have been a pied specimen.
Peale’s Corvus hawatiensis is of course identical, since this is the only species in the
island.

Bloxam noticed this species in his account of the voyage of the ‘ Blonde,’ and Peale
procured several examples during the United States Exploring Expedition ; but as these
were lost in the wreck of the ‘Peacock,’ the latter must be considered fortunate to have
so readily obtained the loan of two others from Dr. J. K. Townsend, which were sent
from Kaawaloa by Mr. Forbes, a missionary at Karakakoa Bay, and were afterwards
deposited in the collection of the Philadelphia Academy. Cassin, however, while
remarking upon the uniform cinereous tinge visible in Peale’s examples, and upon their
small dimensions, did not consider them to belong to Corvus tropicus of Gmelin, which
is founded on Latham’s Tropic Crow, but surmised that they might be the C. australis
of the former author.

This interesting bird, well known to the natives by its name of Alala—the strict
signification of which is the cry made by any young animal—is fairly common in the

district of Kona on Hawaii, where it ranges from 1100 to 6000 feet and probably
higher. As Peale observes, in his excellent account, “They frequent the woody district
of the interior, seldom, if ever, visiting the coast.”

In the chia forests, a few miles above Kaawaloa (celebrated as being the spot where
Captain Cook fell), I found this bird numerous in the month of June, by which time
the brood had already left the nest. A friend, extremely clever at imitating sounds,
was able, by carefully concealing himself and then mimicking the cry of the young
Aiala, to collect round him in a short time many of the old birds; he had found a
nest at the end of April, which he informed me was a large loosely-fashioned structure
of dead sticks, resembling that of a Pigeon, placed in a Pandanus. The Alala seems
to feed principally on the fruit of the Iéié (Freycinetia arborea), but no doubt, when
occasion serves, takes the young of the various forest birds. Peale remarks in this
connection :—“ We noticed that the smaller species of birds were kept in great terror
by the presence of the Alala; from this we infer that, like other crows, they will rob
nests of their eggs, and when an opportunity offers eat the old birds also: such was
their character given to us by the natives.”

I was assured by the islanders that they collect in large numbers and feed on the
sheep occasionally found dead from natural causes or killed by wild dogs, which animals
are said only to suck the blood, leaving the carcass otherwise intact.

The Alala is a noisy species, and Peale remarks that “its voice closely resembles
that of the North-Anierican Fish-Crow, C. ossifragus.” It is far from wild; and I
secured a specimen by a shot from my 28-bore when on the back of a steady-going
mule, as we were riding through the forests. It seems to be restricted to two districts
of Hawaii—Kona and Kau; personally I only observed it in the former, but was
assured, on the authority of a friend who resided in Kau, of its presence there as well.
At Puuanahulu—a veritable oasis surrounded by lava-flows—I shot several examples ;
but this spot, though many miles distant from Kaawaloa, is still in the district of Kona.

Description.—Adult male. Entire plumage dusky brown, almost black on the head and
neck, somewhat lighter on the tail and wings, the quills of the latter being of a rusty
brown, with the shafts of the feathers white. Irides dark hazel; bill bluish black,
lighter at the tip; nostrils covered with glossy black bristle-like feathers; feet black,
yellowish underneath.

Dimensions.—Adult male. Total length 19 inches, wing from carpal joint 13°50,
culmen 2°50, tarsus 2°50, tail 8°50.

The total length of an adult female is 17:25 inches, while the other parts are
proportionately smaller than in the male. In plumage the sexes do not differ.

Immature specimens have the whole plumage of a more rusty shade, and the
primaries light ochreous.

EF W.Frohawk del.et lith. West, Newman imp

? DREPANIS PACIPICA..

DREPANIS PACIFICA.

MAMO.

“Great Hook-billed Creeper,” Latham, Gen. Synops. i. p. 708 (1782) ; id. Suppl. p. 126 (1787).

‘“? Hoohoo,” King, Voy. Pacif. Ocean, iii. p. 119, partim (1784).

Certhia pacifica, Gmelin, Syst. Nat. i. p. 470 (1788); Latham, Ind. Orn. i. p. 281 (1790) ;
Donndorff, Orn. Beytr. i. p. 621 (1794) ; Shaw, Zool. viii. p. 227 (1812) ; Tiedemann, Anat.
Naturgesch. Vog. iv. p. 431 (1814) ; Peale, U.S. Expl. Exped., Birds, p. 149 (1848); Hartlaub,
Arch. f. Naturgesch. 1852, i. p. 109; Cassin, U.S, Expl. Exped., Mamm. & Orn. p. 171
(1858).

“Le Hoho,” Vieillot, Ois. Dorés, ii. p. 124, pl. Ixiii.* (1802) ; Lesson, Compl. Buffon, ix. p. 156
(1837). :

““Grimpereau a long bec des iles Sandwich,” partim, Virey (Sonnini), Hist. Nat. Buffon, Ois. xvii.
p: 97 (1804, 5).

“ Le Mérops jaunoir,” Levaillant, Hist. des Promérops et des Guépiers, p. 45, pl. xix.* (1807).

Melithrepius pacificus, Vieillot, N. Dict. d’Hist. Nat. xiv. p. 323 (1817); id. Encycl. Méth.,
Ornithol. p. 602 (1823); Cuvier, Régne Anim. éd. 2, i. p. 433 (1829) ; J. E. Gray (Griffith),
Anim. Kingd. vi. p. 858 (1829).

Drepanis pacifica, Temminck, Man. d’Orn. 1. p. Ixxxvi (1820) ; G. R. Gray, Gen. B. i. p. 96 (1847) ;
id. Cat. B. Trop. Isl. p. 7 (1859); id. Hand-list, i. p. 113 (1869) [‘ Friendly Islands ”!] ;
Bonaparte, Consp. Av. i. p. 403 (1850); Hartlaub, Arch. f. Naturgesch. 1852, i. p. 181;
Reichenbach, Handb. sp. Orn. p. 258, pl. 611. figs. 3828, 3829 * (1853) ; Dole, Proc. Bost.
Soc. N. H. xii. p. 297 (1869) ; id. Hawaiian Alman. 1879, p. 45; Sclater, Ibis, 1871, p. 368;
id. op. cit. 1879, p. 92; Sundevall, Tentam. p. 48 (1872); Von Pelzeln, Journ. f. Orn. 1872,
p- 26; id. Ibis, 1873, p. 21; Sharpe, Cat. B. Br. Mus. x. p. 5 (1885); S. B. Wilson, Ibis,
1890, p. 178.

Vestiaria hoho, Lesson, Rev. Zool. 1840, p. 269.

* Figure notabiles.

Tuts species, the Great Hook-billed Creeper of Latham, was first described in the
‘General Synopsis ’ from two examples in the Leverian Museum, said to be male and
female, which are now, according to Herr von Pelzeln, in the Imperial Museum at
Vienna. In the main text of Latham’s work the bird is erroneously stated to inhabit
the “ Friendly Islands, in the South Seas,” though this slip is rectified in the ‘ Supple-
ment,’ where it is said to be “ common at Owhyhee and called by the natives Hoohoo.”
Vieillot, nevertheless, in the ‘Oiseaux Dorés’ makes a fresh blunder by giving the
habitat as ‘ Owhihee, Iles des Amis,” and G. R. Gray in his ‘ Hand-list’ repeats the
mistake as far as the islands are concerned. The specimens thus brought to notice
were no doubt derived from the spoils of the early explorers of the Pacific, and King

mentions the “‘ Hoohoo” in his account of Cook’s last voyage ; but as this name appears
L

to have been used for Acrulocercus nobilis also, the yellow feathers of which were
applied to the same purposes of cloak manufacture, it cannot be confidently averred
which of the two was intended by the author; yet, if it be true that Drepanis was
common at Hawaii at that period, the voyagers can hardly have failed to meet with it
there during their seven weeks’ stay.

The first scientific appellation was that of Certhia pacifica, bestowed by Gmelin in
1788; while it is somewhat remarkable that no figure of so fine a bird should have
been published before the time of Vieillot, who took his illustration from one of the
examples described by Latham, a drawing of which, by Sydenham Edwards, was lent
to him by Parkinson, then owner of the Leverian Museum. An earlier drawing by
Hillis (No. 27) is, however, still to be found at the British Museum inscribed “ W.
W. Ellis vivum delin‘ et pinx' 1779.” Temminck, thirty-eight years after the date
of the ‘General Synopsis,’ separated the present species from Certhia under the new
generic name of Drepanis, which is now generally recognized.

Peale, in his account of the ornithology of the. U.S. Exploring Expedition, asserts
that it was found at Hanalei in Kauai, and mentions the yellow feathers and their
use: but Cassin, in his later edition of the same work, considers that he confounded it
with Acrulocercus braccatus; and this is probably the case, as there are no tufts on
the thighs in Drepanis, nor have we any other proof of its occurrence on the island
of Kauai. Bloxam gives us no information in his account of the voyage of the
‘ Blonde,’ though the bird does not appear, as will be seen below, to have been extinct
in 1859. <A single example was purchased by Temminck at the dispersal of the
Bullock Museum, when it was described in the catalogue of the 17th day of the sale
as “Great Hook-billed Creeper, C. pacifica” ; while another is stated by Herr von
Pelzeln (Ibis, 1873, p. 21) to have been in Levaillant’s cabinet.

Of this extremely rare and apparently extinct species I obtained two specimens from
a collection which was formed by the late Mr. Mills! of Hilo in Hawaii, some thirty
years or more ago. The fact of its native name “ Mamo” being the same as that
used for the war-cloaks mentioned below seems to imply that they received it from
this bird, and that they were originally chiefly wrought of the beautiful golden yellow
feathers from its back and vent, which are much deeper in colour, as they are larger
and longer, than the axillary tufts of Acrulocercus nobilis.

I could obtain no certain information of examples having been observed since
those in the Mills collection were procured—about 1859, though while staying at Olaa
in the district of Puna in Hawaii, where Mr. Mills secured them, I was assured by
the natives that the bird still existed, and at the time of my visit (October) had,
together with the O-O, migrated to the mountains, which is barely possible. I saw

* To the late Mr. J. Mills of Hilo, Hawaii, science is indebted for the preservation not only of several
specimens of Drepanis pacifica, but also of several more species now extinct. Mr. Mills died, I regret to say,
some two months after I landed on the Islands. He was an ardent naturalist, and would shut up his store
and disappear in the forest for weeks together, accompanied only by natives who aided him in collecting
specimens. Mr, Mills was also an accomplished artist, some of his paintings possessing great merit.

9
c9)

several fine wreaths, “leis,” composed of its plumes in the possession of the Hon.
C. R. Bishop, while since my return I have carefully examined the feather-robes in the
Ethnological Collection in the British Museum, and find that in the three large war-
cloaks it contains, chiefly made of the yellow feathers of Acrulocercus nobilis, are
interspersed here and there, usually in diamond-shaped patterns, the deeper yellow
feathers of the present species.

One cape only in this collection is made entirely of the plumage of the Mamo,
and in that the upper margin, about one inch in width, is formed of its black
feathers; the dimensions are as follows :—

feet in.

3 6 following lower margin.
1 % at middle.

0 9 following top margin.

Another cape, in which the plumes of this bird occur, may also be worth describ-
ing :—lIt has the ground-colour red (Vestearia coccinea), the upper edge made of the
black and gold feathers of Drepanis pacifica and red feathers of V. coccinea inter-
mingled ; at the bottom is a broad band of the yellow feathers of Acrulocercus nobilis,
while on the red ground of the cape are three angular patches of the same. Among
the wreaths, “leis,” in the collection, there is but one in which the golden plumage
of Drepanis occurs. This “lei” is 15 inches in length, and the yellow feathers, of
which there are six bunches, each one inch in length, are arranged alternately with
bunches of red feathers of V. coccinea. The length and beauty of the former are very
striking in this wreath, and I have only seen one other which perhaps surpasses it in
beauty; this is made entirely of Mamo feathers, and has been quite recently brought
to this country by Mr. Herbert Purvis—the value it is impossible to estimate, nor can
its beauty, at least in the eyes of an Hawaiian, be outshone.

Sir Walter Buller, in his ‘ History of the Birds of New Zealand,’ 2nd ed. p. 104,
tells us of a gorgeous feather-robe which was largely ornamented with the canary-
yellow feathers of the wing of the Hihi (Pogonornis cincta), and goes on to say: “ one
can only compare it in imagination with that gorgeous coronation-robe of costly yellow
plumes worn by the kings and queens of Hawaii, of which mention is made by the
early writers on Polynesia.” As Sir Walter Buller speaks of the New Zealand feather-
robe as “largely ornamented,” we may conclude that the feathers of other species were
intermingled with those of the Hihi, and on this account I think it could not have
equalled the unbroken sheet of gold presented by the war-cloak of Kamehameha I.
described in my article on Acrulocercus nobilis. The yellow feathers of Pogonornis
are, however, of a richer tint than those of Acrulocercus, and more nearly approach
those of Drepanis.

One of the specimens which I brought home has been beautifully remounted by
Mr. Cullingford, of Durham, and is now in the Museum of the University of Cambridge,

the second is in the fine collection of the Hon. Walter Rothschild. Iam not aware of
the existence of other examples in this country.

Description.—Glossy black, with the exception of the lower part of the body, the
rump, the tail-coverts both above and below, the feathers of the tibia and those of the
anterior margin of the wing, which are of a fine crocus-yellow; the larger primary
wing-coverts and under wing-coverts white, the former mottled with blackish grey,
and the latter tinged with yellow. Remiges brownish black, tipped with dull white on
the external vane of the five outer primaries, and both vanes of the next four, as well —
as those proceeding from the olecranon. Four middle rectrices glossy black, the rest
more or less brown, and showing a patch of dull white near the tip, which though
indistinct on the inner feathers becomes very distinct on the extreme pair. Bill and
legs apparently deep brown.

Dimensions.—Total length about 8 inches, wing from the bend 4:12, tail 2:5, bill
from forehead along the culmen 1:75, from gape in a straight line 1°5, tarsus 1-31,
middle toe without claw °56, hind toe 43.

FWFrohawk del.et lath. West, Newmenimy.

DREHPANIS HUNER EAs.

DREPANIS FUNEREA.

Drepanis funerea, A. Newton, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1898, p. 690.

To the Joint Committee appointed by the Royal Society and by the British Association
for the Advancement of Science to carry on a Zoological Exploration of the Sandwich
Islands, my sincere thanks are due for the privilege of including in this work, and of
figuring for the first time, the remarkable and in many respects very interesting new
species of Drepanis (as the genus is now limited) discovered by their agent, Mr. Robert
C. L. Perkins, B.A., of Jesus College in the University of Oxford, who is to be
congratulated on this ornithological reward of his arduous labours—a reward that was
wholly unexpected, since the island of Molokai, on which, by dint of perseverance, he
found it, had been already and very recently ransacked by a collector who wanted
neither skill nor experience. I have only to add my regrets to those expressed by the
describer of Drepanis funerea that Mr. Perkins’s modesty has hindered him from
introducing his discovery to the scientific world.

Of this species, which is somewhat smaller than D. pacifica, Mr. Perkins obtained
several examples in Molokai, at an altitude of about 5000 feet, in June 1893. He
marks the long-billed specimens as males, the short-billed as females.

The following is from Prof. Newton’s paper (oc. cit.) describing the species: —

“ Diagn.—Atra, remigibus manualibus externé grisei-limbatis, rostro valdé decurvato,

maxilla mandibulam multo transeunte.

“Tong. tot. 8; ale 4; caud. 2°75 ; rostri culminis 2°5 ; tarsi 1:25 uncc.

“« Hab. in montibus sylvestribus insule Molokai.

“The sexes are outwardly alike. Mr. Perkins states that the nasal opercula and
the base of the bill between the nostrils are yellow, especially in the young; the irides
‘pale yellowish-brown.’

“It would be easy to point out characters that in the eyes of some writers would
justify the foundation of a new genus for this bird. At first sight the configuration of
its bill naturally suggests the genus Hemignathus; but closer inspection shows that in
its breadth and height at the base it wholly agrees with Drepanis, as restricted by modern
authors, only differing therefrom in its exaggerated maxilla. Some inequality in the
length of the mandibles is, however, exhibited by D. pacifica, and the examples of the
new species sent by Mr. Perkins show no little variability in this respect. For the
rest it is distinct enough, its almost lustreless black plumage not being relieved by any

2¢ 2

yellow feathers, though the patch of that colour at the base of the maxilla must be a
conspicuous feature in life.”

He adds that ‘“‘Its sombre plumage and the sad fate that too probably awaits the
species ” induce him to propose the trivial name that he has bestowed upon it.

Since the article on Drepanis pacifica was written, Mr. Rothschild’s collectors have
obtained an example in Hawaii, showing that the species was not entirely extinct at
the time of my visit.

FW. Frohawk, del. et. lith. West, Newman, 1m;

VESTIARIA COCCINEA,

bie
Rae

CRISS om

FW. Frohawk, del. et lith.

VESTIARIA COCCINEA.

West, Newman, imp.

or ae
fs

Ties

VESTIARIA COCCINEA.

. VESTIARIA COCCINEA.

OLOKELE* or IIWI.
Immature: OLOKELE POPOLO, OLOKELE HOKII, ILWI POPOLO, ILWI POLENA.

Certhia coccinea, G. Forster, Gotting. Mag. Wissensch. i. 6, p. 346 (“1780”) [1781?]; Gmelin,
Syst. Nat.i. p. 470 (1788); Blumenbach, Naturgesch. ed. 2, p. 190 (1782); id. Abbild. naturhist.
Gegenst. Heft 1. tab. 16* (1797) ; Shaw, Nat. Miscell. pl. 75* (1791) ; Donndorff, Handb.
Thiergesch. p. 251 (1798) ; id. Orn. Beytr. i. p. 621 (1794); Tiedemann, Anat. Naturgesch.
Vog. i. p. 480 (1814).

** Hook-billed Red Creeper,” Latham, Gen. Synops. i. p. 704 (1782) ; id. Suppl. p. 127 (1787).

* Polytmus . . . flavo-aurantius,” &c. Marter, Physikal. Arbeit. Wien, I.i. p. 76, tab.2[g¢ & 2]*
(1788).

Mellisuga coccinea, Merrem, Beytr. besond. Gesch. Végel, Heft i. p. 16, tab. iv.* (1784).

Merops sp.?, Cook, [ast] Voy. Pacif. Ocean, ii. p. 207 (1784).

“ Scarlet bird,” id. ¢. ¢. p. 227 (1784).

“ Hee-eve,” King, Voy. Pacif. Ocean, iii. p. 119 (1784).

Certhia vestiaria, Latham, Ind. Orn. i. p. 282 (1790); Shaw, Zool. viii. p. 229 (1812).

“ T’Héoro-taire,” Vieillot, Ois. Dorés, ii. p. 109, pl. lii.* (1802).

“Ve Soui-manga Cardinal 4 queue et ailes noires,” Virey (Sonnini), Hist. Nat. Buffon, Ois. xvii.
p. 90 (1804-5).

Nectarinia coccinea, Tiedemann, ut supra, p. 481 (1814); Bloxam, Voy. ‘ Blonde,’ p. 247 (1826),
“« Hehivi.”

Melithreptus vestiarius, Vieillot, N. Dict. d’Hist. Nat. xiv. p. 822 (1817); id. Encycl. Méth.,
Ornithol. p. 601 (18238) ; id. Galérie, pl. 181* (1825); Lesson, Tr. d’Orn. p. 300 (1831).
Drepanis vestiaria, Temminck, Man. d’Orn. i. p. Ixxxvi (1820); Hartlaub, Syst. Verz. Mus.

[Bremen], p. 16 (1844) [ex “ Otaheite ” !].

“ L’ei-evi,’” Lesson, Compl. Buffon, ix. p. 155 (1837).

Vestiaria evi, id. Rev. Zool. 1840, p. 268.

“ Le vestiaire,’ Léchlancher, ¢. c. p. 322.

Drepanis coccinea, G. R. Gray, Gen. B. i. p. 96, partim, pl. 38. fig. 1* (1847) ; Bonaparte, Consp.
Av. i. p. 404 (1850) ; Cabanis, Mus. Hein.i. p. 99 (1850-51) ; Hartlaub, Arch. f. Naturgesch.
1852, i. p. 181; id. Journ. f. Orn. 1854, p. 170; Lichtenstein, Nomencl. p. 55 (1854) ; Cassin,
U.S. Expl. Exped., Mamm. & Orn. p. 177 (1858) ; Dole, Proc. Bost. Soc. N. H. xi. p. 297
(1869) ; id. Hawaiian Alman. 1879, p. 44; Sclater, Ibis, 1871, p. 360; id. Proc. Zool. Soc.
1878, p. 847; Sundevall, Tentam. p. 48 (1872) ; Von Pelzeln, Journ. f. Orn. 1872, p. 26;
Finsch, Ibis, 1880, p. 79.

Melithreptes vestiaria, Peale, U.S. Expl. Exped., Birds, p. 152 (1848).

Vestiaria coccinea, Reichenbach, Handb. sp. Orn. p. 254 (1858), tab. 562. figg. 3820-3832 * ;
Sharpe, Cat. B. Br. Mus. x. p. 6 (1885) ; Scott Wilson, Ibis, 1890, p. 181.

* The only name by which it is known on Kauai, as I am informed by Mr. Francis Gay.
E

—~3

Drepanis (Vestiaria) coccinea, G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Isl. p. 8, partim (1859) ; id. Hand-list, i.
p. 118 (1869).
» rosea, Dole, Hawaiian Alman. 1879, p. 44.

Loxops rosea, Sharpe, Cat. B. Br. Mus. x. p. 509 (1885).

(In the above list of references, obyious misprints have been disregarded.)

* Figure notabiles.

Tuis species, like many others from the Sandwich Islands, was first obtained by Cook
and his fellow-voyagers ; but, unlike them, did not come into Latham’s hands before
being made known elsewhere. The fortunate person in this case was Georg Forster,
at the time Professor of Natural History at Cassel, who, with his father, had accom-
panied the great navigator on a former voyage, and naturally took great interest in
the further results of his explorations; while he was also, possibly, not averse from
stealing a march on other competitors, which was rendered possible by Barthold
Lohman }, a man from the same town, who had sailed with Cook’s last expedition, and
immediately on its return brought Forster four examples of the present species, a
description of which he promptly published in the Gottingen Magazine for 1780,
under the title of Certhia coccinea. Latham, however, was not far behind, as in 1782
he named it the “ Hook-billed Red Creeper”—no doubt in ignorance of having been
forestalled—while for the first figures of male and female we are indebted to Marter,
who was quickly succeeded by Merrem and later by Blumenbach.

It is not a matter of surprise that many naturalists should have hastened to describe
and figure so remarkable and brilliant a bird directly it became known in civilized
countries, while their independent action had the effect, as will be seen above, of
complicating the synonymy; but though it has been included in a vast number of
works, we hear nothing absolutely fresh until the time of Peale, who, during the
United States Exploring Expedition in the ‘Vincennes’ and ‘Peacock,’ found it
not at all uncommon on most of the Hawaiian group of islands, and mentions, as
former authors had done, the use of its feathers for capes and robes of chiefs, and
especially for the ornamental figures thereon; noticing also its habit of feeding on
the honey of the gigantic lobelias. Cassin, in his account of the same expedition,
merely quotes from Peale with a summary of the information he gives, and other
writers have added little or nothing to our knowledge of the bird’s habits, though many
more examples must have been received by various museums and private collections, in
which while by no means uncommon, they are yet more plentiful than any other of the
Sandwich-Island species. ‘The generic name of Certhia being discarded as inapplicable,
many substitutes have been proposed; but the majority of writers on the subject

1 This was probably the man spoken of by the anonymous author of the Journal of Captain Cook’s last
voyage, published in 1781 (pp. 197-208), under the name of Bartholomew Lorimer or Loreman, who in an

extraordinary way was nearly lost on Christmas Island.

have accepted Fleming’s Vestiaria, taken from the specific name applied by Latham,
and derived from the use of the feathers in forming the ornamental garments. |

This beautiful species, generally distributed throughout the entire Sandwich archi-
pelago, is by far the most conspicuous of its birds, on account of the gorgeous scarlet
of the plumage, which is greatly heightened in brilliancy by contrast with the deep
black of the wings and tail. It is especially well known to every Hawaiian, less from
the attractiveness of its colours than from the fact that its breast-feathers were largely
used in the fabrication of the famous feather-robes! of ancient times—worn by the
priesthood and chiefs alone; and thus its various names occur in many an ancient
tale of chivalry, and in the “ mélés” or songs, which every native loves so well
to chant.

The immature birds are not so familiar to the islanders as the adults and are
often regarded by them as belonging to a distinct species, called in the Hawaiian
tongue “ iwi Popolo” or “ Tiwi Polena,’—an error which Judge Dole shares in his well-
known “ Catalogue of Hawaiian Birds,” where he describes a specimen in the earlier
state of plumage under the name of Drepanis rosea ; nor is it a matter of astonishment
that he has gone astray, seeing that the spotted yellowish plumage of the young shown
in the upper figure of the second Plate is so very unlike that of the older bird.

The call-note of the “ liwi” is peculiar, and is very powerful for so small a songster
—ta-weet, ta-weet, ta-wee-ah, its flute-like clearness being unsurpassed by that of any
other Sandwich-Island species. The bird has, in addition, a somewhat sweet and plain-
tive song, which I heard on a few occasions, usually soon after sunrise; the note first
mentioned is, however, by far the most characteristic, and is that most frequently heard.
I regret to say that I did not succeed in obtaining the eggs, but I found a nest about
which there appears to be little doubt. Perhaps it will be well to quote from my notes
made at the time:—

“There are a number of stunted ohia trees (Metrosideros) growing right among. the
clinker-beds of a comparatively recent lava-flow, which is as yet destitute of any
herbaceous vegetation, save for a few ferns growing here and there in the crevices of

* In the ethnological collection of the British Museum are three large mantles, two of which are mainly
composed of the red feathers of the liwi and the yellow feathers of the O-O (Aerulocereus nobilis), while the
third, of which the bulk is made of the black tail-feathers of the domestic cock, has a narrow margin of the
plumage of the two above-named species interwoven in an angular pattern; these mantles are each about
5 feet long and 8 feet across the bottom. There is a fourth, somewhat shorter, though of the same width,
made likewise of red and yellow feathers; this is in by far the best state of preservation, the colours being of
nearly as bright a tint as in freshly-killed birds. Besides these robes there are in the collection several
“eis” or feather-wreaths, some fabricated entirely of the red feathers of the present species, others of red,
green, yellow, and black feathers arranged in rings in varying order, which are accompanied by three gigantic
masks formerly worn by the priesthood at their ceremonies, and also, I believe, by chiefs in time of war.
These truly monstrous-looking objects consist of a framework of fibre, covered entirely with the red feathers
of the Iiwi; the mouth is set with fish-teeth, and for eyes they have a fragment of pearl-shell with a round
knob of black wood in the centre. I noticed at the same time several smaller capes, in which the feathers of

Vestiaria are used.

the lava-blocks. These trees are a mass of crimson blossom, and among their branches
the Iiwi was in great numbers, busily engaged in probing the flowers in search of nectar.
We found a nest in one of the small trees, which probably belonged to this bird, as it
was the only species observed in this vicinity, and this supposition is strengthened by
the fact of our shooting two quite young birds soon afterwards”1. I may briefly
describe the nest as a round and shallow cup, 4 inches in diameter, composed of mosses
and dry bents, the inside being composed of slender rootlets.

The food of the iwi consists chiefly of honey, which it finds in the blossoms of the
ohia and of the arborescent Lobeliaceee 2; no doubt it also preys on the small insects
found in the flowers; but as honey will often drip from the bill of this bird, when shot,
it probably constitutes its sustenance to a greater extent than that of other species,
where such is not the case.

I have met with the subject of this article at an elevation of 6000 feet in the district
of Kona, in Hawaii, and I am informed that it is abundant at certain seasons of the
year above Kalaicha—a sheep-station on the same island at a still higher level. This
shows that it follows its food, and that when the ohia is over at 2000 feet, but in
full flower at 5000, it migrates to a greater elevation. In the first Plate a flowering
branch of a tall woody climber (Strongylodon lucidum) is shown, from a sketch from
nature by myself, which festoons the forest-trees, and of which the scarlet sickle-
shaped flowers mimic in a most perfect manner, both in colour and shape, the bill of
the liwi; it is therefore known to the natives by the name of “ Nukuiiwi” (bill of
Tiwi) or “* Kaiiwi” (the Tiwi).

I must also note, with regard to its vertical range, that this bird is frequently to be
observed on the sea-beach, to which uncongenial region it is driven by the high winds
from its forest home, as is the case with the “Apapane” (Himatione sanguinea). I
quote the following from a letter of my friend Randal von Tempsky, of Kula, Maui,
received in March 1890, as interesting in this connection :——“ This winter has killed off
an extraordinary number of native birds in Kula, I am sorry to say ; there has been an
exceptionally long spell of dry weather accompanied by a gale of wind. I found
several mountain birds on the sand at the ‘beach, a place the most unpropitious you

1 Bloxam, Voy. ‘ Blonde,’ App. p. 249, states that this species builds on the tops of trees.

? Cassin, U.S. Expl. Exped. p. 178, merely remarks about this species “that several specimens in ex-
cellent plumage were obtained by the naturalists of the expedition,” but he quotes some interesting details
of Peale’s which I think worth transcribing here:—“ This curiously and highly coloured bird is found
inhabiting most of the Hawaiian group of islands, where it is one of the most common species. At Oahu, we
found them generally about the gigantie Lobelcas which characterize the botany of that island. They extract
their food from the flower of the Lobelia, for which the singularly formed bill is admirably adapted. The red
feathers of this species were usually selected for the ornamental figures on the capes and robes of the ancient
Hawaiians, but by reason of their abundance were not so highly valued as those of the 0-0.”

Dr. Finsch (Ibis, 1880, pp. 79, 80) says that he observed many examples of Drepanis coccinea and D. san-
guinea while collecting at Olinda on the island of Maui, at 5400 feet altitude, but that the stomach contained
nothing more than small seeds; I can only say that my observations, extending over a much longer period,

lead to a different conclusion.

could imagine for a mountain bird; natives caught plenty and so did cats. If we have
another such winter I doubt whether we will have any native birds left in the Kula
district.”

Mrs. Francis Sinclair informs me that after stormy weather she has seen numbers of
these birds on the island of Niihau (where no forest now remains), to the uncongenial
shores of which they had been driven by gales from the adjacent island of Kauai,
separated by a channel 18 miles in width.

The upper figure in my second Plate, in which no trace of scarlet is seen, and of
which the plumage is bright yellow-buff, I obtained on the island of Maui; other
examples procured in the same locality seem to show a clearer tint of buff than those
from the remaining islands; the bills in those from Maui are also slightly shorter
and stouter. Dr. Stejneger, however, states that a careful comparison of Mr. Knudsen’s
four birds with three in the museum of the Smithsonian Institution, probably not from
Kauai, shows no tangible difference in colour or dimensions; and with the exception
of these immature birds, I find this to be the case with my series, in which the islands
of Kauai, Oahu, Molokai, Lanai, and Hawaii are represented 1.

A flowering branch of the uulei (Osteomeles anthyllidifolia) is shown in my second
Plate—a low shrub with hawthorn-like flowers, among the branches of which I have
often’ seen the liwi disporting itself; the wood of this shrub is used by the natives in
the manufacture of pipes.

Description.—Adult male. General colour above and beneath vermilion ; wing-quills
and tail black; innermost secondaries white or ashy brown on the inuer web; wine-
coverts black, edged outwardly with crimson; wing-lining and edge of the wing of a
whitish hue tinged with pinkish scarlet; irides dark hazel; bill clear vermilion, darker
on maxilla; feet vermilion.

Adult female. May always be distinguished from the male by her deeper colour,
especially below, where she is almost crimson.

Immature bird. General colour greenish yellow, mottled with blackish spots at the
tips of the feathers ; wing-quills and tail black; irides dark hazel; bill light brownish
grey, maxilla yellow at margin.

The colour of the feet and bill in a very young bird was brown-pink, the scales on
the tarsi darker ; the soles of the feet yellow.

* Reichenbach (loc. cit.) seems to have clearly understood the changes of plumage in this species, which
he fully describes ; while he figures, grouped together, an adult female, a young bird with no trace of scarlet,
and a second with a few buff feathers about the head and neck. These drawings are accurate enough, but,
from an artistic point of view, are caricatures of a most beautiful and elegant bird; nor is the transition state
so completely illustrated as to make a new figure superfluous. Dr. Finsch alone gives correctly the colour
of the bill of the adult of this species, Latham and Merrem describing it as whitish: in Merrem’s figure
accordingly the bill is almost colourless; this is probably due to the fact that in skins the colour of both bill
and legs soon fades.

Dimensions.—Adult male. Total length 5°75 inches, wing from carpal joint 3°45,
culmen 1, tarsus :95, tail 2°40.

Obs.—Four specimens in transition plumage are figured, showing more or less scarlet
according to age.

EW Frohawk delet lith. West, Newman inxp.

AGW is eS OME ul

PALMERIA DOLILI

Himatione dolei (err. typogr.), S. B. Wilson, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1891, p. 166.
Palmeria mirabilis, Rothschild, Ibis, 1893, p. 118; Bull. Br. Orn. Club, i. p. xvi (1893).
Pailmeria dolei, Rothschild, Bull. Br. Orn. Club, ii. p. ix (15 Nov., 1893).

In the month of July 1888, while exploring the district of Kula in Maui, I shot, in
company with an example of Himatione sanguinea, a bird—apparently of the same
family—which was similar in its habits, but was much darker in plumage. It was
obviously young, and for a long while I hesitated to describe it, hoping to get another
and more mature specimen. As time, however, went on and none appeared, I ventured
to specify it as Himatione dolii and so left it. But when, on visiting Cambridge on
October 26th, 1893, I saw the series of specimens of Palmeria recently obtained in
Molokai by Mr. Perkins, I at once recognized that the younger examples, though
considerably larger, agreed essentially with my bird; the absence of the crest, which is
so remarkable a feature in the adult, and the fact that Mr. Rothschild referred his
Palmeria to the family Meliphagide, having combined to prevent my discovering
the identity of the two birds sooner. That gentleman, I believe, made the discovery
previously, when he obtained the loan of my specimen for comparison, but he did
not inform me of the fact, leaving me to infer it from his note in the ‘ Bulletin’ of
the British Ornithologists’ Club, as follows :—

“Mr. Scott Wilson, in the ‘ Proceedings of the Zoological Society ’ for 1891 (p. 166),
described, under the name of Himatione dolei a bird from Mauai [sic] which has not
since been identified !. Through the kindness of Mr. Wilson I have been enabled to
examine his type; and I found, to my astonishment, that it was a very young specimen
of the bird which I had named Palmeria mirabilis, although no one could possibly
have made this out from the description. As the type, therefore, proves beyond
doubt that Wilson’s bird is merely the young of my VPalmeria, and as the latter
genus is very distinct and has nothing to do with Himatione, being a genus of the
Meliphagide near Chetoptila and not one of the Drepanidide, the name of this peculiar
bird must stand henceforth as Palmeria dole (Wils.).”

In this note Mr. Rothschild lays great stress, as he had done in his original
description, upon his new genus belonging to the Meliphagide; but herein I believe
him to be wholly mistaken, for Dr. Gadow has favoured me with the following
remarks :—

* T am unable to understand the meaning of this remark, unless Mr. Rothschild wished to suggest that I
had described a species which did not exist.
2B

“The Hon. Walter Rothschild (‘ Ibis,’ 1893, p. 113) remarks: ‘ This genus is nearest
to Acrulocercus, but differs from it in the three following points :—

“*(1) The tail is square and has no elongated central tail-feathers.

***(2) There is a heavy crest of long curled feathers on the forehead, much like the
crest of certain species of Sturnopastor.

“«*(3) The beak is straighter, much shorter, and more pointed than in Acrulocercus,
and in this respect Palmeria more nearly approaches my genus Viridonia (Ann. N. H.
ser. 6, vol. x. p. 112, 1892),’

“Why Palmeria ‘is nearest to Acrulocercus’ we are not told. From examination
of a spirit-specimen, obtained by Mr. Perkins, Iam enabled to state that Palmeria
differs from the Meliphagidw, and agrees with the Drepanidide in at least the following
points, which, so far as these families are concerned, are of decisive importance :—

““(1) Tongue, typically Drepanine, like that of Hemignathus, Drepanis, Himatione,
not brush-like or multifid.

(2) Crop present. .

**(3) Tenth or terminal primary obsolete, not long and functional as in Acrulocercus.

“*(4) Edges of bill smooth, not serrated.

“*(5) The pattern of colour closely resembles that of Himatione sanguinea.

‘‘ Although the formation of the cesophagus and of the tongue (1, 2) were possibly
not available, and are, moreover, ‘anatomical’ features, the other characters (5-5) at
least would, I should have thought, obtained such consideration as to have enabled the
new genus to be correctly referred from skins only.”

Description.—Adult male. Crown covered by a flat crest of linear lanceolate feathers,
which are blackish with distinct light shaft-streaks ; those nearer the nape are slightly
tipped with brilliant orange-scarlet, while those of the nape itself have long tips of that
colour and join a line of the same which extends across the neck on each side. A tuft
of dirty white feathers springs from the forehead and bends forward so as to cover
about half the culmen. ‘The back, lesser wing- and tail-coverts are blackish, with
duller orange-scarlet tips and slighter shaft-streaks ; the wings and tail are still darker,
the secondaries and greater wing-coverts having greyish-white tips, and most of the
primaries white margins. Scarlet is also present to some extent at the bend of the
wing, the under surface of which is rather light grey. The throat, sides of head, and
neck are silvery grey, the feathers being more or less lanceolate. An orange ring
surrounds the eye. The underparts are similar to the back, the thighs reddish
orange. The bill and feet are black.

Dimensions.—Total length 7 inches, wing 3°76, tail 3, tarsus 1:12, culmen °75.

Very young.—Crown of the head grey, shading into dull brown-pink, which is
tinged on the sides with dull red; rest of the upper parts dusky brown mottled with
greenish buff; beneath, the throat and breast grey, the tips of the feathers brown ;

Q
0

belly greenish buff, shading off into white on the under tail-coverts; wing-quills and
tail black, the former edged outwardly with a narrow line of white; wing-coverts and
secondaries black, edged with brown-pink; irides dark hazel; bill and feet horn-
colour.

Dimensions.—Total length 5:20 inches, wing 3°10, tail 2°20, culmen ‘56, tarsus 1°5.

The figures are from an adult example obtained by Mr. Perkins and from my
immature type specimen respectively.

Lb
ive]
12)

West, Newman imp

FWFrohawk delet hth.

SANGUINEA.,

AIMATIONE

HIMATIONE SANGUINEA.,

APAPANE.

“Crimson Creeper,” Latham, Gen. Synops. i. p. 739 (1782).

“Bird of a deep crimson colour,’ Cook, [Last] Voy. Pacif. Ocean, ii. p. 227 (1784).

Certhia sanguinea, Gmelin, Syst. Nat. i. p. 479 (1788); Latham, Ind. Orn. i. p. 290 (1790) ;
Donndorff, Orn. Beytr. i. p. 643 (1794) ; Shaw, Zool. viii. p, 231 (1812) ; Tiedemann, Anat.
Naturgesch. Vég. ii. p. 481 (1814). :

“ 1?Héoro-taire cramoisi,” Vieillot, Ois. Dorés, ii. p. 128, pl. Ixvi.* (1802).

“Le Soui-manga sanguinolent,”’ Virey (Sonnini), Hist. Nat. Buffon, Ois. xvii. p. 107 (1804-5).

Nectarinia sanguinea, Cuvier, Régne Anim. i. p. 410 (1817).

Petrodroma sanguinea, Vieillot, N. Dict. d’Hist. Nat. xxvi. p. 108 (1818) [ Tanna” !]; id.
Eneycl. Méth., Ornithol. p. 621 (1823); J. E. Gray (Griffith), Anim. Kingd. vii. p. 353
(1829).

Nectarinia byronensis, Bloxam, Voy. ‘ Blonde,’ p. 249 (1826).

Drepanis byronensis, J. H. Gray, ut supra, pl. opp. p. 890 (1829) ; id. Zool. Miscell. p. 12 (1831).

Myzomela? sanguinea, G. R. Gray, Gen. B. i. p. 118 (1846).

Drepanis sanguinea, Hartlaub, Syst. Verz. Mus. [Bremen], p. 16 (1844) ; id. Arch. f. Naturgesch.
1852, 1. p. 181; G. R. Gray, ut supra, p. 96, partim (1847); Bonaparte, Consp. Av. i. p. 404,
partim (1850); Lichtenstein, Nomencl. p. 55 (1854); Cassin, U.S. Expl. Exped., Mamm. &
Orn. p. 439 (1858); Dole, Proc. Bost. Soc. N. H. xii. p. 297 (1869) ; id. Hawaiian Alman.
1879, p. 44; Sclater, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1878, p. 347 ; id. Ibis, 1879, p. 92.

Himatione sanguinea, Cabanis, Mus. Hein. i. p. 99 (1850-51) ; Reichenbach, Handb. sp. Orn. p. 255,
partum, pl. 612. fig. 8834* (1853); Sclater, Ibis, 1871, p. 860; Von Pelzeln, Journ. f. Orn.
1872, p. 27, partim; Sundevall, Tentam. p. 48 (1872) ; Sharpe, Cat. B. Br. Mus. x. p. 8
(1885) ; Stejneger, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1887, p. 95; S. B. Wilson, Ibis, 1890, p. 183.

Drepanis (Himatione) sanguinea, G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Isl. p. 8, partim (1859) ; id. Hand-list,
i. p. 113, partim (1869).

* Figure notabiles.

THE circumstances attending the discovery and description of this bird are almost
identical with those in the case of several other Sandwich Island species: for in the
account of Cook’s last voyage it is mentioned as the “ Bird of a deep crimson colour ;”
Latham, in the ‘ General Synopsis,’ gives it the English name of “ Crimson Creeper ;”
and Gmelin, whose only acquaintance with it was from Latham’s work, bestowed upon
it, in his ‘ Systema Nature,’ the Latin title of Certhia sanguinea; while Peale does not
mention it at all in the history of the U.S. Exploring Expedition, though Cassin gives
it a place in the Catalogue at the end of his edition of the same. Latham, however,
did not figure this species in his book, though Vieillot subsequently did so in his
‘Oiseaux Dorés,’ and still earlier W. W. Ellis, in 1779, had made a drawing of it

(No. 30) which is still preserved in the British Museum. Later, Bloxam introduced a
possible source of error by calling the bird Nectarinia byronensis, after the commander
of H.M.S. ‘Blonde,’ under the impression that it was unknown; but, although
J. KE. Gray followed Bloxam in recognizing a second species, the misapprehension was
soon rectified and the specific name sanguinea finally approved. ‘The type was very
fortunately kept, and was identified by G. R. Gray and later by Dr. Sharpe. With
regard to the generic appellation, however, Professor Cabanis in 1850 rightly sepa-
rated the subject of our notice from the genus Drepanis, making it the type of his
Himatione, so called from the use of the feathers in the robes of chieftains. Helmets
covered with its feathers may still be seen in some museums.

This species, with Vestiaria, in company with which it is commonly seen, is distributed
throughout the whole group, and its vertical range is practically identical. Its
principal food is honey, obtained from the flowers of the ohia (Metrosideros polymorpha),
while I have seen it in numbers among the mamane trees (Sophora chrysophylla)
in the flowering season; and though I am uncertain whether their golden-yellow
racemes or the small insects among their foliage were the attraction, still I have no
doubt that it feeds partially on the latter, which abound in all the flowers visited,
since I have often found insects in the stomach when dissecting specimens. Dr. Finsch,
on the other hand (Ibis, 1880, p. 80), states that he only found small seeds; but
Mr. Knudsen, whose field-knowledge of Hawaiian birds places him on an equality
with Dr. Finsch, expresses his belief (Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1887, p. 96) “that the
Apapane feeds exclusively on flower honey.” JI am, on the whole, of opinion that were
Mr. Knudsen to have added ‘‘and on insects,” his would be the right view of the matter.
Although I did not find a nest of the Apapane, I shot a female on the 24th of May,
1887, at Kadwaloa in the district of Kona, in the ovary of which was an egg almost
ready for exclusion, a circumstance which enables me to fix approximately its breeding-
time, which seems to be later than that of the Jiwi, for 1 had shot several of the
young of the latter before the above date. I never, however, obtained specimens of
the Apapane so young as those of the Iiwi, although I have many immature examples
in which not a trace of the crimson plumage is to be seen: in this stage, as will be
seen by my Plate, they differ so much from the adult (as is also the case with Vestiaria)
that it is not easy at first to believe that they are of the same species, and my natives
were quite sure that 1 was wrong when I told them of it. The note of the Apapane
is a feeble though clear tweet twice repeated, but it also has a pretty simple song
generally heard soon after sunrise or towards sunset. In its flight the white under
tail-coverts are very conspicuous and serve to easily determine it on the wing.
The crimson feathers were not used to any great extent in the fabrication of the well-
known native robes of olden times; but there is in the Ethnological Collection
in the British Museum a kind of waist-covering of the black tail-plumes of the
domestic cock, of which the upper border—four inches in width—is composed of the
crimson feathers of this bird, the dimensions of this very war-like and savage-looking
ornament being—length 41 inches, width at the middle 18 inches. In the account of

Captain Cook’s last voyage, cited above, we find H. sanguinea referred to as follows :—
“The scarlet birds already described [ Vestiaria coccinea] which were brought for sale,
were never met with alive; but we saw a single small one, about the size of a canary
bird, of a deep crimson colour.” These observations were made on the first visit to the
island of Kauai—or Atooi, as it was termed by the early explorers.

The Hawaiians in their old mythology frequently make mention of the Apapane and
of its sweet song, and the following extract from the romantic story of Laieikawai
(‘ Legends and Myths of Hawaii,’ pp. 459, 460) may be of interest :—

“The kahu [servant] of the king first met the princess and her companion, and,
when requested by him to favour his royal master with a visit, the princess informed
him that she might possibly comply with his request the night following. ‘If I come,’
she said, ‘I will give you warning.’ ‘ Now, listen and heed,’ she continued. ‘If you
hear the voice of the Ao [{ Procellaria alba?| I am not in its notes, and when you hear
the caw of the Alala [Corvus hawatiensis] I am not in its voice. When the notes of
the Elepaio | Chasiempis sandvicensis] are heard, I am getting ready to descend. When
you hear the song of the Apapane | Himatione sanguinea] 1 shall have come out of my
house. Listen, then, and if you hear the Liwtpolena [ Vestiaria coccinea] singing, I am
outside of your house. Come forth and meet me.’ And so it came to pass. In the
kthi, or first watch of the evening, resounded the ery of the Ao, in the second watch the
caw of the Alala, at midnight the chirruping of the Elepaio, in the pili of the morning
the song of the Apapane, and at daybreak the voice of the Jiwipolena. Then a shadow
fell on the door, ‘and we were enveloped,’ said the king, ‘in a thick fog, and when it
cleared away the princess was seen in her glorious beauty, borne on the wings of birds.’
The name of the divine being, he said, was Laieikawai.”

Of this species I obtained examples on all the islands, which I am quite unable to
distinguish one from another. Dr. Stejneger (Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1887, p. 95) states
that he carefully compared five specimens procured by the U.S. Exploring Expedition
and one by Dr. Townsend ? with three sent by Mr. Knudsen, and goes on to say that
neither in colour nor in dimensions can he discover any difference between them. It
was formerly a pretty general belief that the red plumage of this species was peculiar
to the male, and that the female was greenish. Thus Reichenbach, as above cited,
described and figured (fig. 3833) one of the green species of Himatione as the female
of this one, stating that it is “ Above olive-green, shading into grass-green, below
greenish yellow, wings and tail blackish brown, bill and feet brown.” Herr von Pelzeln
also, in his paper on the sexual difference of the Honey-suckers of the Sandwich Islands,
to which reference is made in the synonymy above given, thought that Himatione virens
was the young of this species, and sought to distinguish between the male and female as
follows :—“ In the female the under mandible with the exception of the point whitish,

* Thanks to the kindness of the authorities of the Museum of the Academy of Sciences of Philadelphia in
forwarding many specimens of the birds collected by Dr. Townsend, I have been enabled to compare three
of his examples of the present species with mine. Most of those from that excellent collector are in a capital
state of preservation, though now over 50 years old,

which is not the case with the others; the bill also appears somewhat smaller and
more slender; the tip of the bill, however, in both the male and female is somewhat
damaged, so that this cannot with certainty be decided.” Dr. Stejneger does not
appear to have known whether the sexes differed, but he was right in concluding
that the bird described by Dr. Sharpe as an adult female is really only in transition
plumage: I am glad, therefore, to have been able to settle this point by saying that
a careful comparison of males and females in my collection shows that the females
can only be distinguished as stated below.

Description — Adult male. Entire upper surface of body crimson, brightest on the
head; underparts crimson as far as the abdomen, where it shades into white; under
tail-coverts white; remiges and rectrices black, the former with a very narrow outer
edge of crimson ; secondaries black, edged broadly with scarlet ; wing-lining and under
wing-coverts ashy ; irides dark hazel; bill and feet black.

Adult female. Differs from the male in having the general crimson of the plumage
of a distinctly lighter shade, while the crimson on the outer edge of the secondaries is
of the same shade as the rest of the plumage, whereas in the male it is of a much
lighter tint.

Immature. General colour above ashy brown; orange-buff on head and neck; beneath
white tinged with buff, wing-coverts and secondaries broadly margined with buff;
crimson feathers absent or interspersed among the plumage according to age.

Dimensions.—Male. Total length 5:25 inches, wing from carpal joint 2°95, culmen
‘70, tarsus °95, tail 2°90.

Female. Total length 4°85 inches, wing from carpal joint 2°85, culmen ‘60, tarsus -95,
tail 1°85.

West Newman imp.

FW Frohawk del et lith

CIRIDOPS ANNA

CIRIDOPS ANNA.
ULAAIHAWANE.

Fringilla anna, Dole, Hawaiian Alman. 1879, p. 49, (reprinted) Ibis, 1880, p. 241.
“ Ciridops , Wilson,” Nature, xlv. p. 469 (17 March, 1892).

Jupce Doue’s original account of this species is as follows :—‘“‘ Not previously described.
5¢ in. long. Bill short, straight. Toes 3 front, 1 back. Wéing-coverts and breast red ;
throat, primaries and tail black ; secondaries white; head grey, merging into white on
the upper part of the neck, and grey again on the back. Habitat Hawaii. Probably
belongs to the genus Fringilla. This is a bird of remarkable beauty, its peculiar
combination of colours producing a most harmonious and elegant effect.”

I procured a stuffed specimen from the Hon. C. R. Bishop, which had been obtained
by the late Mr. Mills of Hilo. Mr. Bishop has a very much finer example remaining,
with more grey about the head and neck, taken by the same gentleman. I used to hear
repeatedly of the ‘‘ Ulaaihawane,” by which name it is well known to the natives, who
told me that it feeds on the fruit of the Hawane palm, whence its name—Ula (red),
ai (to eat), Hawane (the Hawane palm); and therefore I have little doubt that
it will be found, perhaps in some numbers, in the upland region of the interior,
which I was unable to explore. The present specimen—now in the collection of the
Hon. Walter Rothschild—has not the sex marked; so it is impossible to say whether
the male differs from the female or not. My friend Mr. Francis Spencer, writing to
me quite recently, says that his natives had seen the bird in the swampy forest-region
above Ookala on Hawaii, and his description leaves no doubt of its identity.

CIRIDOPS’.

Bill moderate, culmen slightly arched, mandible almost straight, gape deflected.

Nostrils covered by a membrane, no rictal bristles, but a few bristly feathers on the chin.

Wings with first primary shortest, second, third, and fourth nearly equal.

Tail moderate, rectrices nearly equal.

Feet fairly strong.

Feathers of crown short and, with those of the throat, acuminate. Webs of all the
feathers, especially on the belly, decomposed.

Description.—Crown in front black, gradually shading into silvery grey and white on

* Emberize Ciridis, Linnei, faciem habens.
> >

the nape, becoming tinged with brown on the back; rump, upper tail-coverts, lower breast,
median and part of lesser coverts bright glossy scarlet; sides of face grey, deepening
- into smoky black on the throat and breast, where it forms a distinct gorget ; vent, under
tail-coverts, outer webs of last three secondaries, secondary and lesser coverts ochreous
buff; primaries and greater part of secondaries and tail black. Irides dark hazel; bill
and feet pinkish brown.

Dimensions.—Total length 4°25 inches, wing 3, bill -45, tarsus ‘85, tail 1°80.

#
Hi

Mi ims 7 be

F.WProbkawk del.et lth. West Nevaman ump.

HIMATIONE STEINEGE RI:

HIMATIONE STEJNEGERI.
AMAKIHI,

Himatione chloris, Steyneger, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1887, p. 96 (nec Cabanis).
Himatione stejnegeri, 8. B. Wilson, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1889, p. 446.

Tuas species, first obtained by Mr. V. Knudsen in Kauai, I met with shortly afterwards
in the forests of the district of Kaholuamano—the mountain-ridge adjacent to that
of Halemanu, where the original examples were procured. Dr. Stejneger, to whom
they were sent, noticed them under the head of Himatione chloris in his account of
Mr. Knudsen’s collection, but it will be observed that he did not feel certain as’ to
the identity of the form from Kauai with that from Oahu, whence came Professor
Cabanis’s types of H. chloris, and where I obtained others agreeing with them. I
named it in the ‘Proceedings of the Zoological Society, as above, after my friend
Dr. Stejneger, to whom, for his advice on several points, I am greatly indebted.
It seems to be rather scarce, or at any rate was so at the time of my visit, and I shot
but few specimens; but I was able to observe that it showed a decided preference for
the short underwood, and searched for its insect-food on the trunks and limbs of the
small ohias and other low trees, to which its strong claws enabled it to cling with ease.
It is at once distinguishable by its short stout build from any other member of the
genus, while the curve of its powerful bill more nearly approaches that of V. coccinea
than that of any other Sandwich Island species.

Description. Adult male. Upper surface, head, nape, mantle, and rump olive-green
with a greyish tinge, shading into yellowish green on the tail-coverts; forehead
slightly brighter than the crown; lores brownish black; primaries, secondaries, and
coverts smoky black, with the edges of outer webs bright olive-green ; throat and breast
lemon-yellow, with a golden-green hue, blending into a whitish tint on the abdomen and
under tail-coverts ; tail short, colouring same as wing; bill strong and deep at the
base and decurved.

Dimensions.—Aduit male. Total length 4°45 inches, wing 2°60, culmen °55, tarsus 70),
tail 1:60.
Female. Similar to the male.

Obs.—Closely resembling ZH. chloris, but having the bill much higher at the base,
more decurved, and with the maxilla perceptibly exceeding the mandible in length.
R

BW. Brohawk del. et lith.

HIMATIONE

CHLORIS.

West, Newman 1m-p-

HIMATIONE CHLORIS.
AMAKIHI.

Himatione chloris, Cabanis, Mus. Hein. i. p. 99, note (1850-51); Bonaparte, Comptes Rendus,
XXXvll. p. 264 (1854) ; S. B. Wilson, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1889, p. 447; id. Ibis, 1890, p. 185.

Drepanis (Himatione) sanguinea, G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Isl. p. 9, partim (1859) ; id. Hand-list

_ B.1. p. 118, partim (1869) (nec Gmelin).

Himatione virens, Sharpe, Cat. B. Br. Mus. x. p. 9, partim (1885) (nec Gmelin).

THE synonymy of this species presenting few complications, and its habits being, so far
as they are known, so similar to those of its congener, Himatione wirens, little remains
to be said beyond that it was originally described by Professor Cabanis from specimens
obtained by Deppe in Oahu, to which island H. chloris is confined. I have been able
to compare my specimens with one in the Museum of the University of Cambridge,
procured by Townsend (Deppe’s companion), which was submitted for determination
to the Professor, and was marked by him as agreeiug with his type in the Museum of
Berlin.

On Oahu, in the district of Halemanu (house of the birds), this species seems to
frequent more especially the depths of the steep and densely wooded ravines, and loves,
above all trees, the gigantic Lobeliacee—the strange foliage and great heads of the
purple flowers of which plants are so striking a feature of a Sandwich Island forest,
and one, I believe, only to be met with in these Pacific Isles.

Description.—Adult male. Above uniform bright yellowish green, with very narrow
black forehead and lores, and brownish-grey wings and tail, margined with the same
colour as the remaining upper parts; below golden yellow; bill and feet blackish

brown.

Dimensions.—Total length 4°5 inches, wing 2°6, tail 1-9, tarsus ‘75, culmen °4.

As I have elsewhere remarked (Proc. Zool. Soc. 1889, pp. 446, 447; Ibis, 1890,
pp. 185, 186) the representative forms of Himatione chloris in the islands of Molokai
and Lanai are easily distinguishable from each other and also from the type, and it
had been my original intention to describe them as distinct species, the form from the

latter as H. chloridoides, and that from the former as H. kalaana. It then appeared
to me that some ornithologists would consider the differences too slight to be accounted
specific, and I accordingly refrained from doing more than indicating their existence.
I have since found that Mr. Perkins, who obtained a good series of examples of each,
has in his manuscript lists kept them apart (though I am not aware of his having
published his views on the subject), and I therefore consider it advisable to follow his
example, without pledging myself to the opinion that they are more than local forms.
I here repeat the characters which I then thought would serve to distinguish them :—

Oahu.—A trace only of a yellow mark from the bill to the eye. Upper parts
of a dark greyish buff tinged with a faint shade of olive. Underparts whitish buff
tinged with yellow. Bill and legs dark brown.—True H. chloris.

Lanai.—A distinct yellow mark from the base of the bill to the eye. Upper parts
light greyish buff, distinctly tinged with olive. Beneath on the breast and throat
light lemon-yellow, shading into buff on the flanks. Bill and legs lighter brown.
The bill is more slender.— H. chloridoides.

On the island of Lanai all the specimens which I obtained were shot in some fine
guavas, quite 30 feet in height, which fringed the edge of the streamlet of the deeply-
wooded Waiapaa ravine. The birds were so busily engaged in hunting for insects,
which abounded in the guavas, that I had an excellent opportunity of observing their
graceful movements; here I saw the old birds feeding the young with small flies, larve,
and other insects.

Molokai.—A distinct yellow mark from the bill to the eye, as in the Lanai form.
Upper parts darker than in the Lanai form, but not so dark as in the type from
Oahu. Underparts yellow, but not so bright asin the Lanai form. Bill and legs
considerably stouter than in the preceding form.—Z. kalaana.

On Molokai I have often with delight watched this bird searching for its insect-food
among the low shrubs of ohia which cover the sunny slopes of the ravines on that
island, in my opinion the most lovely of the group, visited, however, but seldom by
travellers, on account of the Leper settlement being situated on its shores.

5
4

ale ut

F.W Frohawl< delet hth. i West Newman imp.

HIMATIONE VIRENS.

HIMATIONE VIRENS,

AMAKIHI*.

“ Olive-green Creeper,” Latham, Gen, Synops. i. p. 740 (1782).

Certhia virens, Gmelin, Syst. Nat. i. p. 475 (1788) ; Latham, Ind. Orn. p. 290 (1787) ; Doundorff,
Orn. Beytr. i. p. 644 (1794); Shaw, Gen. Zool. viii. p 232 (1812) ; Tiedemann, Anat.
und Naturgesch. Vog. ii. p. 431 (ex Insulis Amicis !) (1814).

? “T)Héoro-taire vert-olive,” male, Vieillot, Ois. Dorés, ii. p. 129, pl. Ixvii. (1802) *.

“‘Le Soui-manga verdatre,” Virey (Sonnini), Hist. Nat. Buffon, Ois. xvii. p. 107 (1804-5).

Melithreptus virens (partim?), Vieillot, N. Dict. d’Hist. Nat. xiv. p. 330 (1817); id. Encyecl.
Méthod. p. 607 (1828).

“Crimson Honey-eater” 2, Latham, Gen. Hist. B. iv. p. 200 (1822).

? Nectarinia flava, Bloxam, Voy. ‘ Blonde,’ p. 249 (1826), ‘“ Amakee.”

? Drepanis flava, J. K. Gray, Zool. Miscell. p. 12 (18381); Hartlaub, Arch. f. Naturgesch. 1852,
1. p. 110 (partim) ; id. Journ. f. Orn. 1854, p. 170 ; Dole, Proc. Bost. Soc. N. H. 1869, p. 298 ;
id. Hawaiian Alman. 1879, p. 45.

Phyllornis tonganensis, Lesson, Rey. Zool. 1840, p. 165 !

Phyllornis virens (Vieill.), G. R. Gray, Gen. B. p. 124 (1846)—erased id. op. cit. App. p. 6.

Drepanis sanguinea (partim), G. R. Gray, Gen. B. p. 96 (1847).

Drepanis (Himatione) sanguinea, 9, G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Isl. p. 8, partim (1859) ; id. Hand-l.
B. 1. p. 118, partim (1869).

Himatione sanguinea, Reichenbach, Handb. sp. Orn. p. 255 (partim), pl. 562. fig. 83833 (1853).

? Himatione flava, Reichenbach, ut supra, p. 255, partim (1858).

_ Drepanis flava, Sclater, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1878, p. 348 (qu. Bloxam?); id. Voy. ‘ Challenger,’
p- 95 (1881) (gu. Bloxam ?).

Himatione virens, Sharpe, Cat. B. Br. Mus. x. p. 9, partim (1885) ; Wilson, Ibis, 1890, p. 184;
Perkins, Ibis, 1893, p. 105.

Tus curve-billed species from the Island of Hawaii has, as may be seen from the
above, a long list of synonyms; but little information was until lately forthcoming
concerning it, as the majority of writers who mentioned it in their works took
their facts from the original description of Latham, in which it was named the
“Olive-green Creeper.” Gmelin’s Certhia virens is, of course, but the same in
Latinized form, while the two specimens figured by Vieillot must be referred here
with some hesitation. Forty years after he first described it, Latham in the ‘ General
History of Birds’ gave it as the female of the Crimson Honey-eater; G. R. Gray
subscribing to the same error by placing it under Drepanis (Himatione) sanguinea at
a still later date. There remains to be considered Bloxam’s example, procured during
the voyage of the ‘ Blonde.’ What is said to be the type of Nectarinia flava of that
writer, and of Drepanis flava of J. E. Gray, still exists at the British Museum, and
? The name applied to several other of the yellow-green species of Himatione.

> A very bad figure, questionable whether it refers to this species ; also whether the “‘ femelle” described and
figured, p. 130, pl. lxviii., is of the same species; but the latter is most like H. virens.

certainly appears to be the form found in Hawaii and not that of Oahu; otherwise
the presumption would be that Bloxam’s specimens were obtained in Oahu, in which
case most of the references to Nectarinia, Drepanis, or Himatione flava would be more
properly entered under H. chloris. Two specimens in the Liverpool Museum were
obtained from Townsend through Audubon, and a third is in the Museum of the
Academy of Philadelphia, among the collections made by the United States Exploring
Expedition, though Peale does not mention it in his work ; while Mr. Sclater records
it in the ‘ Proceedings of the Zoological Society’ for 1878, as brought home by the
naturalists of the ‘ Challenger’ Expedition.

This little bird is peculiar to the Island of Hawaii, and ranges from the lowest
forest zone to 5000 feet or higher. Very unobtrusive in its movements, it may con-
stantly be seen among the undergrowth of the forest, diligently searching every limb
and slender branch and tapping the bark for its prey; and at Mana, in Hawaii (3500
feet), I found it in great numbers in January on the mamdne trees, which abound
in that district, and are at that season in full bloom. As far as I have observed, this
species lives almost entirely on insects and larve, and finds its favourite hunting-
grounds on the aaka or Bastard Sandalwood (Myoporum santalinum), the koa (Acacia
koa), and the mamane (Sophora chrysophylia), though it also frequents the ohia. It
may occasionally feed on honey, but I never observed it to do so, and at any rate it
cannot be the case with it to such an extent as with its ally H. sanguinea. Moreover,
it hunts rather among the lower foliage of a tree than in the flowering branches.
The commonest note is a low ‘ tweet,” which is something like that of the European
Goldcrest; but it has, besides this, a sweet though short song. The birds are
depicted on a branch of kauila (Alphitonia excelsa), of which I obtained specimens on
Hawaii, where it is now extremely scarce. In olden times the war-spears of the
islanders were made of the wood of this tree, which is extremely hard and of a very
handsome dark reddish colour.

Mr. Perkins says (Ibis, 1893, pp. 105, 106) that this species is very partial to the
lehua flowers, and that he has seen the nest at different heights in various trees. It
is lined with roots, and has many fruit-capsules of the poka, dry and more or less
skeletonized, woven in the exterior.

Description.—Adult male. Above yellowish orange, somewhat brighter on the rump,
the forehead and sides of the head being yellow with an inclination to orange ; lores black
and well defined; beneath, the entire surface of the body of a bright greenish yellow,
inclining to lemon-yellow on the abdomen; wing and tail-quills blackish brown, edged
with olive-green; under tail-coverts and wing-lining whitish; irides dark hazel: bill
and feet black.

Adult female. Much duller than the male, the abdomen being almost primrose-
yellow, while the greenish yellow of the upper parts in the male is replaced by ashy
olive. Apparently the forehead is not yellow.

Dimensions —Total length 4:5 inches, wing from carpal joint 2°63, culmen -65,
tarsus °80, tail 1°85.

FLW.Frohawle delet lith. . West Newman mp.

HIMATIONE. WILSONTL.

HIMATIONE WILSONL.

Himatione chloris, 8. B. Wilson, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1889, p. 447; id. Ibis, 1890, p. 185 (partim).
Himatione wilsoni, Rothschild, Bull. Brit. Orn. Club, i. p. xlii (1893).

Or this species, peculiar to Maui, the habits are at present undescribed, though they
are doubtless similar to those of its congeners, for which special reference may be made
to H. virens.

Description.—Above yellowish green, below bright yellow with an inclination to
orange ; the superciliary streak is of the same yellow tint, the lores and a very narrow
frontal line being black.

Dimensions.—Total length 4°6 inches, wing 2°46, tail 1°65, tarsus °8, culmen ‘55.
The female is greyer above, and paler in the yellow portions.

Mr. Rothschild says :—“ Similar to H. stejnegeri of Kauai, but smaller, the beak
considerably less and straighter, in this respect resembling H. virens of Hawaii.’ For
my own part I have considered this bird indistinguishable from H. chloris.

(er) a

West,Newman imp.

FW Prohawk delet hth.

HIMATIONE PARVA.

HIMATIONE PARVA.,

ALAWI or ANAUANTI.

Himatione parva, Stejneger, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1887, p. 94.

THIS species was first obtained in Kauai, to which island it is peculiar, while a good
description of it was given by Dr. Stejneger as above cited. It is met with in small
flocks, usually in company with Oreomyza bairdi, and at times also with Chrysomitridops
ceruleirostris, from which it is hardly distinguishable at a short distance; it has a low
chirp, but no song that I heard. The range seems to extend throughout the forest-
region, as it was found by Mr. Francis Gay towards the summit of Waialeale (4000 feet),
the highest point on the island of Kauai. It feeds principally on insects}, as does
Himatione virens, but no doubt also occasionally on honey.

Dr. Stejneger, in his remarks on this bird, says :—

‘** In general proportions the present species, which is the smallest of the slender-
billed Hawaiian Dicewide, agrees very well with Himatione sanguinea, except in its
proportionately somewhat shorter bill, and cannot be separated from it generically,
although in shape and size of bill somewhat intermediate between the latter species
and Lowvops. It is of about the same size as L. coccinea, consequently much smaller
than /. sanguinea, and easily separable from both by its coloration, except perhaps
from the female Loxops coccinea, which, according to v. Pelzeln (Journ. f. Orn. 1872,
p. 29), is green above and yellow below. The bare nasal fossee and longer bill of
H. parva will prevent its being confounded with Loops, however. In regard to
colour it approaches more closely Himatione chloris, but H. parva is brighter yellow
both above and below, and has the under tail-coverts yellow, strongly contrasting with
the white of the abdomen, while in H. chloris they are whitish washed with dull buff.
They are very easily told apart by the quite different dimensions and proportions,
H. chloris being much larger, with a much longer and more curved bill and a propor-
tionately much shorter tail than H. parva.

“From /. virens (Gm.) (which I take to be the same as Sharpe’s and Sclater’s bird
of the same name and also the same as Bloxam’s /. flava, Mr. Sharpe having the type
of the latter in the British Museum) our H/. parva may be distinguished principally
by its smaller size, and especially by its much shorter bill.

* Dr. Stejneger, on the authority of Mr. Knudsen, gives its native name as Kamao, which is incorrect; but -
that gentleman is doubtless right in stating that it “ feeds on bugs, but also on the juices of flowers.”

“ H, maculata, Cabanis, which is evidently quite distinct from both H. virens and
H. chloris, is at once excluded from comparison with H. parva on account of the
dimensions, and especially as having an entirely different wing-formula.”

Dr. Stejneger’s description is as follows :—

Description —Adult male. Entire upper surface and sides of body, as well as the
outer edges of quills and tail-feathers, bright yellowish olive-green, inclining to olive-
yellow on forehead, region above the lores, supercilia, and rump; trace of a dusky
line between bill and eye; under surface, including under tail-coverts, bright olive-
yellow; middle of abdomen, tibie, axillaries, and under wing-coverts white, except
those of the latter nearest to the edge of the wing, which are bright yellow; quills
blackish, edged in the outer web with yellowish olive, in the inner one with white.
Bill horny, brownish grey, pale at base below the nostrils; feet horny, brownish grey.

The female is similar to the male.

Dimensions (taken from a specimen in my collection).—Total length 4°30 inches,
wing from carpal joint 2°40, culmen °40, tarsus °70, tail 1°40.

FW.Frohewk del. et hth.

VIRTD ONTA SAG tT E@ so TS.

West, Newman imp.

VIRIDONIA SAGITTIROSTRIS,

Viridonia sagittirostris, Rothschild, Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist. ser. 6, x. p. 112 (July 1892); id.

Avif. Laysan, p. 109, pl. (1893).

Mr. Roruscump described this new species in the ‘ Annals and Magazine of Natural
History’ for 1892, in the following words :—

“Fam. Meliphagide.
“ VIRIDONIA, gen. nov.

“ Bill slightly curved, stout at the base, attenuating towards the tip, which is sharply
pointed ; wing rather broad, the first quill slightly shorter than the sixth ; no bastard
primary ; tail rather short, nearly even at the tip; legs and feet stout; culmen about
equal in length to the tarsus.

“ Viridonia sagittirostris, sp. n.

“« Adult male. Upper parts bright olive-green, rather paler and brighter on the sides
of the head and upper tail-coverts. Underparts bright yellowish green; wings blackish
brown, the primaries narrowly and the secondaries more broadly margined with
yellowish green ; tail blackish brown, with yellowish-green margins; under surface of
the wings dark ashy, the quills margined with dull white on the basal half; margin
of the wing tinged with yellow. Bill black; legs black; iris brownish grey.

“ Total length about 6°5 inches, culmen 0°9, wing 3:3, tail 2-1, tarsus 0-91.

“ Adult female. Resembles the male, but is rather duller in tinge of colour both on
the upper and underparts.

“ Hab. Mauna Kea, Hawai, Sandwich group.”

This bird was discovered in 1892 by Palmer, when collecting for Mr. Rothschild, on
the slopes of Mauna Kea, above Hilo; it frequents high trees and masses of creepers
in the densest forest, generally at an altitude of from 500 to 1500 feet, is shy and
fairly active, and utters a high clear call-note, rather like that of the Mamo, varied by
a regular whistling trill. The song is not unlike that of Chlorodrepanis, but has two
or three loud notes at the end. Only four specimens were obtained in the first
instance, but Mr. Perkins secured several on his visit to the islands in 1896, one of
them at an altitude of 2000 feet. ‘The stomachs of those he shot were filled with
crickets of the genus Paratrigonidium.

Tt will be seen that Mr. Rothschild originally referred this species to the family
Meliphagide ; but that he subsequently modified his opinion is clear from his statement,
in the ‘ Avifauna of Laysan,’ to the effect that the genus comes “nearest to Oreomyza.”
It undoubtedly belongs to the Drepanidide, as that group is now understood. In the
work just mentioned a new version of the generic characters is given, which runs as
follows :—

“ Bill straight or very slightly curved, high and stout at base, attenuating towards
the tip, which is sharply pointed. Nostrils protected by an upper operculum, only at
base a little overhung by short feathers. Wing rather broad; first primary entirely
rudimentary ; fourth and fifth about equal and longest, gradually becoming shorter
towards both sides; second slightly shorter than the seventh, and about equal to the
eighth. ‘Tail somewhat short, nearly even at tip. Legs and feet strong. Plumage
rich and soft.

“Sexes similar.”

FW Frohawk del et hth

OREOMYZA BAIRDI.

West, Newman unp

OCREOMYZA BATRDI.
AKIKIKI.

Oreomyza bairdi, Stejneger, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1887, p. 99; id. op. cit. 1889, p. 885; S. B.
Wilson, Ibis, 1890, p. 193.
Oreomyza wilsoni, Stejneger, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1889, p. 386.

THIS species was first obtained by Mr. Knudsen in Kauai, to which island it is peculiar,
while an excellent description of it was given by Dr. Stejneger as above cited. It is
usually met with in small flocks of from eight to twelve, and is a particularly active
bird, continually running up and down the limbs and trunks of the high trees in search
of insects; it is, in fact, the most energetic bird of the Hawaiian forests. Its short
tail, in Dr. Stejneger’s opinion, indicates terrestrial habits, but I only observed it at
some considerable height from the ground, in the lofty ohia and koa trees, for the
dead branches of which it evinces a decided preference; a flowering branch of the
narrow-leaved variety of the latter, taken from a dried specimen, is well depicted in
the Plate by Mr. Frohawk. The note is a simple twit, twit, twit, repeated constantly.
Its range seems to reach an elevation of 3000 feet. Occasionally examples of this
bird have the forehead white, and Dr. Stejneger upon them has founded a second
species which he has done me the honour of distinguishing by my name. I do not
think, however, that it is valid, as my examples were all obtained in one locality ; but
at the same time the variation in plumage does not seem to be due to sex.

Dr. Stejneger, in establishing a new genus for this bird says :—‘‘ This genus may be
characterized as one of the nine-primaried Dicwidw (as defined by R. B. Sharpe, Cat.
B. Brit. Mus. x. p. 2) distinguished (1) by having the nasal fosse partly hidden by
antrorse feathers ; (2) by the absence of rictal bristles; (3) by the elongated, but other-
wise Lowvops-like bill; (4) by the shortness of the first (ninth) primary, which is but
slightly longer than the secondaries ; (5) by the shortness and stoutness of the feet, the
tarsus being not more than twice the hind toe without claw.

‘In some respects the present form seems to agree with Pinaroloxias, Sharpe, especi-
ally in the profile of the bill. JI can find no other structural character of consequence
assigned to the latter species than ‘the culmen flattened in front of the nostrils’
(Sharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. x. p. 3), a peculiarity not at all shared by Oreomyza.

“The most noteworthy peculiarity of the present genus is expressed by the wing-
formula, which seems to be unique among the Hawaiian members of the Dicwide, for
all the other forms which I have been able to examine, viz. Hemignathus, Vestiaria,
Himatione, Heterorhynchus (lucidus), Loxops (coccinea), and Psittirostra, have the first
(ninth) primary never shorter than the fifth, while in Oreomyza it is shorter than the

seventh, and only slightly longer than the secondaries, which in the other genera fall
short of the tips of the exterior primary by more than the length of the hind toe
without claw. I have examined carefully both specimens of Oreomyza bairdi and find
they agree completely ; I also find the quills are fully grown, so that there is no chance
of their being undeveloped.

“ Another important feature is the partial covering of the nasal fossz by overhanging
feathers, and the absence of real bristles. In the specimens of Loxops and Psittirostra
before me, the nasal fossee are likewise covered by antrorse feathers (in the cuts of the
bills of these genera in the tenth volume of Cat. B. Brit. Mus. pp. 49, 51, the nasal
fossee are represented as entirely bare), and the bristles, if present, are slightly deve-
loped, while in the other genera strong and black bristles are seen guarding the base
of the upper mandible.

“The hind toe is better developed, and the tarsus comparatively shorter than in the
allied genera. Taken in connection with the rounded shape of the wing and the com-
parative shortness of the tail, it seems likely that the habits of the present form are
more terrestrial than those of the other Hawaiian Dicwide.”

To Dr. Stejneger’s account, part of which is here transcribed, I can add that in
freshly-killed specimens the bill is light brown, tinged with pink, the feet light pink,
the irides dark hazel, and that the female is similar to the male; while the native
name “ Akakane” is incorrect, “ Akikiki” being right.

Description. Adult male. Above clear olive-grey, tinged with pale olive-green on
rump and margins of tail-feathers and secondaries; beneath pale olive-buff, nearly
white on chin, throat, and under wing-coverts, tinged with pale primrose-yellow on the
fore neck, and suffused with olive-grey on the flanks; lores whitish ; ear-coverts like

the upper parts.

Dimensions (taken from a specimen in my collection).—Total length 4-45 inches,
wing from carpal joint 2°80, culmen °45, tarsus ‘65, tail 1:85.

Pers x

Ak ‘ 28

FLW Probawk del. et Hth ' West Newman ince.

| LOXOPS COCCINEA.
2.LOXOPS FLAMMEA.,

LOXOPS FLAMMEA,

KAKAWAHIE.

Lozxops flammea, Scott Wilson, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1889, p. 445.

Tur new species of Loops, of which the discovery is related here, was originally
described in the ‘ Proceedings of the Zoological Society,’ as above.

It is peculiar, as far as I can judge, to the island of Molokai, and I only procured
three specimens during my stay, all at Kalae; it may not, however, be safe to consider
it rare, as my host easily obtained the native name for me, thus showing the bird
to be known to the aborigines. I met with all three examples on the same day,
killing a male and female at the same shot. It was in one of those penetrating mists,
which fortunately we did not often experience in the Sandwich Islands, that I had
started early in the morning from Mr. Meyer's residence, accompanied only by a
native boy, and till noon the day was clear; in the afternoon, however, the mist
gathered and a cold rain began to fall; soon we were completely enveloped, and my
native, well acquainted with the forest as he was, lost the way. While we were
wandering about and searching for the trail, I heard a curious sound,—a continued chip,
chip, chip, not unlike the sound of chopping wood when heard at a distance—which
at first I did not think could belong to a bird; soon, however, I was undeceived, as a
flash of brilliant orange colour passed us in the fog; when, on trying to follow it up,
the continuous metallic note enabled me to get within range and I fired, bringing down
two birds, which proved to be male and female. Soon afterwards I shot another of the
bright-coloured males. We had by this time hopelessly lost our way, and the conse-
quences might have been serious ; so we were extremely glad to hear revolver shots at
no great distance, which proved to be fired by Mr. Meyer’s sons, who had come out in
search of us. The name applied to this bird in the Hawaiian language means fire-
wood ; but whether this is given to it from the note, which, as remarked above, resembles
the sound of chopping wood, or from the brilliant flame-colour of its plumage, I am
unable to say.

Description.—Adult male. Front and sides of the head pure scarlet; top of the head
and back brownish scarlet, brightening into nearly pure scarlet on the rump; chin,
throat, and lower surface generally pure scarlet, but paler in hue, brightening, however,
on the flanks; remiges and rectrices blackish brown edged with brownish scarlet; wing-
lining pale scarlet. Bill and legs light pinkish brown.

Adult female. Top of the head hair-brown, but each feather brownish scarlet at the

base, and the shafts of those towards the back of the head grey; back hair-brown
C

tinged with red; rump distinctly russet ; upper tail-coverts brownish scarlet; remiges
and rectrices blackish brown edged with brownish scarlet, as also are the upper
wing-coverts. Beneath, dull white tinged with pale scarlet ; sides of the body reddish
brown, and wing-lining white tinged with scarlet.

Dimensions. —Total length 5 inches, wing from carpal Joint 2°5, culmen °5, tarsus ‘75,
tail 2.

Obs.—Differs from L. coccinea not only in its much larger size, but in the intense
purity of its scarlet, which replaces the scarlet-orange of that bird.

FW. Prohawk: delet ith.

HIMATIONE NEWTONI

West, Newman imp.

HIMATIONE NEWTONL,

Himatione newtoni, Rothschild, Bull. Brit. Orn. Club, i. p. xli (1893).
Oreomyza newtoni, Rothschild, Avif. Laysan, p. 115 ; Perkins, Ibis, 1895, p. 122.

As will be seen from the above, this straight-billed form was discovered in Maui by
the collectors of Mr. Rothschild, who accordingly described it in 1893 and considered
it to be closely allied to H. montana of Lanai.

Mr. Perkins’s remarks on the habits of the birds of this genus are of such interest
that I think it advisable to reproduce them here, some of the species having already
been treated in former parts of the present work. He says :—

‘«‘ They are pre-eminently insect-eaters, hunting for these on the trunks and branches
of the trees. Their cry is a monotonous ‘chip, chip,’ which they utter very voci-
ferously when their haunts are intruded upon. It is a little different—rather less
sharp—in the species found on Hawaii and Kauai (0. mana and O. bairdz).

“The two Oreomyze peculiar to Maui and Lanai (0. newtoni and O. montana) have
a distinct song, short, rather vigorous, but very rarely heard. Apparently they sing
only when intensely excited, as, for instance, when one male has been successful in
driving off another intruding upon his domain’. On such occasions I have seen the
victor rise spirally upwards to a height of from twenty to fifty feet, pouring forth its
little song while on the wing, then suddenly darting down again to the concealment of
the brush. Very rarely indeed I detected the same species feeding on the nectar of
the lehua flowers, and shot them with the beak dripping therewith. O. mana of
Hawaii generally frequented the tall koa trees, also coming down into the underbrush
of bastard sandal; O. bairdi, of Kauai, was mostly seen in the lehuas; the other
species largely frequented the low brush, being frequently seen amongst the fern-
fronds and even on the ground. ‘hey feed much on caterpillars and small moths,
which they find on the trunks and branches, climbing along the undersides of the
latter and up the largest of the former with equal ease. Large moths, when caught,
they hold down with their claws, tearing off the wings before eating them. To Owls
they have the greatest aversion, and when one flies overhead they become greatly
excited, all those in the neighbourhood joining in the clamour. I have seen some
twenty or thirty Oreomyze@ gathered around one of these birds, which was sleeping on
a dead branch, but they kept at a respectful distance, and did not venture out of the
brush. Itis highly probable that in past times they were largely preyed on by the

1 «This refers more especially to Oreomyza montana. O. newtoni I heard sing more frequently.”

Owls, the favourite food of which they possibly were, as they lack the objectionable
odour of the other green birds, and the latter never seemed similarly frightened. As
to the Owl (Asio accipitrinus) itself, it now preys mostly on the introduced mice,
which abound, especially on the lower slopes and plains, but at times it may be seen
hawking for small birds in parts of the forest where mice are quite absent. Moreover,
it was probably much more abundant in past times, as it was never destroyed by the
natives, who considered it a most powerful god. ‘The old navigators speak of its
great abundance and tameness; but since the settling of the country by white men it
has been largely destroyed (though still abundant), since it is given to carrying off the
newly-hatched chickens. ‘To this day few natives will shoot at one of these birds.

‘To one species referred to this genus by Mr. Rothschild in his book (‘The Birds
of Laysan,’ &c.) I have not alluded. This is the Himatione parva, of Kauai, which
has neither the habits nor appearance of Oreomyza, but belongs rightly to the genus
in which it was first placed. It is to a great extent a honey-sucker, like its congeners.
The slight difference between it and them in the wing-formula is quite insufficient to
detach it from its allies. It also has the nasal opercula bare, as in the other members,
not overhung with antrorse feathers, like Oreomyza. But, apart from this, the
formation of the tongue at once shows its proper place. In Himatione and Lowops
this is elongated, very narrow, and terminates in a brush. ‘The lateral margins are
bent upwards, to meet in the middle line above, and form a tubular canal, for about
half the length of the horny part of the tongue. In Oreomyza the tongue is very
short and comparatively broad, the sides but slightly raised, and not nearly meeting
above; it is not terminated in a brush, but the apex is cleft in the middle for some
considerable depth. Himatione and Loxops (including Chrysomitridops) ave at once
distinguished from each other by the longer, thinner, more or less curved bill of the
former, the beak of Loxops being short and thick with the apex of the mandible more
or less deflected (either to the right or left), tending to cross the maxilla.”

Description.—Upper parts dark olive-green, with a band of yellow on the forehead
and above the eyes, which varies in breadth, though usually the tront portion of the head
is mainly yellow, the cheeks and middle of the lower surface being similarly coloured.
‘The sides of the body are greenish, the bill and feet dark brown. In life the latter are
said to be silvery grey with a pinkish tinge}.

Dimensions. —Total length 4°5 inches, wing 2°5, tail 2, tarsus -8, culmen °4.

The female is greyer above and lighter yellow below, but does not differ from the
male so much as is the case in many other species of the genus.

' Rothschild, Avif. Laysan, p. 115.

PW. Prohawk delet lith. West, Newman. imp.

BIMATION SE, MAC ONES WS. 6 a,

HIMATIONE MACULATA,

AMAKIHI.

Himatione maculata, Cabanis, Mus. Hein. i. p. 100 (1850-51) ; Hartlaub, Arch. f. Naturgesch.
1852, i. p. 110; Reichenbach, Handb. sp. Orn. p. 256 (1853) ; Bonaparte, Comptes Rendus,
XxXkvill. p. 264 (1854) ; Stejneger, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1887, p. 94; S. B. Wilson, Ibis,
1890, p. 186.

Drepamis (Himatione) sanguinea, juv., G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Isl. p. 9 (1859).

Himatione virens, Sharpe, Cat. B. Br. Mus. x. p. 9, partim (1885).

Viridonia maculata, Rothschild, Bull. Brit. Orn. Club, i. p. lvii (1893).

Oreomyza maculata, Rothschild, Avif. Laysan, p. 118, pl. (1898).

Tuis straight-billed bird, found only upon Oahu, was described by Prof. Cabanis, in
the ‘Museum Heineanum,’ from a male and an immature female obtained in that
island by Deppe when in company with Townsend in 1836-37. The validity of the
new species seemed, however, more than doubtful to G. R. Gray, and afterwards to
Dr. Sharpe when writing the tenth volume of the ‘ British Museum Catalogue of Birds’;
for the first. author considered it to be the young of Himatione sanguinea, while the
last-named referred it to H. virens. Dr. Stejneger, nevertheless, reported it as certainly
distinct from the latter in 1887, and the matter was practically settled by the specimens
which I obtained in the same year, on my first visit to the Sandwich Islands. It is
true that all of these examples were immature; but, owing to the kindness of the
authorities of the Museum of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, I was
enabled to compare with them an adult male procured by Townsend, which is that
described below. Mr. Rothschild, who at one time considered the bird to be a member
of his new genus Viridonia, says: ‘“* Wilson remarks that Cabanis’s name ‘ maculata’ is
inappropriate.” This, however, was not the word that I used; I said that the name
was ‘‘ unfortunate ”—which it certainly is, for the adult male exhibits no traces of
spots,—and “unfortunate ” has not the same meaning as “inappropriate.”

Himatione maculata is fairly common in the district of Halemann, where there are
still some remains of the former forest; and Palmer found it “not rare” in the upland
region of Waialua at an altitude of 1500 feet and upwards, while Mr. Perkins obtained
a considerable number of specimens at the same place and at Kawailoa in 1893, some
of them at a rather lower elevation. Its habits resemble those of other members of
the genus (Oreomyza) as limited in the Introduction.

Description.—Adult male. Very similar to the adult male of Z. chloris, but with the
olive upper plumage darker, though tinged with yellow; forehead hardly brighter than
the crown, but a distinct, though indefinitely marked, yellowish streak over the eye;
lores brownish black ; chin, cheeks, auriculars, and throat clear golden-yellow, which
colour pervades the breast and belly, becoming very pale, almost white, on the
abdomen ; lower tail-coverts pale yellow. Wing-coverts with distinct whitish marks
of considerable size.

Adult female. Very unlike the male above described. Streak over the eye and
under parts white, tinged with yellow; sides of the body and flank-region greyish ;
upper parts olive-grey, showing whitish marks, which are much less distinct than in
the male. Bill and feet rather dark brown. “ Soles flesh colour and orange; iris dark
brown ” (Ltothschild).

The male characterized above is not, however, the form usually found, even when
the birds are breeding. No doubt its colour is such as would be expected, judging
from the other species most nearly related to it; but the tints seem to be quite
abnormal, as both sexes are usually coloured much alike, though the male has more
distinct and rounder white wing-spots.

Dimensions.—Total length about 5 inches, culmen about ‘6, wing 2°6-2°8, tail
nearly 2, tarsus 8.

FW. Prohawl: delet lth.

AHIMATIONE -MONTANA.

West, Newman ump

HIMATIONE MONTANA.

Himatione montana, 8. B. Wilson, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1889, p. 446.

Tuis hitherto undescribed species I obtained in the mountain-region of Lanai, ata
spot called Lanaihale (the house of Lanai), at a height of about 3000 feet, the
brilliant yellow of the underparts in the freshly killed male and its nearly straight
bill clearly showing it to be distinct from any other member of the genus. I only met
with four specimens, of which I secured an adult male and female on the same day in
the locality mentioned above, and subsequently two immature examples in a gulch at
a much lower elevation. As, perhaps, an account of our mountain trip on the day on
which I shot the former may be of interest, I here transcribe from my Journal
some notes, taken on the spot :—

“ Ist June, 1888.—To-day we took two natives, one of them armed with an axe with
which to clear the path for us. ‘The day was fine, and the trail by which one ascends
to the plateau was consequently in good order, so we arrived there without accident.
Here we tied up our horses, and then all of us started down a narrow forest-path, the
same which we had followed the day before. For a few hundred yards it is thickly
overhung with ferns (Gletchenia) and the climbing Ieie (Mreycinetia arborea), and we
had almost to take to our knees, which was intensely tiring work. After this thick bit it
becomes more open, owing to the presence of wild pigs; and here F. and I, with one of the
natives, waited, as it was at this spot that Mr. Gibson had shot some birds the previous
day. I was very unlucky in not finding several specimens which I killed; Mr. Gibson
soon returned with a few birds, but of the same species that I had already obtained
in Hawaii. From here we started about 12 o’clock, following the path, to try to make
the summit of the mountain. Before long the path emerges from the thick scrub and
comparatively tall trees on to a plateau, where the scrub only reaches to one’s knees.
From this open plateau we had a magnificent view of the west side of the island, with
Molokai and Maui in the far distance, surrounded by a bright blue sea. The path then
ascends gradually till we reach a point overlooking Palawai Valley, which looks a mere
dot in the landscape, so far is it below us. We followed the path a little higher;
here it becomes decidedly steep, and the rich light yellow soil is very slippery as
far as the top of the mountain; the ohia and other trees are of considerable size, but
we could neither hear nor see any birds. However, at a point called Lanaihale, on
our return journey, I caught sight of a bright yellow bird in an ohia bush, a few yards
down the side of the gulch; I put my gun instantly to my shoulder and fired, and
down came the bird; F. and I scrambled down the gulch and fortunately found it.

Its breast was of a brilliant yellow, far brighter in tint than the plumage of any other
species I had previously obtained ; its legs and bill were a light pink: in dissecting it
I found some small larvee.”

No words of mine can convey an idea of the difficulty and danger of collecting in
the mountains of Lanai; this is due to the almost impenetrable bush which covers the
upland plateau, to the fogs which render riding extremely dangerous, and to the rains
which make the nearly perpendicular mountain-trails treacherous even to a sure-footed
Lanai horse; indeed, inured as I was to “steep bits” in my island travels, I must
confess that the first trip we made into these solitudes surprised me. I must here
mention that the discovery of this interesting species is due to the kindness of my friend
Mr. Henry Gibson, in kindly acting as our guide on our explorations, and also to
the late Mr. Jesse Morehead’s invariable kindness to me during a stay of some weeks’
duration under Mr. F. H. Hayselden’s hospitable roof.

Description—Adult male. Forehead, sides of the face, and throat deep lemon-yellow,
shading into a lighter tint of yellow on the breast and abdomen, the lower part of
which is white; under tail-coverts deep lemon-yellow; upper parts, with the exception
of the rump, which is yellow, are dull greenish yellow; primaries (of which the second
is much shorter than the fourth and fifth, which are equal) ashy brown, edged with dull
yellow; wing-lining white, tinged with clear yellow; tail-quills ashy brown edged with
dull yellow ; bill light pinkish; feet slender, of the same colour as the bill.

Adult female. Similar in general colour to the male, though the underparts are of a
very light shade of lemon-yellow instead of the deep yellow of the male.

Dimensions.—Total length 4 inches, wing from carpal joint 2:25, culmen °35, tarsus
‘70, tail 2°75.

Obs.—The bill in curve approaches nearest to Oreomyza and in size to Himatione
parva, Stejn.

TW. Prohawk delet lith.

HIMATIONE MANA,

West, Newman imp,

HIMATIONE MANA.

Himatione mana, 8. B. Wilson, Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist. ser. 6, vii. p. 460 (1891).

Or this new species I only obtained three specimens; and I must confess that I
did not recognize its distinctness from Himatione virens, inhabiting as it does the
same localities in Hawaii, until I examined my examples with Professor Newton;
while Count T. Salvadori, on looking over the birds in my collection, remarked its
similarity to Oreomyza bairdi in the nearly straight bill and the plumage of the
underparts, especially in the female.

Description.—Adult male. Head ashy olive, shading into dull olive-green on the
back ; beneath dull greenish buff, except the chin and throat, which are whitish;
wings and tail brown, edged outwardly with olive-green.

Female. Duller on the upper parts, while the chin and throat beneath are nearly
white, the rest of the underparts more buff than in the male.

Dimensions.—Total length 4:45 inches, wing 2°50, culmen -45, tarsus °70, tail 1-40.

3, F

ahs

Pa
Bey

eer Le : inhi Lae

bh aie

oe NR

LOXOPS COCCINEA,

AKEPEUIE.

"s gh 2-0, ‘duke,

“Scarlet Finch,” Latham, Gen. Synops. 1. p. 270 (1783).

Fringilla coccinea, Gmelin, Syst. Nat. i. p. 921 (1788); Latham, Ind. Orn. i. p. 444 (1790) ;
Donndorff, Orn. Beytr. 1. p. 541 (1795); Tiedemann, Anat. Naturgesch. Vég. ii. p. 433
(1814) ; Stephens, Shaw’s Zool. ix. p. 454 (1815); Cuvier, Régne Anim. i. p. 387 (1817) ;
Vieillot, N. Dict. @ Hist. Nat. xii. p. 167 (1817) ; id. Encycl. Méthod., Ornithol. p. 983 (1828) ;
J. E. Gray & Griffith, An. Kingd. Aves, ii. p. 140 (1829); G. R. Gray, Gen. B. ii. p. 371
(1849).

“ Le Moineau des Iles Sandwich,” Sonnini, Hist. Nat. Buffon, Ois. xii. p. 251 (1802).

“‘Chardonneret écarlate,’” Vieill. Ois. Chant. pl. 31* (1805).

Fringilla rufa, Bloxam, Voy. ‘ Blonde,’ p. 250 (1826) ; J. E. Gray, Zool. Miscell. p. 11 (1831).

Carduelis coccinea, Lesson, Compl. Buffon, viii. p. 281 (1837).

Linaria ? coccinea, Gould, Zool. Voy. ‘Sulphur,’ p. 41, Birds, pl. 22* (1848).

Drepanis rufa, G. R. Gray, Gen. B. 1. p. 96 (1847).

Loxops coccinea, Cabanis, Arch. f. Naturgesch. 1847, i. p. 3830; G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Isl.
p. 28 (1859) ; id. Hand-l. B.i. p. 114 (1869) ; Sclater, Ibis, 1871, p. 360, 1879, p.92; Sharpe,
Cat. B. Br. Mus. x. pp. 49, 50 (1885).

Hypoloxias coccinea, Bonaparte, Consp. Av. i. p. 518 (1850) ; Lichtenstein, Nomencl. Av. p. 48
(1854) ; Hartlaub, Arch. f. Naturgesch. 1852, i. p. 183; Dole, Proc. Bost. Soc. N. H. 1869,
p- 801; id. Hawaiian Alman. 1879, p. 49.

Lozxops coccineus, Von Pelzeln, Journ. f. Orn. 1872, p. 29.

“ Byrseus coccineus, Reichenbach,” Bonaparte ut supra [Byrseus, Reichenbach, Natiirl. Syst. Vig.
tab. Ixxv. (1850) ].

Drepanis aurea, Dole, Hawaiian Alman. 1879, p. 45.

Lowxops aurea, Sharpe, Cat. B. Br. Mus. x. p. 50, partim (1885).

* Figure notabiles.

Tuis is one of the birds of which examples have always been so rare in museums that
few persons have had opportunities of examining them, and in consequence we have an
involved synonymy. Brought home by Cook’s people, and originally described by
Latham from the Leverian Museum, it was named Fringilla coccinea by Gmelin, but
unfortunately received the new appellation of F. rufa from Bloxam; while G. R. Gray,
having the ‘Blonde’ specimens before him, referred them in 1847 to the genus
Drepanis, retaining also, in 1849, the original F. coccinea as a distinct species; Gould,
moreover, in the Zoology of the Voyage of H.M.S. ‘Sulphur,’ failed to perceive that
the so-called two species were identical. Further confusion has been caused by Judge
Dole, who, while including /’. coccinea in his list, redescribed it there as Drepanis aurea
D

from an example in Mills’s collection, which has been examined by myself. The
curved and slender bill makes its reference to Drepanis, as that name has been some-
times used, excusable ; but Dr. Finsch unfortunately referred (Ibis, 1880, p. 80) to
the so-called “ D. aurea ””»—the type of which came from Hawaii—the birds which he
obtained in Maui, belonging to a wholly different species, as is elsewhere shown in the
present work.

This bright-coloured species is confined to the Island of Hawaii, where it is so un-
common that during eight months’ collecting I obtained but five specimens. It may
be of interest to state the localities and give some details of the capture, as this is one
of the rarest of Hawaiian birds, and cannot, I think, be far from extinct. The first
example that I procured was on June 15th, 1887, at a ranche called Puulehua, in the
district of Kona, at an elevation of 5000 feet, and, soon after, I got another in the same
locality, while a third was shot by my friend Mr. Horswill in September, about three
miles from the Voleano House, on the Keauhou road. I had seen this bird the day
previous, sitting on an old stump of an ohia tree, and had fired at it but missed; yet
the next day on our return to the spot we found it not thirty yards from where we
had seen it before, and Mr. Horswill shot it. It is a curious fact that the natives at
the house insisted it was the far-famed Mamo (Drepanis pacifica) ; and this ignorance
tends to show that that species cannot have been seen of late years, as here were
natives living within fifteen miles of Olaa—formerly a famous bird-catching resort,
and supposed to be the home of the Mamo,—confounding it with a bird totally unlike
it inform and colour. Again, in January 1888, when shooting in the forest on Puukapu
near Waimea, in company with Mr. Frank Spencer, jun., I saw an example of this
species in the flower-covered branches of an ohia tree, and called to my friend to fire; —
he killed it and brought down an Amakihi (Himatione virens) with the same barrel.
My fifth bird was shot within a few miles of Mana, the Hon. Samuel Parker’s residence.
These five specimens were all obtained at altitudes ranging from 3000 to 5000 feet, so
that the habitat may be said to be the middle and upper forest-zones; and there seems
to have been less difficulty in obtaining them in former times, as more than one of the
old explorers procured several during comparatively brief stays on the island. A good
figure of the male was given by Gould in his account of the birds of the Voyage of the
‘Sulphur.’ That ship appears to have made Honolulu its headquarters, which the
explorers reached on July the 17th, 1837; there they remained till the 27th, much of
the interval, as the narrative tells us, being very agreeably spent among the lovely
valleys of Oahu. It is probable, therefore, that most of their collecting was done on
that island, but as they revisited the Islands in June 1839, they very possibly landed
on and explored Hawaii, to which this species is, so far as I know, peculiar. Bloxam,
Voy. ‘ Blonde, App. p. 250, gives a brief description of it from specimens obtained
by the expedition; he mentions Akepakepa as its Hawaiian name, which has some
resemblance to its proper title of Akepeuwie. No reference to the island which is its
home is made by any of the authors who have hitherto noticed it, except by Judge Dole
(Hawaiian Almanack, p. 45, 1879), who, after describing an example belonging to the

9
9)

late Mr. Mills, goes on to say that M. Bailleu had observed a brown variety which might
be the female. As I have elsewhere remarked, M. Bailleu made his collections in Kona
(the place where my first two specimens were obtained), while those in the Mills
cabinets were probably procured in the vicinity of Olaa. I have examined the birds
in the British Museum of Natural History, obtained by Bloxam, and that described by
Gould in the Voyage of the ‘Sulphur,’ and find that they are identical with mine,
though the brilliant orange has faded to a great extent.

Description —Adult male. General colour of the whole of the upper surface scarlet-
orange, inclining to a brownish tint on the back; lower surface also scarlet-orange
but of brighter hue, especially towards the abdomen; wing-quills and tail dusky
brown edged with brownish orange; wing-lining whitish washed with light scarlet-
orange; irides dark hazel; bill bluish black; feet black.

Dimensions.—Adult male. ‘Total length 4:5 inches, wing from carpal joint 2°45,
culmen ‘35, tarsus °85, tail 1:65.

Obs.—Of my five specimens none were females, so I am unable to say whether the
sexes differ.

10) 2

ie tie
7

West, Newman imp.

FWP rohawk del.etlth.

AUREA 6 red form.

eI GP SOuerS WI IONE

iE O20

LOXOPS RUFA,

Fringilla rufa, Bloxam, Voy. ‘ Blonde,’ p. 250 (1826); J. E. Gray, Zool. Miscell. p. 11 (1881).

Linaria ? coccinea, Gould, Voy. ‘Sulphur,’ p. 41, Birds, pl. 22 (1843) (see Fringilla coccinea, Gmel.).

Drepanis rufa, G. R. Gray, Gen. B. i. p. 96 (1847).

Loxops coccinea (pt.), G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Isl. p. 28 (1859) ; id. Hand-l. B. i. p. 114 (1869) ;
Sharpe, Cat. B. Br. Mus. x. pp. 49, 50 (1885); Wilson, B. Sandw. Isl. pt. i. (1890).

Loxops wolstenholmei, Rothschild, Bull. Brit. Orn. Club, 21 June, 1898, p. lvi.

FoLLowine the example of the late Mr. G. R. Gray in 1859, of Dr. Sharpe in 1885,
and others, I was led in my account of Loops coccinea to suppose that the Fringilla
rufa of Bloxam, the types of which (obtained during the visit of the ‘Blonde’ to the
Sandwich Islands) still exist in the British Museum, was identical with the F. coccinea
of Gmelin. This belief was strengthened by the fact that a specimen of the same
species from Gould’s collection (probably that figured in the ‘ Voyage of the Sulphur’),
and also in the same museum, had also been referred by him to J. coccinea. It is true
that these examples possessed little of the vivid colouring displayed by my own recently
obtained examples of the latter; but this was attributed to the former having been for
so many years exposed to the effects of the London atmosphere, which seemed
sufficiently to account for their faded appearance, on which I duly remarked at the
time. Knowing, however, that most of Bloxam’s specimens must have been procured
in Oahu, where I was not so fortunate as to meet with a Zowxops, and finding that
Mr. Rothschild had described a species of that genus from that island, I was induced to
look again into the matter, and then it was evident that Bloxam’s birds were perfectly
distinct from the Hawaiian J. coccinea, and must be recognized under the name of
L. rufa, of which Mr. Rothschild’s L. wolstenholmei is a synonym, as he has since
admitted. .

Mr. Perkins, who was with Wolstenholme in Oahu when he shot an example for
Mr. Rothschild, has also examined the specimens in the British Museum and agrees to
their identity.

As J. K. Gray and Gould had the opportunity of examining the bird when the
colours were comparatively fresh, I here subjoin their descriptions, in preference to
re-describing it in the present faded condition.

The former says :—‘‘ Body red-foxy; lores blackish; wing and tail olive-brown ;
wing-coverts, quills, and tail red-edged, inner edge of quills and under wing-covert
white ; bill short, triangular, conic, tip straight, acute, whitish; feet brown; tarsus

9 lines. Mr. Bloxam describes ‘the tongue as short, tubular, and divided [into]
filaments at the end !’”

Gould says:—‘The whole of the plumage rich rusty-red, deepening into brownish-
red on the back; wings and tail brown, margined with rusty-red; bill horn colour;
feet black.

“Total length 4 inches, bill ;4, wing 24, tail 13, tarsi 2.”

TW.Erohawk del et Lith.

HIMATIONE

PIA

West, Newman imp.

LOXOPS AUREA.

Hypoloxias aurea, Finsch, Ibis, 1880, p. 80 (nec Drepanis aurea, Dole, 1879).

Lozxops aurea, Sharpe, Cat. B. Br. Mus. x. p. 50 (1885) ; Perkins, Ibis, 1895, p. 121.

Lozxops ochracea, Rothschild, Bull. Brit. Orn. Club, 21 Dec., 1892, p. xvi (descr. null.) ; id. Ibis,
1893, pp. 112, 281.

Himatione aurea, Wilson, B. Sandw. Isl. part iv. (1893) (cancelled).

I HAVE very much to regret that in a former part of the present work I erroneously
referred this species to the genus Himatione, and in extenuation of my mistake can
only urge that the type specimens obtained by Dr. Finsch, and obligingly forwarded by
the authorities of the Berlin Museum for the use of this work, were unavoidably in my
hands but for a very short time. I was of course unwilling to detain them any longer
than was necessary, and the greater part of their brief sojourn in England was passed
with Mr. Frohawk, who has carefully depicted them. One advantage has, however,
followed from this mischance: I am now able to avail myself of the extremely
interesting observations of Mr. Perkins, which show that this species, of which so
little had been known before, is dimorphic—an uncertain number of the cock birds
assuming a red plumage; and by favour of the Joint Committee of the Royal Society
and the British Association I am allowed to figure one of the beautiful examples
obtained by that gentleman, in addition to the types of Dr. Finsch’s Hypoloxias
aurea.

Mr. Perkins’s remarks are :—

“In the genus Loxops, which contains the smallest of the native birds, the different
species have much the same habits, and the song, which is short and simple, though
sweet, is nearly the same in all. Their call is a plain ‘ keewit, uttered once or
repeated, and is constantly to be heard. ‘They seek their food amongst the leaves,
especially at the ends of the branches, more rarely on the limbs themselves. It
consists largely of caterpillars and the smaller spiders. They also suck the nectar of
the ohia flowers (Metrosideros) ; this I saw them do but rarely, and only two of the
species, L. awrea and L. [Chrysomitridops| ceruleirostris. Most often, when seen
amongst the blossoms, they were merely seeking insects, thereby attracted; but several
times I shot specimens with the beak dripping, and on tasting the fluid found it to
be, beyond doubt, the nectar of these flowers.

‘From the other green birds, their green young and females are readily distin-

2462

guished, at any height, by their more forked tails, which, combined with their short
thick beaks, give them a very Finch-like aspect.

“The young generally follow the parents (some going with the male, and some with
the female), who feed them most assiduously even after they appear well able to shift
for themselves.

“The difference in colour of the sexes is very marked, while the male of L. aurea
is dimorphic (yellow or red), though with occasional intermediate forms. L. cerulei-
rostris of Kauai, so far as colour is concerned, has claim to be considered the primitive
form, both sexes largely retaining the green plumage, which only appears in the female
and young of the red species on the more southern islands.

‘““On one occasion I saw a pair of LZ. aurea building, high up in a tall ohia tree,
toward the end of a branch. They came down to the ground for material, stripping
off the brown down that covered the young fronds of some stunted ‘ pulu’ ferns. On
another occasion I watched a pair sporting on the wing, now ascending, now descending,
but gradually rising upwards till they became mere specks in the sky. It must have
been several minutes before they finally alighted at no great distance from their
starting-point. Both were splendid males.” —

Dr. Finsch thus describes his types :—

“Uniform orange ; quills blackish brown, margined externally with the same colour,
but more sordid; covers of primaries and secondaries on the outer webs broadly
margined with dull orange. Bill hornish-blue, tip blackish ; iris dark brown.
Stomach containing nests of insects (caterpillars). First and third primaries longest,
first scarcely shorter.

“ Young (just able to fly, and fed by the former).—Upper parts dull olive-green, the
outer margin of the dark brown quills and tail-feathers more vivid, the same as the
tips of the secondaries, which form a pale cross band on the wing; lower parts pale
olive-yellow, chin passing into whitish; bill horn-blackish, tip darker; feet black ;
third and fourth primaries longest, second equal to fifth, somewhat shorter, first a little
shorter ; tail twelve feathers. ‘Tongue ordinary, bifurcated at tip.”

The red form, which is here figured on the same Plate as the orange, only differs in
the brighter coloration; but it should be observed that the lower figure (from Dr. Finsch’s
type) shows a somewhat intermediate bird, not so yellow as in some cases.

The question of the trivial name which this species should bear is one that may
interest those fond of nomenclatural puzzles. It is beyond all doubt the Hypoloxias
aurea of Dr. Finsch, admirably described by him in 1880. But he, by a very pardon-
able mistake, wherein he was followed in 1885 by Dr. Sharpe, referred it to the
Drepanis aurea of Judge Dole, which, as I have already mentioned, I had ascertained
(from examining the type while I was in Honolulu) to have been founded on an
immature specimen of the Hawaiian species, Lowops coccinea. It is therefore open
for some to urge that the term awrea is precluded to any other species of Loxops;
but, on the other hand, it is to be observed that this term originally appearing in
connexion with Drepanis was a wholly inaccurate generic assignment, while as used by

HIMATIONE AUREA.

Hypoloxias aurea, Finsch, Ibis, 1880, p. 80 (nec Drepanis aurea, Dole).

In ‘The Ibis’ for 1880 Dr. Finsch described two examples of this species, which he
procured at Olinda in Maui, and referred them to the genus Hypolozias. On exami-
nation, however, I find that they undoubtedly belong to Himatione, while care must
be taken not to confound the bird, as the above author has done, with Drepanis aurea
of Dole (Hawaiian Alman., 1879, p. 45), by which may possibly be intended Losops
coccmea from Hawaii.

I regret that during a short stay on Maui I did not procure specimens, not having
collected at Olinda or having met with the species when exploring at similar elevations ;
but Iam enabled to give a figure, thanks to the kindness of the authorities of the Berlin
Museum, who forwarded the two examples obtained by Dr. Finsch for my inspection.

The adult is very dull orange above and below—the colour somewhat that of the
breast of the young in Vestiaria coccinea, but more dingy: it appeared, however,
much faded, and would probably be a bright golden yellow in a freshly killed
bird.

Dr. Finsch’s description of the type specimens is as follows :—

“Uniform orange; quills blackish brown, margined externally with the same colour,
but more sordid; covers of primaries and secondaries on the outer webs broadly
margined with dull orange. Bill hornish-blue, tip blackish ; iris dark brown. Stomach
containing nests of insects (caterpillars). First and third primaries longest, first
scarcely shorter.

“« Young (just able to fly, and fed by the former). Upper parts dull olive-green, the
outer margin of the dark brown quills and tail-feathers more vivid, the same as the tips
of the secondaries, which form a pale cross band on the wing; lower parts pale olive-
yellow, chin passing into whitish ; bill horn-blackish, tip darker; feet black; third and
fourth primaries longest, second equal to fifth, somewhat shorter, first a little shorter;
tail twelve feathers. Tongue ordinary, bifurcated at tip.”

oy
)

Dr. Finsch it was correctly referred (Hypoloxias being merely an equivalent of Loxops),
and, accordingly, it may be reasonably contended that justice to the perspicuity of this
distinguished ornithologist demands that his name should not be set aside. So far
as practice is concerned no confusion is likely to follow from maintaining the term
aurea in Dr. Finsch’s sense; and, as Mr. Rothschild was neither the discoverer nor the
first describer of the species, and could not have known except from my work what
the “ Drepanis aurea” really was, there seems no need to treat his name for the Maui
bird otherwise than according to the strictest law, which to me does not appear to
require the adoption of his subsequently conferred designation of ochracea.

Dimensions.—Total length 4:5 inches, wing 2:6, tail 1:9, tarsus ‘75, culmen ‘38.

FW. Frohawk, del. et lith.

CHRYSOMITRIDOPS

CARULEORGSTRIS.

West, Newman, imp.

CHRYSOMITRIDOPS CHRULEIROSTRIS.

O-U HOLOWAI.

Chrysomiridops ceruleirostris, Scott Wilson, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1889, p. 445.

THis interesting novelty 1 obtained in the district of Waimea, in Kauai, during
October 1888, at an elevation of about 3000 feet, and, as far as can be determined,
it is confined to that island. The Siskin-like song serves to distinguish it from Himatione
parva, with its low plaintive “tweet,” in company with which it is generally found,
the two birds frequenting in common the lower branches of the ohia trees (Metrosideros
polymorpha). The first specimen which I shot, whilst flitting about a flower-covered
ohia at a considerable height from the ground, I took for H. parva; and great was my
delight, on picking it up, to find I had secured a variety quite unknown to me. The
general colour of the two species is much alike, but the bright prussian blue of the
bill of Chrysomitridops is most striking in a freshly-killed example and has no other
counterpart in the Sandwich Islands. Mr. Francis Gay—whose knowledge of the
birds of the group is very considerable—had not previously met with it, nor, as far as
I am aware, had Mr. Knudsen, whose labours in regard to the Hawaiian Avifauna
are so well known to science; so that it seems that I was fortunate to come across
it, with two such good observers already in the field. It cannot be common, as during
a stay of some days in the mountains I seldom saw it, and never in the lower forest-
zone. On my return to Makaweli, Mr. Gay showed my new bird to a large number of
natives in the employ of the Sinclair family, and but one, at the time, gave it a name—
O-u holowai; subsequently another old native, who seemed to recognize it, applied
to it the same name; O-u is the local name of Psittirostra psittacea, holo means
“to fetch” and wai “ water” in the Hawaiian language.

At first it seemed doubtful whether this generic form should be assigned to the
Finches or to the Honey-eaters; the slightly-covered nostrils indicated the latter, but
the mucronate tips of the secondary quills appeared to point to a Fringilline affinity.
The first part of the name “ O-u holowai” tends to show that the islanders recognize
a likeness to the O-u (Psittirostra psittacea), which is undoubtedly allied to the
Finches. I brought home specimens of Chrysomitridops in alcohol with the idea of
settling this point, but unfortunately the box containing them and several other species
was lost during my journey to England; however, I may mention here that since my
return a specimen of this species has been sent to me in alcohol, which, as will be seen
in another portion of this work, has enabled Dr. Gadow to determine its relations with
the Drepanidide.

Description —Adult male. Bill light prussian blue, darker on maxilla. Lores black,
meeting below the chin and in front, where the black passes into olive and is succeeded
by an ill-defined coronal patch of gamboge-yellow, gradually shading into yellowish
olive, which extends over the whole surface of the sides of the head, neck, mantle,
back, and rump, but is rather brighter on the last; lower surface gamboge-yellow,
brightest on the throat, and shading into olive on the flanks. Waing-lining primrose-
yellow, passing into white. Wing- and tail-quills blackish brown, margined outwardly
by olive and the former inwardly by greyish white, while the middle pair of the latter |
have most of the inner web dusky olive; irides dark hazel; feet bluish black.

Dimensions. —Total length 4:5 inches, wing 2:6, tail 2, culmen °4, tarsus “79.

F.W.Frohawk, del. et lith. West, Newman, imp.

A EMG AT EES. PRO; Ri ErS.

HEMIGNATHUS PROCERUS.
IIW1*.

Hemignathus obscurus, Dole, Proc. Bost. Soc. N. H. xii. p. 298 (exx. ex Kauai) (1869); id.
Hawaiian Alman. 1879, p. 45 (partim) ; Stejneger, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1887, p. 93 (nec
Gmelin; nec Lichtenstein).

Hemignathus procerus, Cahanis, Journ. fir Orn. 1889, p. 331.

Hemignathus stejnegeri, S. B. Wilson, Ann. & Mag. N. H. ser. 6, iv. p. 400 (1 November, 1889) ;
id. Ibis, 1890, p. 190, pl. vi. fig. 2; Stejmeger, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. xii. p. 884 (1889).

Tuts bird, according to our present information, is peculiar to Kauai, and examples from
that island had been examined—thougn not recognized as different from H. obscurus—
by Judge Dole, when he wrote his article on the Birds of tne Hawaiian Islands in the
‘ Proceedings of the Boston Society of Natural History’ for 1869; finding, however,
that the birds from Kauai and Hawaii were perfectly distinct, I suggested, on my return
to England in 1888, that the former should be separated as 1. stejnegeri. As the result
of inquiry regarding the various species of the genus in the Berlin Museum, informa-
tion was received through Professor Mébius that Professor Cabanis had come to a
similar conclusion on inspection of the specimens there, and had forestalled my proposed
title by a few weeks ; so that I must at once acknowledge his activity in securing priority
for his name H. procerus.

Of this well-marked species, which I was enabled to figure for the first time in ‘The
{bis’ for April 1890, Mr. V. Knudsen sent specimens in 1887 to Dr. Stejneger, who
showed them to me in Washington, and described them, though with some doubt, as
belonging to H. obscurus. At the time of my visit to the Island of Kauai in the month
of September it appeared to be rather scarce; hence I obtained but few examples,
and was able to make but scanty notes on its habits; of these, however, I am fortu-
nately in a position to give a good description, owing to the excellent observations made
by Mr. G. C. Munro, assistant to Mr. Palmer, a collector in the interest of the Hon.
Walter Rothschild, who, since my return, has spent many months on the Island of
Kauai and has met with the bird in fair numbers. He has kindly sent me a most

* Mr. Francis Gay has informed me that this species is known by the name of Iiwi on Kauai, and not by that
of Akialoa, which name is applied to H. obscurus and, I think, also to H. olévaceus, the two species found on
Hawaii.

» The species is said to have been described at the Meeting of the Allgemeine Ornithologische Gesellschaft
held on the 9th September, 1889, of which a repert was published in ‘ Vossische Zeitung,’ No. 429, of the

14th September.

interesting account, which his long stay on the island has enabled him to make much
more complete than my own. I subjoin it verbatim here :—

“This bird is much more common and enjoys a wider range than the Nukupuu,
which bird it much resembles in habits. It seems to inhabit the whole forest-region
of Kauai; its food consists of insects, their eggs and larvee, and we have also seen them
sucking honey from the Lehua flowers. Above Makaweli in January and February we
found it less common than at other places we visited: there they were mostly on the
koa trees (being the most suitable hunting-ground for them in this locality). Usually
there was a pair in the same vicinity, but not keeping very close together, so that when
one was shot we would usually get another.

“At Kaholuamano in the latter end of February and beginning of March they were
more common, generally, in company with the Akikiki, feeding on the Lehua trees, the
pairs keeping more together. In one instance I shot a female, and the male stopped in
the top of the tree calling desperately. I fired at him without effect, and so intent was
he in looking for his mate that he immediately returned and was brought down by
another shot. At Halemanu towards the end of March we found them as plentiful as
at the latter place, but the Akikiki not being so common the Akialoa were more often
found apart from them; here we first heard the Akialoa sing, although it was some
time before we knew for certain it was the bird whose sweet note we heard every day ;
once [ heard one sing whilst flying from one tree to another. Near Hanalei in April
we found these birds not uncommon, generally in pairs chasing each other about, or
singing in the tops of the trees. ‘Their chirp seemed different here; Mr. Palmer likens
both the chirp and song to that of the canary. We watched a pair singing together
one day; the smaller and duller bird (probably the female) seemed to have fewer
notes than the other.

“‘ Females that I dissected here had the ovaries enlarged, which with before-mentioned
notes on the subject would denote the approach of the breeding-season. I have seen
these birds from the branches in the tops to the roots of the trees, probing into holes
and under the bark, where they find a harvest of cockroaches’ eggs, beetles, and grubs;
on one occasion I saw one alight on the ground and insert its bill amongst mats of
dead leaves and bits of wood; have also seen them collecting insects from the bases of the
leaves of the halapipi tree; have not often seen them feeding on honey. In feeding they
do not seem to depend much on sight ; have never noticed them to look into a crevice,
as the A-A, before inserting their bill. I saw one send its bill at full length into a hole
in a tree; have seen them work about one spot for some minutes, but have not noticed
them break off any portions of bark or wood. Like the Nukupuu, it is an active bird
but can be easily approached within gunshot with ordinary caution. Have also a
strong smell when killed; and some, shot at Makaweli, had sores on their feet like the
other birds in that locality at that time,”

The range, as I stated in ‘ The Ibis,’ is from the lowest forest-zone to 3000 feet or
perhaps higher, the highest ground on Kauai (Waialeale) being but 4000 feet. This

view seems to be borne out by Mr. Palmer’s account ; he also met with it at Hanalei,
on the other side of the island, a district which I did not explore.

Description.—Adult male. Front and top of the head dark ashy olive, shading into
olive on the back, which becomes brighter on the rump; sides of the face olive, with
an indistinct olive line over the eye; body beneath sulphur-yellow, light primrose on
abdomen, the flanks washed with olive; under tail-coverts olive-yellow ; wing- and
tail-quills ashy brown, edged outwardly with olive; secondaries and wing-coverts ashy
brown, very broadly edged with olive; irides dark hazel; bill black; feet bluish
black.

Adult female. Above dingy yellowish buff, the feathers on the head being yellowish
olive with black centres; the yellow mark over the eye more distinct, owing to the
blacker lores ; beneath uniform olive-buff.

In both male and female the edge of wing and wing-lining is white, slightly tinged
with primrose-yellow.

Dimensions.—Adult male. Total length 7:50 inches, wing from carpal joint 3-75,
tarsus 1, tail 2, hind toe with claw -75, middle toe with claw -95, maxilla following
the curve 2°80, chord subtending the curve 1:75, difference between maxilla and
mandible °30.

Adult female. Maxilla following the curve 2°55 inches, difference between maxilla
and mandible °25.

Obs.—Generally resembling 4. obscurus (Gm.), but much exceeding it in size and of
brighter tint, especially beneath, the abdomen being of a light primrose-yellow.

Bea By Sf

EWFrohawk delet lith, West, Newman amp.

HEMIGNATHUS LICHTENSTEINI.

HEMIGNATHUS LICHTENSTEINI

JIBI.

Hemignathus obscurus, Lichtenstein, Abhandl. k. Akad. Berlin, 1838, p. 449, tab. v. fig. 1* (nec
Certhia obscura, Gmelin) ; id. Nomencl. Av. Mus. Berol. p. 55 (1854); Dole, Proc. Bost.
Soe. N. H. xii. p. 298 (partim) (1869) ; id. Hawaiian Alman. 1875, p. 45 (partim).

Hemignathus lichtensteini, 8. B. Wilson, Ann. & Mag. N. H. (6) iv. p. 401 (Noy. 1889) ; id. Ibis,
1890, p. 190.

Hemignathus ellisianus, Rothschild, Avifaun. Laysan, p. 87 (1898) (nec Gray).

* Figura notabilis.

TuIs very distinct species, peculiar, so far as we know, to Oahu, had, as I pointed
out in the paper above cited, been hitherto confounded with its Hawaiian congener
H. obscurus. Yixamples of the former were obtained in 1837 by Deppe, and one of
them was figured in the following year by Lichtenstein, who doubtless had not seen a
specimen of the latter or he could scarcely have failed to perceive the difference between
them. On my return from the Sandwich Islands in 1889, I was fortunately able,
through the kindness of Prof. Mébius of Berlin, to compare the very subject of his
illustrious predecessor’s figure with my own specimens of H. obscurus, and thus to
justify the suspicion of their distinctness that had been already aroused. I accordingly
bestowed on the present species the name of the celebrated zoologist who first published
an indication of its existence, and I have to thank my good fortune for being the first
to elucidate this matter.

Mr. Rothschild (doc. cit.) has referred this species to the “ Drepanis (Hemignathus)
ellisiana” of Gray (Cat. B. Trop. Isl. Pacif. p. 9), which I have already correctly quoted
as a synonym of H. obscurus. It is pretty clear that Mr. Gray never saw a specimen
of either, and it is absolutely certain that three out of the four authorities cited by him
refer to H. obscurus. Vieillot, the first of them, as I have already shown, figured (Ois.
Dor. pl. 53) the very specimen, now at Liverpool, which was formerly in the Leverian
Museum, and actually the type of Latham’s description, on which was founded the
Certhia obscura of Gmelin, and hence the H. obscurus of modern ornithologists.
Similarly the bird figured in Ellis’s unpublished drawings (no. 28), which from the name
used by Gray is doubtless to be regarded as the type of his supposed species, is most
unquestionably Z. obscurus, as anyone who examines the drawing in the British Museum

may satisfy himself!. The last of the authorities cited by Mr. Gray is Cassin, and he
quotes Peale as saying that the species he speaks of was obtained in “ Hawaii only,”
and that according to his observations it did “ not inhabit Oahu ;” it was accordingly
also H. obscurus ; and the mere fact of Mr. Gray’s mistakingly referring Lichtenstein’s
figure, and assigning Lichtenstein’s locality, to the so-called “ Drepanis (Hemignathus)
ellisiana”’ cannot remove the incontestable objection that his other references show it
to be but a synonym of H. obscurus. The error probably originated in his adopting
the view of Lesson that this last was the female of Vestiaria coccinea; but even that
error was pardonable, as so little was known of the ornithology of the Hawaiian
Islands, and indeed when IJ arrived there I was, on the strength of the information
then existing, quite prepared to find that the brilliant scarlet bird had a green partner.

Although I believe that the bird still exists in diminished numbers on one of the
mountain-ranges which I was unable to explore—a belief strengthened by the accurate
description of it given to me by a native of Oahu in 1888, who said that he had seen it
during that year near Waialua,—I am bound to admit that my failure to meet with it
in the course of my explorations there, and the similar issue of the careful examination
of the heights by Mr. Perkins and Mr. Rothschild’s collectors, point to its possible
extinction. Though Deppe is said to have obtained several examples in the interior
of Oahu, where it was called ‘Jibi,” the only specimen I have seen is that so kindly
placed at my disposal by the authorities of the Museum of Berlin, and the species
must be regarded as one of the rarest in the world.

Description, condensed from Lichtenstein (ut supra, p. 450).—‘ Uniform olive-green
above and on the wing-feathers, though the inner and concealed parts of the latter are
dull brown. Beneath paler though as little brilliant. The chin, middle of the belly,
and the lower tail-coverts pale cream-colour. A pale yellow stripe over the eye is
enlivened by a dark brown streak running immediately beneath it from there to the
bill. The lower mandible is 3 lines shorter than the upper. The whole length of the
bird is 7 inches, of which the bill and tail measure each 12; the tarsus 11 lines; the
middle toe with its claw 9 lines; the outer toe one half and the inner a whole line
shorter than the middle toe.”

" To any one acquainted with the movements of Cook’s ships, on each of which Ellis in turn served, it
is obvious that he never had an opportunity of collecting specimens in Oahu, at which island they touched but
for one single day (27 February, 1779), when the captains only seem to have gone ashore. It is not very
likely that they would bring off a live bird of this species for Ellis to draw, and we have the inscription on the
sketch in his own writing: “ W. W. Ellis delin. & pinat. ad viv. 1779.”

FE W.Frohawk, del. et lith. West, Newman,imp.

HEMIGNATHUS OBSCURUS.

AKIALOA.

“ Hook-billed Green Creeper,” Latham, Gen. Synops. i. p. 703, pl. xxxiii. fig. 1 (1782) ; id. Suppl.
p. 126 (1787).

?“ Akaiearooa,” King, Voy. Pacif. Ocean, iii. p. 119 (1784).

Certhna obscura, Gmelin, Syst. Nat. i. p. 470 (1788); Latham, Ind. Orn. p- 281 (1790) ;
Donndorff, Orn. Beytr. i. p. 621 (1794) ; Shaw, Zool. viii. p- 227 (1812) ; Tiedemann, Anat.
Naturgesch. Vég. ii. p. 430 (1814); J. E. Gray & Griffith, An. Kingd., Aves, vii. p. 358
(1829).

“TL? Akaiearoa,” Vieillot, Ois. Dorés, ii. p. 111, pl. liii. (1802) ; Lesson, Compl. Buffon, ix. p. 155
(1837).

““Grimpéreau a long bec des tiles Sandwich,” partim, Virey (Sonnini), Hist. Nat. Buffon, Ois. xvii.
p- 98 (1804-5).

Melithreptus obscurus, Vieillot, N. Dict. d’Hist. Nat. xiv. p. 822 (1817) ; id. Encycl. Méth.,
Ornithol. p. 601 (1823) ; Cuvier, Régne Anim. ed. 2, i. p- 433 (1829).

Drepanis obscura, Temminck, Man. d’Orn. i. p. Ixxxvi (1820).

“ Hook-billed Green Honey-Eater,” Latham, Gen. Hist. B. iv. p. 192, pl. 71. fig. 1 (1822).

Melithreptus vestiarius, 2? , Lesson, Tr. d’Orn. p- 300 (1831).

Vestiaria akaroa, Lesson, Rev. Zool. 1840, p. 268.

Drepanis coccinea (partim), G. R. Gray, Gen. B. p. 96 (1847).

Hemignathus obscurus, Peale, U.S. Expl. Exped., Birds, p. 158 (1848) ; Hartlaub, Arch. f. Natur-
gesch. 1852, ii. p. 110; Reichenbach, Handb. sp. Orn., Tenuirostres, p. 312, pl. 591. fig. 4009
(1853) ; Cassin, U.S. Expl. Exped., Mamm. & Orn. p- 178 (1858); Dole, Proc. Bost. Soc.
N. H. xii. p. 298 (partim) (1869) ; id. Hawaiian Alman. 1879, p- 45; Sclater, Ibis, 1871,
p- 860 ; id. op. cit. 1879, p. 92; Sundevall, Tentam. p- 48 (1872) ; Sharpe, Cat. B. Br. Mus.
x. p. 4 (1885); 8. B. Wilson, Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist. ser. 6, iv. p. 400 (1889) ; id. Ibis, 1890,
p. 189.

Drepanis (Vestiaria) coccinea, 9, G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Isl. p. 8 (1859); id. Hand-l. B. i.
p- 114 (1869).

Drepanis (Hemignathus) ellisiana, G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Isl. p. 9 (1859); id. Hand-l. B. i.
p- 114 (1869).

Nature has shown great symmetry with regard to the species of this genus to be found

in the Sandwich Archipelago, three of the main islands having each a long-billed and

a short-billed form, in the latter of which, moreover, the mandible is only about half

the length of the maxilla, The subject of our present notice is the long-billed form

from Hawaii, which was called by Latham the “ Hook-billed Green Creeper” in his

‘General Synopsis’ of 1782, and the “ Hook-billed Green Honey-eater” in his later
P

work, the ‘General History of Birds,’ being figured on both oceasions ; he should have
had before him a specimen from the Museum of Sir Ashton Lever, procured during
Cook’s last voyage, and still preserved in the Derby Museum at Liverpool, which is
unquestionably that delineated in Viellot’s ‘Oiseaux Dorés, being copied from a
drawing sent to the author by Parkinson, then owner of the Leverian Museum.

The specific title odscurus dates from Gmelin’s Certhia obscura of 1788, and has only
since been altered in error, as by G. R. Gray in the case mentioned below; while it
will be seen that both Vieillot and Lesson identified King’s ‘‘ Akaiearooa” with our
species. The generic appellation, on the other hand, has experienced similar vicissi-
tudes to those of allied forms from the same region, alternating between Certhia,
Melithreptus, Vestiaria, Drepanis, and Hémignathus; but when once it became evident
that Temminck’s Drepanis included within itself several distinctly separable genera, it
followed that the only one of the above names applicable to the present group of
birds was the last, originally bestowed by Lichtenstein on examples obtained by
Deppe in Oahu, and considered by him to be identical with those from Hawaii,
though they now prove to belong to a different species which I have named J. lichten-
stem. G. R. Gray, who in more than one case erroneously considered the green
birds to be the females of the red, referred H. obscurus partly to the female of
Vestiaria coccinea, partly to his Drepanis ellisiana, which, therefore, must rank as a
synonym.

This species—peculiar, so far as my observations go, to the Island of Hawaii—
occupies the lower forest-zone from about 1100 to 2500 feet, and is most plentiful
among the tall ohia trees. Like its larger relative—Z. stejnegeri on Kauai,—it prefers
decayed timber in which to search for its food, and invariably chooses a rotten or half-
dead tree for its hunting-ground, no doubt on account of its slender bill, which requires
soft material to work upon. It is also very partial to the great tree-ferns which in the
forests of Hawaii reach a height of more than 30 feet, and, as the sombre colour of its
plumage is very nearly that of their foliage, it is most difficult to observe, and is at
the same time more quiet and unobtrusive in its habits than any other member of the
genus; in fact, had it not been for its clear and characteristic call-note, I doubt whether
I should have noticed it at all. It must—at least in the several localities I visited
and at the time of year I saw them—be considered a scarce bird: and whilst I was at
Olaa in the district of Puna—a place renowned in ancient times for its bird-catchers—
an old native, Hawelu, an excellent observer and well skilled in the almost forgotten
art, told me that it was extremely rare. During a long stay in the higher forest-
region in Kona, I did not notice it, and believe, as I remarked above, that it is con-
fined to the lower forest-zone.

Description —Adult male. Head and upper parts generally uniform dull greenish
olive, rather brighter on the rump; lores dusky, with a yellow mark over the eye;
throat, sides of face, and breast dull olive-green, lighter on abdomen and under tail-

(0)
o

coverts ; wing- and tail-quills ashy brown, edged with dull olive; irides dark hazel ;
bill and feet dark brown.
Adult female. Nearly similar to the male, but perhaps rather duller in plumage.

_ Dimensions.— Adult male. Total length 5:50 inches, wing from carpal joint 3°5,
maxilla following the curve 1°85, chord subtending the curve 1-50, difference between
maxilla and mandible ‘15, tarsus ‘85, middle toe with claw -S0, hind toe with claw °75,
tail 1:60.

Adult female. Total length 5°15 inches, wing from carpal joint 3, maxilla following
the curve 1:45, chord subtending the curve 1:30.

Te ceed
Pa

HEMIGNATHUS LANAIENSIS.

Hemignathus lanaiensis, Rothschild, Bull. Brit. Orn. Club, i. p. xxiv (18938) ; id. Avif. Laysan, p. 89,
pl. (1893).

At the January meeting of the above Club in 1893, the following communication was
read from Mr. Rothschild, on a new species from the island of Lanai in the Sandwich
group, for which he proposed the name of

“‘ FHEMIGNATHUS LANAIENSIS.

“ HT. similis H. obscuro, sed rostro valdé longiore et crassiore, pileo cinerascente, noteo
sordidiore olivascenti-viridi, pectore sordidé flavo, hypochondriis sordidé olivas-
centibus, et subcaudalibus albicantibus, distinguendus. Long. ale 3:1-3°3 poll.,
culm. 2°9-3:1.

< Had. in insula Sandwichensi ‘ Lanai’ dicta.

“Mr. Rothschild’s communication contained the following remarks on this new
bird :—

“<< This species belongs to the typical section of Hemignathus, which, in my opinion,
includes two different species from the island of Kauai, one from Hawai, and one
from Oahu, in addition to the new species. They all have the upper and lower
mandible of about the same length, while the aberrant Heterorhynchus-section, which
now contains four species, has the upper mandible nearly twice the length of the
lower.

“«*The male differs from the same sex of H. obscurus (its nearest ally) from Hawai
in its much longer and very stout bill, ashy-greyish tint of the crown, and much duller
olivaceous green of the back, neck, and rump. Breast dirty yellow, gradually passing
into dull olive on the flanks, instead of bright yellowish olive as in H. obscurus.
Under tail-coverts creamy white, instead of olive green.

“<¢ Female. Everywhere dull greyish olive, becoming more yellowish on the abdomen
and under tail-coverts. Throat and cheeks dull greyish.

“<* Young male. Similar to the adult male, but all the colours strongly suffused with
an ochraceous tinge. .

««« Tris dark brown; bill blackish brown, greyish at the base; feet and legs bright
slaty blue, soles of the feet yellowish. Wing 3:1 to 3:3 inches, culmen 2°9 to 3:1
(much longer than that of 7. obscwrus).’” .

Mr. Perkins believes that he saw an adult male in Lanai, but he was unable to
procure it.

2M 2

F WFrohawk delet hth. West Newman imp.

HE MIGNATHUS LUCIDUS.

HEMIGNATHUS LUCIDUS.

Hemignathus lucidus, Lichtenstein, Abhandl. k. Akad. Berlin, 1838, p. 451, t. v. figg. 2,3 *; id.
Nomencl. Av. Mus. Berol. p. 55 (1854); Hartlaub, Arch. f. Naturgesch. 1852, i. p. 110
(partum) ; Reichenbach, Handb. sp. Orn., Tenuirostres, p. 313 (1853); Cassin, U.S. Expl.
Exped., Mamm. & Orn. p. 180 (1858); Dole, Proc. Boston Soc. N. H. xii. p. 298 (1869) ;
id. Hawaiian Alman. 1879, p.45 ; Sclater, Ibis, 1871, p. 360; id. op. cit. 1879, p. 92; Sharpe,
Cat. B. Brit. Mus. x. p. 5 (1885) ; 8. B. Wilson, Ann. & Mag. N. H. ser. 6, iv. p. 401 (1889) ;
id. Ibis, 1890, p.192; Hartert, Katal. Vogelsamml. Mus. Senckenb. p. 28 (1891).

Heterorhynchus lucidus, Reichenbach, Handb. sp. Orn., Tenuirostres, p. 223 (1853), Taf. dxci. figg.
4012, 4013*; Rothschild, Avif. Laysan, p. 105 (1893).

Drepanis (Hemignathus) lucida, G. R. Gray, Gen. B. i. p. 96 (1847) (partim) ; id. Cat. B. Trop. Isl.
p- 9 (1859) ; id. Hand-l. B. i. p. 113 (1869).

* Figure notabiles.

Our knowledge of this species, as of H. lichtensteini, is due to the Prussian collector
Deppe, who sent specimens of it which he obtained in Oahu to the Museum of Berlin,
where they were described and figured by its Director, the celebrated Lichtenstein, as
above stated. While Deppe was in the Sandwich Islands he was joined by the still
better-known American naturalist Townsend, who (with Nuttall) accompanied Captain
Wyeth’s expedition across the Rocky Mountains to the Columbia River, and thence
proceeded to Honolulu. In his work! Townsend states that he and Deppe, in January
1837, hired a house in the Nuano Valley, five miles from that town, with the object of
collecting birds and plants, and we may well suppose that this species (and J. lichten-
steini also) was found by them in that district. On Townsend’s return he sent several
specimens of birds collected by him to Audubon, then in this country, and among them
two of the present species, which were acquired by the late Sir William Jardine, at the
sale of whose collection, in 1886, they were bought for the Museum of the University
of Cambridge. On one of them being submitted, at my request, to Professor Cabanis
for comparison with the type at Berlin, that eminent authority declared the two to be
specifically identical. This result was the more satisfactory since I myself was unable
to meet with the species, and later explorers have been no more fortunate, so that
there is reason to fear that it has become extinct. It was undoubtedly peculiar to the
island of Oahu, where Deppe informed Lichtenstein that it frequented the plaintain-
blossoms in considerable numbers.

Mr. Rothschild holds me much to blame for having referred the short-billed

* Narrative of a journey across the Rocky Mountains to the Columbia River, and a visit to the Sandwich
Islands, Chili, &c., with a Scientific Appendix. Philadelphia: 1839. 8vo.

It is much to be regretted that Townsend’s ‘ Appendix’ is limited to the Mammals and Birds of the Oregon

Territory. The observations of a naturalist so wellinformed as he was on the zoology of the Hawaiian Islands
at that time would be invaluable.

Hawaiian species to the Heterorhynchus olivaceus of Lafresnaye, stating that he has
carefully examined the type of the latter in the Paris Museum, and that it is no doubt
identical with the Hemignathus lucidus of Lichtenstein from Oahu. This assertion I
am unable to contradict, for I long ago expressly said that, not having seen Lafresnaye’s
type, I could only judge of his species by the figure, which I still think that few
persons will be able to reconcile with the figures given by Lichtenstein, not, however,
for the reason assigned by Reichenbach, since the difference in the tail noticed by him,
though admittedly shown in the plates, does not exist in the birds. The differences
offered by actual comparison of specimens was unquestionably first mentioned by Cassin,
who wrote in 1858 :—“ It is probably very nearly impossible to determine or reconcile
with each other the synonyms of these two species, or the instances in which they have
been mistaken for each other; but we have given them as they appear to us, and as
represented in the plates cited.” This difference has been recognized by all subsequent
writers (including Judge Dole and Mr. Sclater) except Mr. G. R. Gray in the following
year, and he really had no materials on which to form an opinion, the genus being
represented in the British Museum by only a single specimen (apparently a female) of
H. lucidus, which was presented by Sir Edward Belcher, and was therefore probably
obtained during the voyage of the ‘Sulphur’ between 1838 and 1842.

If Mr. Rothschild’s views be correct, it would seem that it was my good fortune to
be the first to meet with and make known the Hawaiian species, and it is therefore not
without some sense of retributive justice, for which I thank him, that, as though to
make amends for the severity of his remarks, he has proposed to honour me by calling
it H. wilsont, though he thereby commemorates the error with which he charges me.

Description (from a specimen at Cambridge, no doubt immature).—Upper parts dull
olive-green with a brown tinge, the whole of the wing- and tail-feathers being brown
with yellowish-green margins to the outer webs. A thin line of yellow nearly surrounds
the eye, and may almost be called a streak above it. Lores brown; throat yellow;
underparts generally buffish white, the decided buff tint being varied by a yellow tone
in parts. Sides of the body brownish; under tail-coverts and flanks buff. A little
bright yellow is present at the bend of the wing, the under surface of which is grey
and buffish white. The curved bill is dusky, the feet of the same colour.

Dimensions.—Total length 5°62 inches, wing 3, tail 2, tarsus 87, culmen just over 1,
the mandible being almost exactly two-thirds of the maxilla.

Another specimen, also at Cambridge, entirely lacks the yellow tints, and is probably
still younger than the last.

Mr. Rothschild says that the bill is longest in the male.

‘ How Lafresnaye’s type (which is included as no. 5677, bis, in the lithographed catalogue of his collection,
drawn up after his death by the late M. Jules Verreaux) found its way to Paris is not apparent. The collec-
tion is supposed to have been sold in its entirety to the Natural History Society of Boston, and there this
specimen should be expected to exist; but I have learned through the courtesy of Professor Hyatt that it
cannot be recognized there. This fact strengthens the assertion that it is at Paris, but still the authenticity
of the specimen seems to need verification.

FW. Frohawk, del. et lith.

HEMIGNATHUS

OLIVACEUS.

West, Newman, imp.

HEMIGNATHUS OLIVACEUS.

AKTALOA.

Heterorhynchus olivaceus, Lafresnaye, Mag. de Zool. 1839, Ois. pl. x.; id. Rev. Zool. 1840, p. 321;
Florent-Prévost, Voy. Vénus, Ois. pl. i. figs. 1, 2 (18— ?).

Vestiaria heterorhynchus, Lesson, Rev. Zool. 1840, p. 269; id. op. cit. 1842, p. 209.

Drepanis olivacea, G. R. Gray, Gen. B. p. 96 (1847).

Hemignathus lucidus, Peale, U.S. Expl. Exped., Birds, p. 1538 (1848); Bonaparte, Consp. Av. i.
p- 404 (1850) ; Hartlaub, Arch. f. Naturgesch. 1852, i. p. 110 (partim) ; Florent-Prévost &
O. DesMurs, Voy. Vénus, Zool. p. 191 (185-) (nec Lichtenstein).

Hemignathus olivaceus, Reichenbach, Handb. sp. Orn., Tenuirostres, pp. 223, 318 (1858), pl. 591.
figg. 4010, 4011; Cassin, U.S. Expl. Exped., Mamm. & Orn. p. 179 (1858); Dole, Proc.
Bost. Soc. N. H. xii. p. 298 (1869) ; id. Hawaiian Alman. 1879, p. 45; Sclater, Ibis, 1871,
p. 860; id. op. cit. 1879, p. 92; Sharpe, Cat. B. Br. Mus. x. p. 4 (1885); S. B. Wilson, Ann.
& Mag. N. H. ser. 6, iv. p. 400 (1889) ; id. Ibis, 1890, p. 191.

Drepanis (Hemignathus) lucida, G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Isl. p. 9 (1859); id. Hand-l. B. i.
p. 112 (1869), partim.

Tuts short-billed Hawaiian species was brought to the knowledge of ornithologists at
a much later date than many others from the Sandwich Islands, having been unknown
to the earliest writers on the group. Lafresnaye, who was the first to specify the bird,
described and figured it as forming a subgenus of “ Héorotaire” (i. e. Drepanis), under
the name of Heterorhynchus olivaceus, in the ‘Magasin de Zoologie’ for 1839, from
an example bought (for 25 francs) of Dupont, a dealer in Paris. In 1848, in his
account of the United States Exploring Expedition, Peale mistook it for H. lucidus,
the corresponding form of Oahu, and thereby led astray various authors down to
G. R. Gray in 1869, who combined the two species under one heading; the error,
however, had no serious consequences, as Cassin, in his revision of Peale’s work, put
the matter on a proper footing, and has been followed by Judge Dole and more
recent authorities. Meanwhile MM. Florent-Prévost and DesMurs had given another
description and figure in the Zoology of the Voyage of the ‘ Vénus,’ a French frigate
sent round the world for purposes of exploration: they named the bird correctly on
the plate, though assigning the specific name to “ Lichtenstein”—a mistake followed
by many writers; but in the letterpress, having possibly seen Peale’s book meanwhile,
they referred it to H. ducidus. Lesson, considering it congeneric with Vestiaria,
changed the appellation to V. heterorhynchus, and G. R. Gray placed it under Drepanis ;
but the distinctness of the genus Hemignathus of 1838 being finally settled, that term
takes precedence over Heterorhynchus of 1839; moreover, it is clear that while in any
case the latter can only be applied to the short-billed forms, the former will cover those

with a long bill also, as Lichtenstein figured an example of each when founding his
genus in the year first mentioned.

In the Island of Hawaii, to which, as far as we know at present, it is peculiar,
this bird is decidedly rare, and I obtained only three specimens during a stay of some
five weeks in June in Kona, where it frequents the koa trees alone, running up their
great smooth trunks and along their limbs in search of insects. In the mamdne
woods near Mana, I subsequently found it in considerable numbers in the month of
January, when these trees are in full flower, resembling laburnums with their
golden clusters. Its movements are very rapid, and the quickness with which it
slips from one-side of a limb to the other is surprising: I never could detect it in the
act of sucking honey from flowers, nor, indeed, have I seen any of its congeners so
engaged; Mr. Palmer, however, has seen //. stejnegeri sucking the Lehua flowers.
I noticed that many of the branches of the mamdne were dead, or sometimes half the
tree, while the bark of large examples was easily detached and well suited to the
penetrating bill of this bird; so that, although I was unable to approach near enough
to watch the precise mode of procedure, the bill is probably thrust into cracks and
crannies in the decayed wood, where grubs and insects are found, or it may loosen the
bark and then capture the insects beneath with its long tongue.

Its vertical range seems to be from 3500 to 5000 feet, as I never met with it in the
lower forest-zone.

Description. Adult male. Head dull olive-yellow, passing into greenish olive, which
covers the entire upper surface; throat and breast deep gamboge-yellow, shading into
dull white on abdomen; under tail-coverts ashy olive; wing- and tail-quills greyish
brown edged with olive; bill and feet slaty black.

Adult female. Head, sides of face, and entire upper surface ashy olive ; throat and
upper part of breast light gamboge-yellow, passing into dull ashy washed with lemon-
yellow ; wing- and tail-quills greyish brown, edged with a duller shade of olive than
in the male.

Immature. Upper surface uniform ashy, slightly tinged with olive on mantle and
rump ; chin and throat dull white, passing into ashy brown on flanks, while the breast
and abdomen are ashy tinged with primrose-yellow.

Dimensions.—Male. Total length 5°75 inches, wing from carpal joint 3°35, maxilla
following the curve 1:15, chord subtending the curve °85, mandible °65, difference
between maxilla and mandible -40, tarsus -95, tail 2°15.

Female. Total length 5:10 inches, wing from carpal joint 3, maxilla following the
curve ‘95, chord subtending the curve ‘70, mandible °60, tarsus -85, tail 1-65.

West,Nevmam imp.

EW Frobawk delet

NIS.

=
sts

flo SEs

HE MIGNATHUS

HEMIGNATHUS AFFINIS.

Hemignathus affinis, Rothschild, Ibis, 1893, p. 112.
Heterorhynchus affinis, Rothschild, Avif. Laysan, pp. 103, 104; Perkins, Ibis, 1895, p. 119.

Mr. PrERxins’s observations, recorded on the spot, give an excellent idea of the pecu-
liarities of the genus asa whole. He says that since writing on the Hawaiian species
he had had the opportunity of observing the habits of the present species on Maui,
and H, hanapepe on Kauai :—“ Both of them are found in the upper forest, though
stragglers may occur at times at lower elevations. Their habits seem to’ me quite
identical; and going straight from the haunts of the one to those of the other,
I failed to detect any difference in their songs. At the same time, besides the
ordinary song (which resembles that of H. wilson7, the Hawaii species, but is less
loud), the Maui bird has a second distinct one, much like that of an introduced
Carpodacus, which abounds in the same locality and nests there. ‘This is no doubt
imitated, as some of the native birds not infrequently sing like some other (native)
species, the song of which is quite unlike their own proper one. Their call-note is a
sharp ‘keewit’ once or twice repeated and louder than that of other birds in which it
is very similar. This the sexes are repeatedly uttering, pausing in their feeding
at short intervals for this purpose. Their food cousists mainly of various insects,
which they procure much in the same way as does H. wilsoni, but they are altogether
quieter and less vigorous in their movements. In their stomachs I usually found
spiders, wood-feeding larve of Tineide and Geometridz, and wood-boring beetles,
especially the endemic brassy weevils of the genus Oodemas. Sometimes, too, they
contained small pieces of lava, no doubt to aid in breaking up the hard shells of the
beetles mentioned. That H. affinis also sucks honey I obtained decisive evidence,
though I never saw it myself; probably all the species do so at times except H. wilsont,
which has become more entirely specialized for a Woodpecker’s mode of life.

“In life, apart from their very distinct song and call-notes, these birds and the
Hemignathi can readily be distinguished from all the other native species by the
extremely short tail in proportion to their total length,—a distinction which the eye
can appreciate at distances at which neither the form of the beak nor the colour of
the plumage is any longer to be made out. Moreover the Heterorhynchi differ in
another respect from all the other green birds, for the latter, even in feeding on the
limbs of trees, advance by more or less distinct hops, whereas the former regularly
creep over the surface of the trunks and branches.”

Ju 2

To complete my account of the two species from Hawaii, already treated in this work,
I here append Mr. Perkins’s observations upon them, published in ‘ The Ibis’ for 1893
(pp. 106-108) :—

‘But of all the birds of Kona the most interesting in habits is the shorter-billed
Hemignathus | H. wilsoni]. The mere sight of so extraordinary a form could hardly fail
to awaken in any one a keen desire to witness the manner of its feeding, and this I
have many times been able to accomplish. It is a common bird from rather below
4000 feet to some hundreds of feet above that altitude, and most probably much higher
still. It is most partial to the larger acacias, running up and down the limbs and
trunks with equal ease, and also both on the upper and lower surfaces of the branches.
It was on the 11th of July, soon after my arrival at a sufficient altitude for this bird,
that I first saw one, a fine bright male, feeding. When I first caught sight of it it was
some ten yards off; but I easily got closer without scaring it in the slightest. Being
bare-footed and bare-legged at the time, and the ground being overgrown with a very
prickly introduced thistle, after following it for half an hour I found my feet somewhat
painful. Meanwhile the bird kept straying over the fallen trunks, turning its head,
now right, now left, in its desire for food. In this manner it searched both sides of the
tree in one journey without retracing its steps. And this is how it uses its bill:—The
upper mandible it plunges into the small holes or cracks in the wood, while the lower
presses on the surface of the bark. By this means, I imagine, it gets a considerable
leverage to help it in opening out the burrows of the insects. In the same way it
thrusts its upper bill under the loose bark, resting the lower one on the surface, and in
this way strips the bark off. The upper mandible, though so thin, is very strong and
somewhat flexible; while the curve of the bill follows the curve of the burrow, for
insects nearly always burrow more or less in a curve. Should the curve of the burrow
not agree with the curve of the bill, the difficulty is overcome both by the slight
flexibility of the beak and by the wonderful flexibility of the bird’s neck, which it
twists round so as to bring the curve of the bill to follow that of the burrow. In this
manner it gets out its prey, being largely aided by the long tongue, which is as long as
the upper beak. Every now and then it gives several blows to the trunk, the sound of
which may be heard at a considerable distance, sometimes, [I think, to frighten out its
prey to the entrance of the burrow, sometimes for the purpose of actually breaking the
wood.

‘7 had several other opportunities of observing this bird when feeding, afterwards ;
the blows that it gives to the trunk and branches are dealt with great vigour and with
the beak wide agape, so that the points of both mandibles come in contact with the
surface. One hot morning, shortly before I left Kona, 1 watched one of these birds for
some time lying on a branch of the mamane and basking in the sun. Now and then
it would lazily turn and peck at the bark without changing its position. Suddenly it
started up and commenced to feed in earnest, dealing blows with savage energy. Into
these blows it throws its whole weight, swinging backwards from the thighs to renew
each stroke. In some cases at least these blows are for the purpose of driving out
insects, or at any rate have that result; for several times I saw the bird after a stroke

make a sudden dart, sometimes even taking an insect on the wing, and, after swallowing
it with evident satisfaction, return again to its labour. Its song is short but rather
pleasing, and, as one would expect from its habits, full of life and energy.

‘The long-billed species [| H. obscurus] is also an interesting bird, as in its habits it
is intermediate between Himatione and its short-billed relative. Himatione mainly
feeds on insects amongst the leaves and flowers of the forest trees, but not infrequently
pecks at the bark in true Woodpecker style. In the long-billed Hemignathus this
mode of feeding becomes much more usual, and its tapping may often be heard in
acacia and other trees; still it feeds largely on insects amongst the leaves of the lehuas,
&c., while the short-billed species has almost entirely assumed a Woodpecker’s habits.
This bird is by no means confined to the lower forest, but extends its range right up
into the haunts of the short-billed bird, where they may be seen even in the same tree.
I rarely heard it sing. Its song reminded me somewhat of that of the yellow Himatione,
but was distinct enough.”

Mr. Rothschild’s original description of this species is as follows :—

“ This bird is very closely allied to H. hanapepe, of Kauai, but differs in having the
head, throat, and upper breast more golden yellow, and the back, rump, and upper
wing-coverts dull olive colour instead of greenish yellow. Moreover, in 1. affinis the
yellow of the head terminates abruptly at the occiput, while it gradually passes into
the colour of the back in H. hanapepe. ‘The anal region and under tail-coverts are
yellowish green, whilst in H. hanapepe they are white. Total length about 5 inches,
wing 3°05, tail 2, tarsus 0°85, culmen 1:2.”

The female is greyish above, with pale yellow lower parts and superciliary streak.

West, Newman,imp.

F W.Frohawk del, et lith.

HEMIGNATHUS HANAPEPE.

HEMIGNATHUS HANAPEPE,

NUKUPUU.

Hemignathus hanapepe, 8. B. Wilson, Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist. ser. 6, iv. p. 401 (1 Nov. 1889) ; id.
Ibis, 1890, p. 192, pl. vi. fig. 1.

THis interesting bird, which in colour and size much resembles Z. olivaceus of Hawaii,
I described as new in my paper on “Three undescribed Species of the Genus Hemi-
gnathus,” in the ‘ Annals and Magazine of Natural History’ for November 1889, while I
subsequently figured it in ‘The Ibis.’

I discovered the Nukupuu whilst staying at a little mountain-cottage belonging to
the Sinclair family in the higher forest-region of Kauai, at an altitude of some 3000
feet, to which excellent collecting-ground Mr. Aubrey Robinson most kindly accom-
panied me. Here I stayed with my native—Keawe—for ten days, and as the cottage is
some five hours’ ride from any other habitation, and is completely surrounded by forest
on three sides—the fourth having a fine outlook to the sea, across a stupendous and
thickly-wooded ravine, which separates it from the next plateau—one could not well
imagine a better camping-ground. ‘That this bird is very scarce is pretty clear, for my
friend Mr. Francis Gay, who for some years past has paid great attention to birds,
had never seen any specimens, and, furthermore, I only obtained five during a stay of
nine days. Mr. Palmer—the collector sent to the islands by the Hon. Walter Roth-
schild—only secured eight during a visit of some duration, and but two additional
examples in seven weeks’ collecting in the wooded mountain-slopes above Makaweli
(2000 feet), the latter in different months. The fact of Mr. Palmer's procuring speci-
mens near Makaweli is of interest, as showing that the bird is not entirely confined to
the higher forest-zone. The first I shot, a fine male which was in a lofty ohia tree, I
took to be Himatione parva, the brilliant yellow of the breast in both species being
very noticeable, and I was therefore greatly delighted to find, on picking it up, that I
had secured a form quite new to me. Mr. Palmer says that he found difficulty in
distinguishing the females and young males of the Nukupuu from the Amakihi
(Himatione stejnegeri), as the two birds have so great a resemblance to each other.
For my own part—as I remarked in my paper in ‘The Ibis’ for 1890—I found that
the slaty colour of the upper surface of the former enabled me to determine them
easily enough, even when engaged in hunting for insects at a great height from the
ground. With regard to the exact manner in which the curiously formed bill is used,
I regret that neither Mr. Palmer nor I have been able to throw any light on the subject,
for the bird is so active in its movements, and the maxilla so slender, that it is most

Q 2

difficult to discern the latter at all, even at a short distance, while the extreme rarity of
the species made me unwilling to risk the loss of a specimen by too close observation.
I agree with Mr. Palmer in believing that the bird merely inserts its long hooked
beak into crevices and holes in decayed wood, extracting by that means the grubs and
insects which abound under the bark ; its habit of keeping along the upper surface of
a branch and examining the’sides within its reach we both noted. ‘The food doubtless
consists for the most part of insects, larvee, small beetles, &c., but I am assured by my
native—Keawe—that the Nukupuu also feeds on bananas and oranges, and I have
every confidence in the assertion. In the district of Waimea, especially near the
renowned Hanapepe Falls, after which I named my discovery, orange-trees are
numerous, and though I did not actually see the Nukupuu there, Mr. Palmev’s speci-
mens from the vicinity of Makaweli make it very probable that the bird may occur
in that locality.

Description.— Adult male. Front and top of the head dull gamboge-yellow, passing
into bright olive, which extends over all the upper surface of the back, wing-coverts,
and tail; lores black, joined by a narrow black line just above the bill; throat, cheeks,
and breast deep gamboge-yellow, passing into dusky white on abdomen and tail-coverts ;
wing- and tail-quills greyish brown, edged outwardly with olive; irides dark hazel; bill
and feet slaty black.

Adult female. Tinged with olive on the forehead, an indistinct line passing over the
eye; wing- and tail-quills margined with olive; breast primrose-yellow, changing into
dull white on the abdomen ; lower tail-coverts tinged with buff.

Dimensions —Adult male. Total length 5:60 inches, wing from carpal joint 3°26,
maxilla following the curve 1:20, chord subtending the curve ‘80, difference between
maxilla and mandible -50, tarsus ‘90, middle toe with claw ‘70, hind toe with claw ‘79,
tail 1°85.

Obs.—Generally resembling H. olivaceus, but differing remarkably in the shape of the
mandible, which follows the curve of the maxilla as in ZH. /ucidus, and is not straight
as in the former bird; the rather brighter tinge of yellow that pervades most of
the plumage and the white abdomen are other distinguishing marks.

FW.Frohawk del et hth.

PSEUDONESTOR

XANTHOPHRYS.

West Newman ump.

PSEUDONESTOR XANTHOPHRYS.

Pseudonestor zanthophrys, Rothschild, Bull. Brit. Orn. Clnb, i. p. xxxv (1893) ; Perkins, Ibis,
1895, p. 118.

Or this very curious stoutly-built form, peculiar to Maui, especially noticeable for its
abnormally large hooked bill, Mr. Perkins writes as follows:— |

“Of the Fringillide (nearly all of which are peculiar to the Island of Hawaii) I
have already given some account of the habits; but there remains one,—Pseudonestor
xanthophrys,—peculiar to the Island of Maui, which is perhaps the most remarkable
form of all. It is local and rare, and seems to be confined to the highest forest on
Haleakala, at an elevation of some 5000 feet above sea-level. Being very tame and
apparently unwilling to fly far, I had on several occasions excellent opportunities to
learn something of its habits, and especially of the use of its curiously formed and
exceedingly powerful beak. The bird has an evident predilection for the koa trees
(Acacia falcata), and it is from these that it mainly gets its food. This consists
of the larvee of a highly peculiar endemic genus of Lougicorn beetles (Clytarlus), of
which there are in the islands a considerable number of species, nearly all of them
attached to the different species of native acacias. The larger ones usually burrow in
the main trunks, the smaller in the limbs and twigs above. It is on the larvee of the
latter that Pseudonestor feeds and in procuring them has developed the large hooked
beak, the powerful jaw-muscles, and heavy skull, which constitute its chief peculiarities.
It may be observed that the twigs in which the Clytarli have their burrows are not
generally rotten, but dry, and of excessive hardness, often surpassing in this respect
the still living and unaffected branches. The bird is sluggish, in its movements
parrot-like in the extreme, especially in the varied hanging attitudes that it assumes,
while the similarity is still further increased by the shape of its beak.

“Those that I saw in the act of feeding were generally clinging to the under sides
of the thin branches or twigs, the head raised above the upper surface; the point of
the curved maxilla was thrust into the burrow, the short mandible opposed thereto,
and pressed against the side or under surface of the twig, and the burrow opened out
by sheer strength. All that I shot contained larve of these beetles, as many as 20
or 30 being found in the stomach of a single bird. No less than four species of
Clytarlus were found on the acacias in the actual haunts of Pseudonestor ; these too,
like the bird, are all of species peculiar to the same island. When alarmed the bird

gave frequent utterance to a short squeaking cry; it has besides a decided song,
2H

which reminded me much of that of the green Himatione. Once I heard it sing on
the wing, as it crossed a gulch}.

‘“The unpleasant scent of Pseudonestor, like that of many Drepanidide and other
Hawaiian Finches, is very noticeable.

“Looking at the Hawaiian Finches as a whole, it may be noticed how wonderfully
the structure of each of them has been specially developed according to the nature of
its own particular and most important article of food. Thus, Pseudonestor, as above
mentioned, has an enormous development of beak and skull and muscles attached
thereto, for splitting the koa twigs; Chloridops has a huge beak and still heavier skull
and muscles, which enable it to crack the hard nuts of the bastard sandal (Myoporum) ;
then there is the strong cutting-beak of Rhodacanthis for dividing up the koa beans,
and a large development of the abdominal portion of the body, in accordance with
the large fragments that it swallows; the shorter bill of Lowiozdes, which deftly cuts
off the bean of the mamane acacia (Sophora), while the bird holding it in position
with its foot opens the pod and devours the seeds; and, lastly, the hooked bill of
Psittacirostra, with which it digs out the separate components of the fleshy in-
florescence of the ‘ieie’ (Mreycinetia), for this is certainly its natural food, though it
has now come to feed largely on various introduced fruits—guavas, oranges, and the
like. Besides their special foods, all the Finches vary their diet at times with the
larvee’ of Lepidoptera.”

Description. — Upper parts greenish grey, greener towards the rump and head, a
canary-yellow superciliary streak reaching nearly to the nape on each side ; lower parts
of the same yellow colour, which extends upwards to the bottom of the sides of the
neck; wings and tail browner with greenish margins; maxilla blackish, mandible
nearly white ; feet slaty black.

Dimensions.—Total length 5°5 inches, wing 3, tail 1-9, tarsus ‘9, culmen 1.

The female is duller grey above, and less bright beiow, being smaller in all her
dimensions.

1 & See Ibis, 1893, p. 108.”

TEXY Le, a

S
F

Newman imp-

West,

PFW Frohawk delet lith

PSITTIROSTRA PSITTACEA.

PSITTACIROSTRA PSITTACEHA.,
OU.

“ Parrot-billed Grosbeak,” Latham, Gen. Synops. ii. p. 108, pl. xlii.* (1783).

“ Bird with a yellow head,” King, Voy. Pacif. Ocean, iii. p. 119 (1784).

Loxia psittacea, Gmelin, Syst. Nat. 1. p. 844 (1788) ; Latham, Ind. Orn. i. p. 371 (1790); Donn-
dorff, Orn. Beytr. i. p. 843 (1795) ; Tiedemann, Anat. Naturgesch. Vog. ii. p. 433 (1814) ;
Stephens, Shaw, Zool. ix. p. 268 (1816) ; Bloxam, Voy. ‘ Blonde,’ p. 249 (1826).

“ Le Gros-bec Perroquet,” Virey (Sonnini), Hist. Nat. Buffon, Ois. xi. p. 81 (1803-4).

Strobilophaga psittacea, Vieillot, N. Dict. d’Hist. Nat. ix. p. 609 (1817); id. Encycl. Méth.,
Ornithol. p. 1021 (1828).

Psittirostra psittacea, Temminck, Man. d’Orn. i. p. Ixxi (1820); Swains. Classif. B. ii. p. 295
(1837); G. R. Gray, Gen. B. ii. p. 389, pl. 94. fig. 2* (1845); Bonaparte, Consp. Av. i. p. 492
(1850) ; Hartlaub, Arch. f. Naturgesch. 1852, i. p. 183; Cassin, U.S. Expl. Exped., Mamm. &
Orn. p. 432 (1858); Dole, Proc. Bost. Soc. N. H. xii. p. 301 (1869) ; id. Hawaiian Alman.
1879, p. 49; Sclater, Ibis, 1871, p. 360; id. Proc. Zool. Soc. 1878, p. 847; id. Ibis, 1879,
p. 92; Von Pelzeln, Journ. f. Orn. 1872, p. 30; id. Ibis, 1878, p. 21; Finsch, op. cit. 1880,
p- 81; Sharpe, Cat. B. Br. Mus. x. p. 51 (1885) ; Stejneger, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1889,
p. 886; S. B. Wilson, Ibis, 1890, p. 194. ,

“ Raouhi,” Quoy & Gaimard, Voy. ‘ Uranie’ et ‘ Physicienne,’ Zool. ii. p. 86 (1824).

Psittirostra sandvicensis, Stephens, ut supra, xiv. p. 91 (1826).

Psittacirostra icterocephala, Temminck & Laugier, Nouv. Rec. Pl. Col. 457 *, livr. 77 (1828) ;
Cuvier, Régne Anim. éd. 2, i. p. 415 (1829).

Sittacodes, Gloger, Gemeinn. Hand- u. Hilfsbuch, p. 249 (1842).

Pstitacopis psittacea, “ Nitzsch,’ Cabanis (Ersch & Gruber), Allgem. Encyel. sect. i. 1, p. 219

(1849) ; Sundevall, Tentam. p. 32 (1872).
Psittacina olwwacea, Lichtenstein, Nomencl. Av. p. 48 (1854).
Psittirostra icterocephala, G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Isl. p. 28 (1859).

* Figure notabiles.

Tuis is one of the birds originally made known by Latham, who described and
figured as the “ Parrot-billed Grosbeak” in the ‘ General Synopsis’ an example of
each sex from the collection of Sir Ashton Lever; of these the male is now in the
Imperial Museum at Vienna, while both were doubtless obtained during Cook’s last
voyage, in the account of which King refers to this species as the “ Bird with a yellow
head.” Cassin, by merely mentioning it as from the Sandwich Islands, in the ‘ Catalogue
of Birds’ at the end of his account of the U.S. Exploring Expedition, would seem to

1 Mr. F, Gay informs me that on Kauai the male is sometimes called “ Ou poolapalapa” (Ou with the yellow
head), while the female goes by the name of “ Oulaevo” (the green Ou). Bloxam also called the bird “* Ohu.”

imply a wide and general range, while Peale omitted it entirely, though his party
obtained the examples vouched for by Cassin. Gmelin called the bird Lowia psittacea,
and, as will be seen from Dr. Gadow’s ‘Remarks’ in this work, it is truly Fringilline
and is near Loxioides, though belonging to a different genus, which Temminck rightly
felt justified in separating in 1820 under the title of Psittirostra: I agree, however,
with that author’s later opinion that the more correct form is Psittacirostra, which
was accepted at a subsequent date by Cuvier. In his ‘ Manuel, Temminck made the
mistake of considering the female, of which he had only a drawing, to be a distinct
species; but when figuring it in the ‘Planches Coloriées’ he corrected the error},
Latham in his ‘General History of Birds’ having meanwhile drawn attention to it.

In the former author’s own copy of the catalogue of the sale of the Bullock Collection
(23rd day), a single specimen of this bird is marked “ £1 1s.—genre nouveau:” in
another copy, with annotations supposed to be in Latham’s handwriting, the same
example is marked “ Lichtenstein ;” but this is probably a mistake, as the genus does
not occur in Lichtenstein’s “ Verzeichniss,’ and therefore presumably was not in the
Berlin Museum in 1823, Temminck, moreover, in the ‘ Planches Coloriées,’ remarks :
“Le Musée des Pays-Bas posséde les sujets achetés 4 la vente du Bullockian Muséum,
& Londres,” where “‘ sujets” is in the plural. This would indicate that the Museum of
the Netherlands contained more examples than one, though whether they all came
from Bullock’s collection must remain somewhat doubtful. A male and female are
also in the Derby Museum at Liverpool (marked 1829 and 1829 @ in Lord Derby’s old
catalogue), while W. W. Ellis has a drawing of the bird among those preserved in
the British Museum (No. 79, 1779”).

This well-known species is distributed throughout the Sandwich group, and I obtained
specimens from every island save Oahu and Maui, on the former of which I have good
reason to believe it has become extinct or else extremely scarce. I cannot detect
any appreciable difference between examples from the various islands, although I think
those I obtained on Lanai are brightest in plumage. The size and shape of the
curiously formed bill varies considerably, especially in the males: the two woodcuts
on the next page will serve to show the variation referred to.

Next to Vestiaria coccinea, it is perhaps the most noticeable of the forest-birds of
the islands, the bright yellow head and neck of the adult males rendering them very
conspicuous in their straight dashing flight from tree to tree. The immature males
and females, which lack this distinctive feature, might easily be mistaken for the
sombre-coloured Pheornis obscura; but the constant twittering which the Ou almost
invariably makes while feeding at once betrays its identity. Freshly killed examples
possess a peculiar scent, which I did not observe in any other forest-dwelling species ;
it is probably due to their extremely varied fruit-diet.

Though Pstdttacirostra, as remarked above, is generally distributed throughout the
group, in no locality does it seem to be abundant; but I am told by Mr. Francis Gay

* The figure in the Pl. Col. is absurdly overcoloured, being of a bright grass-green, whereas the true colour
is decidedly tinged with olive.

that at the time of year that the guava is ripe it may be seen in great numbers feeding
on its yellow fruits. I think that I found it most plentiful among the trees which
clothe the abrupt sides of the deep ravine running down to the leper settlement on
the island of Molokai; and very lovely these little birds looked, flying continually
to and fro, up and down this stupendous gorge—their yellow necks flashing in the
bright sunlight, as they darted out from among the dark green ohias or from the
silvery foliage of the kukui (Aleurites triloba). The food of Psittacirostra consists
entirely of fruits, and chiefly of that of the ieie (Freycinetia arborea), the ripe seeds
of which I found in most cases in the stomach when dissecting specimens; I noticed
also, particularly in one place on the outskirts of a forest in the district of Kona,
that a very large proportion of the fruits of the climber were eaten away at the apex,
and here I shot a good number of examples. I killed others as they were busily
engaged in feeding on the small crimson fruit of the wild mulberry (Morus papyrifera),
the juice of which had dyed their throats a deep crimson.

Necklaces, “‘ leis,” used sometimes to be made from the bright green plumage of the
back and underparts of this bird, but they were commonly used in combination with
the black feathers of Acrulocercus nobilis and the scarlet feathers of Vestiaria coccinea.
I saw a wreath thus made at Olaa in the district of Puna, which I attempted to
purchase, but the native woman wanted a higher price than I was inclined to give.

Description. Adult male. Head and neck gamboge-yellow, all the rest of the upper
parts olive-green inclining to yellow on the rump; whole of the under surface greenish
yellow with the exception of the breast, which is grey; remiges and rectrices dusky
brown margined with olive-green; irides dark hazel; bill and feet pinkish.

Adult female. Head and neck olive-green above and grey beneath; the rest of the
under surface greyish white ; under tail-coverts pure white.

Dimensions.— Adult. Total length 6°30 inches, wing 3°85, culmen ‘70, tarsus -95,
tail 2°20.

Woodcuts are here given of the heads of two examples to show the difference in size
and shape of the bill; in the first figure it is of an abnormal size and extraordinarily
decurved. Other specimens vary between the two extreme types figured.

Obs.—An immature female from Kauai has the upper wing-coverts tipped with light
olive-yellow. ‘This specimen has also more yellow on the underparts than have others
of that sex in my collection. Dr. Stejneger, in a paper entitled “ Notes on Psittirostra
psittacea from Kauai, Hawaiian Islands” (Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1887, pp. 389, 390),

discusses the possibility of there being two species, and in conclusion asks: “Are there
two different species of Psittirostra on the Sandwich Islands, or are the differences
pointed out above perhaps only due to age?” Since the publication of this paper
Dr. Stejneger has been kind enough to send me one of the specimens described in it—
an adult male—for comparison. I have carefully compared it with others from Hawaii
and cannot detect any marked difference, though it has the head rather brighter than
the average from that island; while I imagine that the discrepancy which the author found
between it and Latham’s description may have been due to the latter having had only
poor examples before him. I did not, however, obtain specimens from Oahu, and Herr
von Pelzeln may be right when he remarks (Ibis, 1873, p. 22), with regard to two
examples procured on Oahu as compared with Latham’s type, ‘‘even the older one
[ ¢ | differs from Latham’s male bird [then before him], the middle of the breast and
belly and the thighs being whitish ;” the latter in all probability came from Hawaii.
I may here remark that an immature male from Lanai has the under surface clear
primrose-yellow, with bright olive-green flanks, while the olive-green of the upper
parts is also brighter than in any other specimen which I possess. ‘These variations are,
I imagine, due to age, as a female from the same island does not differ from one
from Hawaii. Examples from Molokai do not present any definite points of difference,
though perhaps they are somewhat duller beneath. I did not, as already remarked,
obtain a single bird from Maui !.

* Dr. Finsch (Ibis, 1880, p. 80) says “‘ when collecting at Olinda, Maui, Psittirostra psittacea I saw repeatedly ;
but I lost those I shot, from their falling into the ferns.” My friend Mr, Randal yon Tempsky informs me
that he saw several specimens of this bird during a visit made to the Ukumehame Gulch in 1890.

F.W Frohawk, del. et lith.

EO XO DES: “SrA aie

West, Newman, tmp.

LOXIOIDES BAILLEUL
PALILA.

Loxioides baillewt, Oustalet, Bull. Soc. Philomath. Paris, sér. 7, i. p. 100 (1877) ; Ibis, 1878,
p- 3876; Sharpe, Cat. B. Br. Mus. x. p. 49 (1885).
§ bailleni (err.), Sclater, Ibis, 1879, pp. 90, 92, pl. 11.*

* Figura notabilis.

Tue literary history of this bird is of the simplest nature. Described by M. Oustalet
in 1877, as a new species of a new genus, undoubtedly Fringilline, and similar to
Psittirostra, while easily distinguishable from it, the only dissentients of authority seem
to be Messrs. Sclater and Sharpe, who have considered both to belong to the Family
Dicwide, or at least to approach it very nearly. The two original examples were sent
by M. Bailleu!t from the Sandwich Islands in 1876; and though M. Oustalet did not
state the exact locality from which they came in the first instance, he afterwards
informed Mr. Sclater that the habitat was Hawaii, where the author also obtained his
specimens.

A good coloured figure is given in ‘The Ibis,’ as above, from the pencil of Mr. Keu- -

lemans, to illustrate Dr. Sclater’s paper “On recent Additions to our Knowledge of
the Avifauna of the Sandwich Islands.” In this paper the author makes some most
valuable observations on this “very remarkable type” as he terms it, which I here
transcribe :—“ It will be at once observed that Lowxioides in general appearance is
closely allied to Psittirostra. The form, size, and distribution of colours are similar.
When we come to a closer comparison of the skins, the result arrived at is the same.
The wing-formula is nearly the same in each. There are nine fully formed
primaries, of which the first is about equal to the fifth, and the intermediate ones
are the longest in the wing. In Psittirostra these three primaries are nearly equal
in length; in Lowioides the second is rather more elongated beyond its fellows.
The structure of the feet in the two forms is also nearly similar, those of Psittirostra
being, however, shorter and stouter. ‘The tarsi in both cases are unmistakably
Oscinine, and the divisions of the scutes are quite obsolete. In the shape of the bill
only, as will be seen by the outlines (a of the bill of Lowxioides, and 6 of that of Psitti-
rostra) given on the plate, there is considerable divergence, that of the newly discovered
form being considerably shorter and much more swollen laterally than that of Ps¢ttz-

* The late M. Bailleu was an enthusiastic naturalist, and spent some months at Dr. Trousseau’s mountain-
cottage in the district of Kona on Hawaii, engaged in forming a collection of birds which he forwarded to the
Museum of the Jardin des Plantes, with a second collection consisting of fishes.

rostra. This, and the differences in the feet, may justify the separation of the two
forms into two genera; but there cannot be the slightest doubt that they are very
nearly allied, and must be placed next to one another in the system. M. Oustalet
places Lowtoides near the Finches and Paradoxornis. But Paradoxornis has, I be-
lieve, no near relationship to the Finches. And I adhere to my previously expressed
sentiment }, that in all probability Psittirostra, and with it Lowvioides, are not really
Fringilline genera, but merely abnormal forms of the same type as Drepanis and
Hemignathus, either belonging to or closely allied to the Diceide?. ‘This question,
however, can only be satisfactorily determined by an examination of the structure of
the tongue and other soft parts.’ I am happy to say that the valuable investigations of
Dr. Gadow, the result of which will be found in the present work, have pretty well
decided this question.

That Zowioides is closely allied to Psittirostra there can be little doubt, and
their striking general resemblance often causes the natives to mistake the former
for the latter; the two species, however, are, to my knowledge, scarcely ever met
with in the same forest-zone—Loxioides being confined to the middle and upper,
while Psittirostra is seldom seen except in the lower region. The Palila—to call it
by its liquid and euphonic native name—is, as far as I absolutely know, confined to the
island of Hawaii, and even there is singularly local, being found, I believe, only in
the upland districts of Kona and Hamakua. Few natives recognize it, but as I
remarked above—deceived by its general resemblance to Psittirostra—confound the
two species. Its chief food, according to my observations, consists of the seeds of the
mamane ? (Sophora chrysophylla), the golden laburnum-like racemes of which tree
make such a striking feature of the upper forest-zone during the months of January
and February. The upper figure in the Plate represents a bird which I watched
at close quarters splitting a maméne pod, as the following extract from my journal
will show :—“I shot a Palila to-day, as it was in the act of extracting the seeds from
a mamdne pod; the bird’s method of procedure was to cut the pod off with its
beak, and then to lay it on a horizontal branch, holding it firmly with its claws, and
pecking out the seeds one after the other. Iwas a few yards off, partially concealed
by a tree.”

As the sandalwood (Santalum album) and the bastard sandalwood (Myoporum
santalinum) occur in fair quantity in the region in which Lowioides is found, I think
that it very probably feeds on them; however, I have generally observed it in

1 « Of, Ibis, 1871, p. 360.”

2 « Mohoa seems to be a Meliphagine form; but Drepanis, Hemagnathus, and the other genera (except
perhaps Chetoptila) in the list given, Ibis, 1871, p. 360, haying only nine primaries, should probably be
referred to the Diceide.”

° T observed the mamdne also on the island of Maui, and it is reported, perhaps erroneously, from Kauai;
so I think that Lowtotdes may inhabit the former island; and I am the more inclined to this belief, from the
fact that a man but lately arrived in Hawaii from the highlands of Maui seemed at once to recognize the
bird, and told me it was abundant where he had been living.

the mamane, and have found the seeds of that tree alone in its crop. My friend
Mr. Francis Sinclair tells me that the Sophora of New Zealand (S. grandiflora, the
Kowhai of the natives), which bears a strong resemblance to the Sandwich Island
species, is a great favourite with the Tui (Prosthemadera nove-zealandiw) and other
birds; and Sir W. Buller, in his ‘ History of the Birds of New Zealand’ (2nd ed.),
informs us that the Kaka (Nestor meridionalis) feeds on the pollen of the same plant,
and figures the Tui on a branch of it.

The Palila, as far as I know, has no song, but merely a very clear whistle-like note,
which, when often repeated, is held by the natives to be a sign of approaching rain.
While at Waimea, a specimen of Lowiotdes was brought to me alive though injured ;
it lived a few days, during which it constantly uttered the clear whistle without giving
evidence of any further powers. On June 14th I found a nest from which I
saw the bird fly; it was placed in the topmost branches of a Nato tree (Myoporum
santalinum), about 35 feet from the ground, but contained no eggs, and when we
subsequently revisited it we found it deserted. It may be briefly described as cup-
shaped, 4 inches in diameter, and very loosely constructed of dry grass, among which
is interwoven a considerable quantity of grey lichen; the inside being composed of the
same lichen, with a few slender rootlets added.

Description.— Adult male. Entire head and neck deep gamboge-yellow, the remainder
of the upper surface ashy grey, slightly inclining to whitish on the rump; wing-coverts,
wing-quills, and tail-feathers dusky black, edged externally with olive-yellow ; throat and
upper part of breast gamboge-yellow, the rest of the under surface dusky white ; irides
dark hazel; bill and feet slaty-purple.

Adult female. Differs from the male in having the yellow of the head and neck
washed with brown, which gives it a very dusky appearance, while the yellow on the
under surface has a distinctly greenish tinge.

Dimensions.—Total length 6°5 inches, wing from carpal joint 3°55, culmen °5
tarsus ‘95, tail 2°65.

FW.Frohawk delet hth .

RHODOCANTHUS PALMERI.

West,Newmanmp.

RHODACANTHIS* PALMERL.

Rhodacanthis palmeri, Rothschild, Ann. & Mag. N. H. (6) x. p. 111 (July 1892) ; Perkins, Ibis,
18938, p. 103.

In the paper here cited Mr. Rothschild describes the above as a species of a new
genus from Kona in Hawaii, and in 1892 I received two examples from that district,
while about the same time Mr. Perkins obtained many others from the forests at an
altitude of 4000 feet.

He writes (‘ Ibis,’ 1893, pp. 103-104) of them as follows :—

“The Hoa Finch (Rhodacanthis palmert) is the largest and most beautiful of all the
Hawaian Finches. It frequents the tallest and most leafy acacias, both when growing
on the roughest lava-flows and in the grassy openings in the forest. It belongs
entirely to the upper forest, and is probably most numerous at about 4000 feet. Its
peculiar whistle, though not very loud, is very clear, and can be heard for a consider-
able distance. If imitated closely it will readily answer, and sometimes, after fruitless
hunting for hours without even hearing a sound from this bird, a whistle has been
immediately responded to. At other times a distant bird has been drawn close by the
imitation of its whistle and easily secured. It devours the beans of the acacia, and
these it swallows in very large pieces. I think that the enormous development of the
abdominal portion of the body must be connected with this habit. I have seen both
male and female feeding the full-grown young, and as I could find nothing but the
large pieces of koa bean in the latter, I conclude that the young are fed on pieces
similar to those swallowed by the parents, without mastication. ‘The young male soon
acquires the peculiar whistle, for I have shot one in almost perfect song in quite
immature plumage and with the skull still cartilaginous. It does not restrict itself
to the koa bean, but varies its diet by feeding on lepidopterous larve, just as the
Psittacirostra does; for this purpose it generally descends into the aaka or bastard
sandal-wood trees, and, as was the case with that bird, I have found in the crop of
Rhodacanthis larvee with conspicuous ‘ warning’ colours. When it has been feeding
on the koa beans its bill is often much stained with their green juice and green frag-
ments. ‘The female I have heard to utter a rather deep single note when alarmed.
On one occasion when I had shot a male I heard his mate repeatedly utter this note,
and she continued to do so for some five minutes, but seemingly possessed some

1 To prevent misapprehension it should be noticed that the genus is not closely allied to the bird called
Acanthis by classical writers, or to the supposed genus (see ‘ Ibis,’ 1892, p. 556) of that name, nor is it rose-
coloured.

2¢

ventriloquial power—the sound seeming now in front, now behind, now near, now far ;
yet it was utterly impossible that the bird could have flown without my being aware
of it. At last the bird became silent, and I never caught sight of it at all.”

Description.— Adult male. Head, throat, and underparts rich scarlet-orange, becoming
slightly more yellow on the chest and gradually merging into the mere orange of the
abdomen and under tail-coverts; upper back and wing-coverts brown, washed with
yellowish olive; remiges and rectrices blackish brown, with a narrow margin of dull
orange on the outer web; lower back with rump and tail-coverts dull orange; under
surface of wings and tail whitish grey, with a little orange on the axillaries. The
outer wing-coverts and bend of wing are tinged with orange. Bill bluish grey, legs
almost black.

Dimensions.—Total length 8-87 inches, wing 4°62, tail 2°87, tarsus 1, culmen ‘75.

Adult female. Above brownish, washed with fairly bright olive-green, which is still
brighter on the crown, forehead, sides of face, rump, and upper tail-coverts; throat
and chest much as the rump, but more white-looking; rest of underparts greyish
white with a slight green wash; axillaries tinged with green. The wings and tail are
similarly coloured to those of the male, but with green margins instead of orange.
The hook of the maxilla is less prolonged than in the male. The dimensions are
smaller, except as regards the tarsus and culmen.

Young male, No. 1. The scarlet-orange is beginning to show on the forehead and,
slightly, on the crown; the under surface is dull orange, with indications of green on
the breast; the region of the rump is duller than in the adult; the maxilla is whitish
at the sides.

Young male, No. 2. Entirely olive-green above; throat yellower; breast mottled
with green and yellow, owing to the feathers having green centres and broad buflish-
yellow margins; abdomen pure buffish yellow; maxilla similar to that of the female.

Mr. Rothschild considers some examples from Kona to be specifically distinct, and
calls them , flaviceps (Ann. Mag. N. H. ser. 6, x. p.111). In these the head, neck, and
underparts are yellow, greener below; the upper parts are ashy-green, brighter towards
the rump; the iris is brown. Only the forehead is yellow in the female. The dimen-
sions are respectively smaller than in the last species.

RHODACANTHIS FLAVICEPS.

Rhodacanthis flaviceps, Rothschild, Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist. ser. 6, x. p. 111 (July 1892).

Wuen treating of Mr. Rothschild’s species Rhodacanthis palmert, from Kona in
Hawaii, we carefully abstained from expressing any decided opinion upon the exact
status of R. flaviceps, of which we had not then examined a specimen, quoting
nevertheless the describer’s opinion as to its validity, and stating the main points of
difference. ‘Two birds, obtained by Palmer at the same locality as &. palmeri, have,
however, now been submitted to us, with the result that we unhesitatingly agree to
the perfect validity of the species, which is undoubtedly distinct from its larger and
more orange congener. ‘The original description is consequently given below, as it
appeared in the ‘ Annals and Magazine of Natural History’ :—

“ Rhodacanthis flaviceps, sp. n.

“ Adult male. Head, neck, and underparts generally apple-yellow, brighter and
richer on the head and neck and greener on the underparts. Upper parts ashy green,
becoming bright green on the lower back, rump, and upper tail-coverts; wings
and tail dull blackish brown, the feathers externally margined with green. Bill
blue-brown ; legs grey; iris brown.

“Total length about 7:5 inches, culmen 0°72, wing 3°8, tail 2-5, tarsus 1:0.

“ Adult female. Differs from the male in being much greener and duller in colour,
only the forehead being yellow; the crown similarly coloured to the back. Underparts
dull yellowish green.”

bo
=

F.W.Prohawk cel. et lth. i West, Newman ump,

CHLORIDOPS KONA 2

CHLORIDOPS KONA.

PALILA.

Chloridops kona, S. B. Wilson, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1888, p. 218; Perkins, Ibis, 1893, p. 104.

I sHor a single example of this species on June 21st, 1887, when collecting at an
elevation of about 5000 feet in the district of Kona on the west coast of Hawaii, in a
ereat tract of forest, consisting principally of koa-trees (Acacia koa); but there were
also the mamané (Sophora chrysophylla), the alii (Dodonea viscosa), the sandalwood
(Santalum album), and the bastard sandalwood (Myoporum santalinum). 1 think that
as Lovioides bailleui, so far as I know, feeds only on the seeds of the Sophora, it is most
probable that this big Finch eats them also. During my stay of four weeks I only
saw three examples of it. The specimen shot was on a tall Myoporum. ‘The bird
must be extremely rare, as I have since collected at almost similar elevations, where
there are the same species of trees, but failed to obtain either of these Finches again,
nor do the natives know them, whence I conclude that they are peculiar to the
Kona district.

The general appearance of this bird is that of an exaggerated Greenfinch (fringilla
chloris, Linn.).

Description.—Adult female. Bill dull flesh-colour; lores dusky black. General
colour above bright olive-green, passing into golden-green on the throat and belly ;
abdomen whitish ; quill-feathers dusky black, edged outwardly with olive-green.

Dimensions.—Total length 5°75 inches; wing from carpal joint 3°25; tail 2; bill—
from gape to tip *8, height from chin to forehead -73; maxilla, width at base ‘52 ;
mandible, width at base °59.

Mr. Robert Perkins has recently published the following notes on the habits of this
species in ‘The Ibis’ :—

“The Palila (Chloridops kona), though an interesting bird on account of its peculiar
structure, is a singularly uninteresting one in its habits. It is a dull, sluggish, solitary
bird, and very silent—its whole existence may be summed up in the words ‘to eat.’
Its food consists of the seeds of the fruit of the aaka (bastard sandal-tree, and pro-
bably at other seasons of those of the sandal-wood tree), and as these are very minute,
its whole time seems to be taken up in cracking the extremely hard shells of this fruit,

~~
>

for which its extraordinarily powerful beak and heavy head have been developed. I
think there must have been hundreds of the small white kernels in those that I
examined. The incessant cracking of the fruits when one of these birds is feeding, the
noise of which can be heard for a considerable distance, renders the bird much easier
to get than it otherwise would be. It is mostly found on the roughest lava, but also
wanders into the open spaces in the forest. I never heard it sing (I once mistook the
young Rhodacanthis’ song for that of the Chloridops), but my boy informed me that he
had heard it once, and that.its song was not like that of Khodacanthis. Only once did
I see it display any real activity, when a male and female were in active pursuit of one
another amongst the sandal-trees. Its beak is nearly always very dirty, with a brown
substance adherent to it, which must be derived from the sandal-nuts,”

PW. Frobawk delet lth. West, Newman imp.

ACRULOCERCUS BRACCATUS.

ACRULOCERCUS BRACCATUS,

O-O A-A.

‘‘ Yellow-tufted Bee-eater, var. B.,”’ Latham, Gen. Synops. Suppl. 2, p. 149 (1802).

Certhia pacifica, Latham,” Peale, U.S. Expl. Exped., Birds, p. 149 (1848) (nec Gmelin, Latham).

Mohoa fasciculata 9, Reichenbach, Handb. sp. Orn. p. 333 (1853), tab. 614. fig. 4099* (nee
Lath.) .

» Oraccata, Cassin, Proc. Acad. N. 8. Philad. 1855, p. 440; id. U.S. Expl. Exped., Mamm. &
Orn. p. 172 (1858) ; Sclater, Ibis, 1871, pp. 358, 360, 1879, p. 92; Von Pelzeln, Journ. f.
Orn. 1872, p. 26.

Moho braccata, Cassin, U.S. Expl. Exped., Mamm. & Orn. p. 172 (1858); G. R. Gray, Cat. B.
Trop. Isl. p. 9 (1859) ; id. Hand-l.i. p. 114 (1869) ; Dole, Proc. Bost. Soc. N. H. 1869, p. 296;
id. Hawaiian Alman. 1879, p. 46; Stejneger, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1887, p. 100.

Moho nobilis, Gadow, Cat. B. Br. Mus. ix. p. 284, partim (1884).

* Figura notabilis,

At least one example of this undoubtedly good species was received in England in
comparatively early days, but was regarded by Latham asa variety of A. nobilis; and
that it should have been obtained even by Cook’s people is only natural, since his ships
more than once visited Kauai (then known by the name of A-tooi), to which island it
is pecuhar. But the real merit of its discovery is due to Cassin, who in 1855 first
defined it, as above, from a single specimen—marked as a male—previously brought by
Townsend to the Museum of the Academy of Philadelphia, where it had been ascribed
in error to Certhia pacifica.. The same mistake was made by Peale, who writes that
“another bird is called Oo by the natives; it is Certhia pacifica of Latham, and is
found on the island of Kauai, one of the same group. It also has tufts of yellow
feathers which have been collected for the same purpose in former days; theirs are
on the thighs, not on the sides as in the genuine Oo; the feathers are smaller,
much inferior in beautiful texture, and are no longer collected ; both species are black.
We killed specimens at Hanalei, a department of the Island of Kauai, where they are
found in the woody districts on the mountains.” The United States Exploring
Expedition, however, does not appear to have brought back any examples; but Cassin,
as we have seen, clearly perceived the error and, in pointing it out, properly described
the present bird as a distinct, but allied, member of the genus Mohoa, as he called it: he
moreover observed that Reichenbach figured it as the female of J. fasciculata [= A.
nobilis |, whereas Judge Dole has since stated that the subject of that figure must have
been a male. The original of the drawing is at Dresden, but otherwise no specimens
are known to have reached Europe except those brought by myself; while I have

had the great advantage of comparing my examples with Townsend’s, through the
kindness of the authorities of the Museum at Philadelphia, who with great courtesy
forwarded it, together with examples of other varieties procured by the same traveller,
for my inspection. Except for the fact that Dr. Gadow, in the Catalogue of the
Birds in the collection of the British Museum, combined this species with A. nodilis,
little more need be added to its history.

This bird is confined to the island of Kauai, where it seems to be found at all
elevations throughout the forests, and is called O-O A-A—the dwarf O-O—by the
natives, who therefore recognize its resemblance to the O-O of Hawaii (Acrulocercus
nobilis), while distinguishing it by its inferiority in size. The general appearance of
the two species, especially at a distance, is black, so that it is hardly a matter for
astonishment that mistakes occur even among the islanders; but in that under
discussion the yellow axillary tufts are wanting, being replaced by others of a pale
buffish grey which are far less developed; the colour, however, which is absent from
the wing, is here found on the lower part of the tibie.

Dr. Stejneger (Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1887, pp. 100-103) has tabulated very fully
the differences between Acrulocercus nobilis and A. braccatus, while he gives a key
by which the three members of the genus may be very easily distinguished, which I
here reproduce :—

“a', Tail-feathers uniform blackish, without any trace of white ........s:..ssse0 M. braccata.
a. Tail-feathers blackish, four or more tipped with white.
b’. Only two outer tail-feathers on each side tipped with white ............ M. nobilis.
6°. All the tail-feathers, except the middle pair, tipped with white......... M. apicalis.”

So far back as 1871, Dr. Sclater also (Ibis, 1871, p. 358) recognized these three as
undoubtedly good species; and I trust that the coloured figures to be found in the
present volume will prevent the possibility of any further confusion. With regard
to the call-note—a kind of chuck—it is noteworthy that it is somewhat similar to that
of the larger O-O, though in a higher key; the bird has also a sweet song, some of its
notes possessing a bell-like clearness. It is common in the woods by which Makaweli,
the lovely mountain residence of the Sinclair family, is surrounded, where in the
early morning its dulcet tones may be heard to perfection, blended with those of its
forest companions; here its home is a natural plateau open towards the west, with a
magnificent view of the Pacific—the island of Niihau alone breaking the broad expanse
of ocean. Mr. V. Knudsen says that in districts of Kauai where the banana! grows
wild the dwarf O-O feeds on the fruit, hollowing it out before itis ripe. Its chief food,
however, appears to consist of nectar, which it extracts from the ohia, the arborescent
Lobeliacee, and other plants, in the same way as its large relative the O-O of Hawaii;

* This information seems to be corroborated by the following extract from Townsend’s ‘Narrative of a
Journey across the Rocky Mountains and a Visit to the Sandwich Islands’ (Philadelphia, 1839, p. 207) :—

«The Birds are the same here (Kauai) as we found and collected on Oahu, but are not so numerous.
They are principally Creepers (Certhia) and Honey-suckers (WVectarinia): feed chiefly upon flowers and
the sweet juice of the Banana, and some species are very abundant.”’

at all events, the specimens of 4. braccatus which I obtained were invariably feeding
in flower-covered ohia trees. This bird is not nearly so wary as A. nobilis, but is very
clever in concealing itself among the thick foliage, thereby rendering observation
difficult. I did not succeed in finding its nest, my visit to Kauai being made in
October.

Description.—Adult male. Head black, streaked with a few longitudinal lines of
white; rest of the upper surface slaty brown, brightening into russet on the rump
and flanks ; throat and breast black, each feather barred with white; rest of the under
surface dull slaty brown, while the centres of the feathers being grey give it a streaked
appearance ; wings and tail black, the central pair of feathers of the latter much
exceeding the rest in length ; axillary tufts (little developed) of a pale greyish buff;
edge of the wing pure white; tibis rich golden yellow; irides light yellow; bill and
feet black.

Adult female. Similar to the male, but with the feathers on the throat much more
extensively barred with white, which gives the bird the appearance of having a well-
defined whitish patch on the throat and upper part of the breast.

Dimensions.—Total length 7:75 inches, wing from carpal joint 3°90, culmen 1:9,
tarsus 1°5, tail 3:5.

West, Newman mmp

delet lith.

ohawl

BOWE

APICALIS.

ACRULOCERCUS.

ACRULOCERCUS APICALIS.

“ Yellow-tufted Bee-eater,” Dixon, Voy. pl. to face p. 381 * (figure only) (1798) (nec Latham, Gen.
Synops. 1. p. 683).

“ Yellow-tufted Bee-eater, var. A,” Latham, Gen. Synops. Suppl. 2, p. 149 (1802).

Moho nobilis, var., G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Isl. Pacific Ocean, p. 9 (1859).

Moho apicalis, Gould, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1860, p. 381; Dole, Proc. Bost. Soc. N. H. 1869, p. 297
(nec Hawaiian Alman. p. 46, que=Drepanis pacifica!); G. R. Gray, Hand-l. B. i. p. 114 (1869) ;
Gadow, Cat. B. Br. Mus. ix. p. 285.

Mohoa apicalis, Sclater, Ibis, 1871, p. 360, 1879, p. 92; Von Pelzeln, Journ. f. Orn. 1872, p. 26.

* Figura notabilis.

TuHIs species, figured as the “‘ Yellow-tufted Bee-eater” in Captain George Dixon’s
‘Voyage round the World,’ was described as “ Variety A” of the same by Latham
(loc. cit.), and was properly distinguished specifically from Acrulocercus nobilis by
Gould in 1860, on the strength of two examples—supposed to be one of either sex—
which are now in the British Museum.

Gould stated that “ Dixon’s bird was obtained at Owhyhee,” and believed that his
own “two specimens were brought from the same island,” but produced no evidence
in support either of his statement or of his belief, while we are now in a position to show
that each was almost certainly unfounded ; and there cannot be a doubt that the present
species inhabited Oahu, where, in January 1837, a male and female were procured by
Deppe, now preserved at Vienna, as recorded by Von Pelzeln (wt supra). An examina-
tion of Dixon’s work shows that his ship, the ‘ Queen Charlotte,’ anchored but once, and
then for little more than twenty-four hours, off Owhyhee (Hawaii), and that in the
historic bay of Karakakooa1, the very district at that time and still inhabited by the
kindred species A. nobilis, alongside of which the present is hardly likely to have

* There is a discrepancy (which should be noticed) between the account of Dixon’s voyage (pp. 50, 52), as
told by William Beresford the narrator (¢f. Portlock’s ‘ Voyage,’ p. 6, note), and the ship’s log, as printed by
her Commander (Dixon, Voyage, App. ii. p. 10), in regard to the precise day (whether the 26th or 27th May,
1786) on which the ‘Queen Charlotte’ and her consort the ‘ King George ’ (under Capt. Portlock) anchored in
this bay ; but that is of no importance, and there is none as to the duration of the ships’ stay, confirmed as it
is by Portlock (op. cit. pp. 62, 65). The crews were in want, among other things, of water, which their
commanders (both of whom, it may be observed, had served on Cook’s voyage and knew the place) expected
to get there, but to their disappointment the sources were “tabooed,” and the ships had to be off as soon as
they could. Though on two occasions subsequently coasting along the shores of Hawaii, near enough to
communicate with and receive supplies from the natives, but more than once interrupted by bad weather, the
ships never brought up, and it can hardly be supposed that, when fresh meat and vegetables were the sole
object of the intercourse, anything so unimportant as a small bird would be thought of in the way of traffic.

existed. On the other hand, we know that Dixon’s ship anchored on three occasions,
and for a considerable time, in King George’s Bay, on the south side of Oahu (Woahoo
or Whahoo as it is spelt in his book). ‘The ‘Queen Charlotte’ lay there from the 1st
to the 5th of June, and from the 30th of November to the 20th December, 1786, and
again from the 10th to the 13th of September, 1787, so that the chance is greatly in
favour of that being the locality where this species was procured. He could hardly
have got it in Attoui (Kauai) or Oneehow (Niihau), for the former is the home of the
allied A. braccatus ; nor in Ranai (Lanai) or Morotai (Molokai), for there the species
would in all probability be A. bishopi. Accordingly the inference that Oahu was the
real habitat of A. apicalis is so strong as, accompanied by the positive evidence of
Deppe, to be irresistible; and since it is known that the ‘Blonde’ also made a long
stay at Honolulu, the specimen brought home by Byron, and now in the British
Museum—being the third now there,—may well have been obtained thence.

Though no success attended the indefatigable explorations of Mr. Rothschild’s
collectors, and Mr. Perkins has not yet been more fortunate, I am of opinion that the
bird still exists, and will be rediscovered hereafter; but the disappearance of several
other species from Oahu tells, I confess, against this hopeful view. If the bird be
extinct, the cause is probably the destruction of so much of the ancient forest on that
island. According to Judge Dole, the subject of the present notice shares with the
other members of the genus the name O-o, and the habits and food are similar ; but
the “ Moho apicalis” of his last paper is not this bird, but Drepanis pacifica, and
should have been cited in the synonymy of that species.

Description (from Gould).— General plumage sooty-black ; tail brown, all but the
two middle feathers largely tipped with white; the two central feathers somewhat
narrower than the others, and gradually diminishing in the apical third of their length
into fine hair-like or filamentous upturned points; axille or under surface of the
shoulder white; flanks and under tail-coverts bright yellow; bill and legs black.

“Total length 12 inches, bill 14, wing 42, tail 6%, tarsi 1.

“The plumage of the female is in every respect similar to that of the male; but, as
in the Honey-eaters of Australia generally, particularly amongst the members of the
genus Ptilotis, the body is fully a fourth less in size.”

The striated appearance of the breast of A. apicalis, a character found in so many
of the Meliphagide, though hardly perceptible in its congener A. nodzlis, is especially
noticeable.

Von Pelzeln remarked that the edges of the mandibles in both male and female
were partially serrated, as Reichenbach stated to be the case in M. nobilis; and that the
end of the tongue was clearly brush-shaped in the female.

The figure is from one of the specimens in the British Museum.

The species of Acrolocercus, if one there was, inbabiting Maui has yet to be ascer-
tained (Feb. 1894).

EF W.Frohawk delethth.

ACRUI OG EIRIG US: -Ni@ iis:

West, Newman imp.

ACRULOCERCUS NOBILIS.
0-0.

“Yellow-tufted Bee-eater,” Latham, Gen. Synops. i. p. 683 (1782); Suppl. p. 120 (1787) ; Suppl. 2,
p- 149 (1802).

? “ Moho,” Ellis, Narrat. Voy. Cook & Clerke, ii. p. 156 (1782).

? “ Hoohoo,” King, Voy. Pacif. Ocean, iii. p. 119, partim (1784).

Gracula nobilis, Merrem, Beytr. besond. Gesch. Vogel, Heft i. p. 8, pl. 11.* (1784).

» longirostra, var. 8, Gmelin, Syst. Nat. i. p. 398 (1788).

Merops niger, Gmelin, tom. cit. p. 465 (1788) ; Tiedemann, Anat. und Naturgesch. Vég. ii. p. 431
(1814).

» fasciculatus, Latham, Ind. Orn. 1. p. 275 (1790).

“Le Moho,” Sonnini, Hist. Nat. Buffon, Ois. xviii. p. 286 (1802).

Philemon fasciculatus, Vieillot, Eneyel. Méthod., Ornithol. p. 618 (1823).

? Nectarina [sic] niger, Bloxam, Voy. ‘ Blonde,’ p. 249 (1826).

Meliphaga fasciculata, Temminck & Laugier, Rec. d’Ois. livr. 79, Pl. Col. 471 * (1829).

““Philédon moho, Merops fasciculatus, Lath.,” Lesson, Tr. d’Orn. p. 802 (1831) ; id. Compl. Buffon,
ix. p. 149 (1837).

Acrulocercus niger, Cabanis, Arch. f. Naturgesch. xiii. p. 327 (1847); Sundevall, Tentam. p. 50
(1872).

Moho niger, G. R. Gray, Gen. B.i. p. 96 (1847); Bonaparte, Consp. Av. i. p.394 (1850); Hartlaub,
Arch. f. Naturgesch. 1852, i. p. 181; Dole, Proc. Boston Soc. N. H. 1869, p. 296.

Piiloturus fasciculatus, Peale, U.S. Expl. Exped., Birds, p. 148 (1848).

Mohoa fasciculata, Reichenbach, Handb. sp. Orn. p. 333, partim (1853), tab. 614. fig. 4098 *.

nobilis, Cassin, Proc. Acad. N.S. Philad. 1855, p. 439; Sclater, Ibis, 1871, pp. 358, 360;

id. Proc. Zool. Soc. 1878, p. 347; Von Pelzeln, Journ. f. Orn. 1872, p. 25.

Moho nobilis, Cassin, U.S. Expl. Exped., Mamm. & Orn. p. 170 (1858); G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop.
Isl. p. 9 (1859); Dole, Hawaiian Alman. 1879, p. 46; Gadow, Cat. B. Br. Mus. ix. p. 284,
partim (1884) ; Stejneger, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1887, p. 101.

Acrulocercus nobilis, Scott Wilson, Ibis, 1890, p. 177.

oP)

* Mgure notabiles.

Tuis bird, with its decidedly Meliphagine affinities, was first described by Latham from
the Leverian Museum, under the name of the “ Yellow-tufted Bee-eater,” which led to
its inclusion by Gmelin in the genus Werops. The original specimens were received
from the companions of Cook on his third voyage, when the Sandwich Islands were
discovered and twice visited ; but the number of these and the circumstances of their
capture are quite unknown. From the outset the native name was entirely misappre-
hended by the unrefined ears of the early travellers, who wrote it variously Mo-ho,
B2

/t¢

Hoohoo, Uho, and so forth, according to their fancy, a mistake! which has been
perpetuated by later writers, not only in the specific, but even in the generic designa-
tion; Lesson, however, did not, as is often supposed, employ Moho as a strictly generic
term, George Robert Gray being the first to do so.

But though Latham was the original describer of the species, Blasius Merrem two
years later had the good fortune to bestow upon it the earliest scientific appellation,
Gracula nobilis, and to figure it without reference to that author’s work—while placing
it in an entirely distinct genus—in his ‘ Beytrage zur besondern Geschichte der Vogel,
published in 1784 at Gottingen, where he was at the time a Professor, He states that
an example had been sent to the museum there by King George III., who, as Elector
of Hanover, seems to have taken great interest in the University founded by his
predecessor: but, in referring it to the genus Gracula, he was misled by its apparent
resemblance to the G. longirostra of Pallas; while Gmelin, with the usual perspicacity
of a compiler, failed to see that Merrem’s bird was identical with that of Latham, and
so made two species out of one: later writers, again, bestowed upon it various names,
which were set aside for several reasons by Professor Cabanis in favour of Acrulocercus?
in 1847, the same year that Gray adopted Lesson’s barbarous Moho.

It does not appear that after the days of Cook any additional information concerning
the subject of our notice reached the scientific world for many years. It is briefly
mentioned in the meagre list by Bloxam appended to the narrative of Lord Byron’s
voyage in H.M.S. ‘ Blonde, —the vessel which, in 1825, conveyed home the corpses of
the King and Queen of the Sandwich Islands, who had died in England,—but merely
as “the bird whose yellow feathers are so highly prized,” showing that the writer did
not discriminate between it and Drepanis pacifica. Very different is the case with the
naturalists attached to the celebrated United States Exploring Expedition under
Commodore Wilkes in the ‘ Vincennes’ and ‘ Peacock’; for its ornithologist, Titian R.
Peale, in a work of which nearly all the copies were unfortunately destroyed, gives a
very good description of the bird from Hawaii, mentioning not only its note, its love of
the loftiest forest-trees, and its habits in general, but also the use of its feathers and
the method of capture—all agreeing well with my own experience; as does the faet of
his writing the native name O-O. Cassin, in the ‘ Proceedings’ of the Academy of
Philadelphia for 1855, compared the specimens then obtained, which he considered to
represent examples of both sexes, with those presented to its Museum by the well-known

The mistake (for such it undoubtedly was) in regard to Moho originated with W. Ellis, describing himself
as “assistant-surgeon to both vessels” in Cook’s Expedition, who also executed the series of drawings now in
the British Museum (Natural History). In a passage in his ‘ Narrative’ of the voyage (vol. ii. p. 156), he
writes :—‘ They have also a kind of fly-flap made of a bunch of feathers fixed to the end of a thin piece of
smooth and polished wood: they are generally made of the tail-feathers of the cock, but the better sort of
people have them of the tropick birds feathers, or those belonging to a black and yellow bird called mo-ho.”
O-O is the correct name of this species, Mo-ho is that of Rallus ecaudatus, King.

* Acrulocercus, signifying a tail that is curly at the tip, though apt enough for the present species, is unfor-
tunate as regards its two congeners, where the tail presents no such peculiarity.

traveller Townsend, who, after crossing the Rocky Mountains, made more than one visit
to the Sandwich Islands.

Additional examples have since occasionally found their way to Europe or America.
The Liverpool Museum contains two specimens, a male and female, obtained by the
late Mr. J. Heywood; and the Hepburn collection, presented in 1870 to the Museum of
the University of Cambridge, included another: but the distinction between the
different members of the genus haying been made sufficiently clear, there is no necessity
for further details.

This is, perhaps, the best known species both to natives and denizens of the
Sandwich Islands; for it was principally from the yellow feathers that grow beneath its
wings, together with the still more beautiful and similarly coloured upper tail-coverts of
the now extinct Drepanis pacifica, that the state robes of the princes! were fabricated.
It was the privilege of those classes alone to wear them; nor can it be denied that they
formed a becoming and magnificent garb, as beautiful as anything that the triumphs of
civilized art can now produce. ‘The fine statue of Kamehameha I., which stands in
front of the Government House in Honolulu, represents the great conqueror who first
consolidated his sovereignty over the various islands, draped in his Mamo, as this
feather cloak is called in the Hawaiian language, the texture of which is wonderfully
represented by the sculptor’s chisel. Gazing on this and recalling the fact that the
princes of Hawaii-Nei were a race of giants, most of them being over six feet in height,
we can well understand what an imposing effect must have been produced. The great
yellow war-cloak of Kamehameha I. had been gradually growing in size through the
reigns of eight preceding monarchs. The groundwork is of coarse netting, to which,
with skill now impossible to emulate, are attached the delicate feathers, those on the
border being reversed: the length is four feet, while there is a spread of eleven feet
and a half at the bottom, the whole having the appearance of a mantle of gold. The
cloaks and capes which I examined in Honolulu were all of the lighter shade of
yellow, which belongs to the feathers of the present species; but on carefully going
through those in the Ethnological Collection of the British Museum, I find that in
most of the robes made of the wing-tufts of Acrulocercus the more beautiful plumage
of Drepanis pacifica is introduced, though in small quantities only. The ancient
kings had a regular staff of bird-catchers, who were very expert in their vocation, and
made use of the sticky juice of the bread-fruit (called in Hawaiian “ Pilali”), or of the
tenacious gum of the fragrant olapa (Cheirodendron gaudichaudit), smearing it over the
branches of a ohia tree, and often fastening there an example of the scarlet liwi
(Vestiaria coccinea), of which more in another place, as an additional attraction to
the Royal bird, well known for his pugnacity, who, in his eagerness to attack his

* It appears from the following extract from the Hon, R. M. Dagget’s able Introduction to ‘The Legends
and Myths of Hawaii’ by his Hawaiian Majesty Kalakaua (p. 32), that in olden times certain classes were
privileged to wear robes made of feathers of certain colours:—‘ Yellow was the ‘tabu’ colour of royalty,
and red that of the priesthood, and mantles of feathers of the Oo and Mamo could be worn only by kings and
princes. Feather capes of mingled red and yellow distinguished the lesser nobility.”

brilliant rival, would fall an unsuspicious victim to this ingenious device. That
large numbers of the O-O must have been taken in former days is clear from the
quantities of “leis” or wreaths of feathers that now remain in the possession of the
natives, who still set so great store by them that it is but rarely that a traveller is able
to purchase so interesting a relic of a past age; but I was fortunate enough to obtain
a small example, for the construction of which it is reckoned that two hundred}
birds must have been sacrificed. The Hon. C. R. Bishop possesses some very fine
specimens, and the contents of a small tin box of them I estimated as being worth
ten thousand dollars. What the value of a cloak or cape may be it is impossible to
say. At the ceremony of opening the Hawaiian Legislature in 1888 capes were
donned by two of the native officials, and very imposing they looked, though the effect
could not be compared with that produced by the flowing war-cloak.

This bird is preeminently a honey-sucker, extracting the nectar with its long tubular
tongue from the flowers of the ohia or from those of the great tree-lobelia, the hollow
curving corolla of which is perfectly adapted in shape to the O-O’s bill; and though I
have on several occasions observed it feeding on the fruit of the banana, I believe this
to be only a secondary article of diet: in a state of captivity it has been kept with
success on the juice of the sugar-cane.

It has a very peculiar call, whence its native name is derived; and here I may
insert some extracts from notes taken in the district of Kona, where it is still fairly
common :—

“We shot two O-Os to-day, but these birds are extremely difficult to obtain, as they
are constantly on the move from tree to tree, hardly ever at a less height than 90 feet
from the ground. ‘Their cry issomewhat harsh, and resembles the sound of the letter O
repeated twice, with a well-marked pause between; it is, however, extremely difficult
of imitation by the human voice. The yellow axillary tufts are very conspicuous when
this bird is on the wing, and its dipping mode of flight somewhat resembles that of the
Magpie, while its long tail still further suggests a resemblance to that bird. The O-O
exhibits a decided preference for the extreme top of any tree, on which it alights, and
when thus perched may be seen continually jerking its long plume-like tail up and
down at a right angle to its body, all the while uttering its harsh ery.” As mentioned
above, it is an extremely wary bird and most difficult of approach when met with

* It may be interesting to compare with the above the numbers of the Kaka (Nestor meridionalis) still
annually captured by the Maories; I therefore quote the following paragraph from Sir Walter Buller’s ‘ History
of the Birds of New Zealand, (2nd ed. vol. i. p. 163) :—‘*The Kaka is particularly abundant in the Urewera
country, and during the short season the rata is in bloom the whole Maori population, old and young, are out
Kaka-hunting. An expert bird-catcher will sometimes bag as many as 300 in the course of a day; and at
Ruatahuna and Mangopohatu alone it is said that from 10,000 to 12,000 of these birds are killed during a good
rata season, which occurs about every three years.”

IJ may mention that the rata of New Zealand, of which an excellent representation is given in Sir
Walter’s plate, is Metrosideros robusta, the crimson flowers of which are doubtless as attractive to the Kaka as
are to the O-O the larger but very similar blossoms of the ohia (Metrosideros polymorpha), of which a branch,
though not the flower, is shown in my Plate.

in the ohia-forest, so that the only occasions on which I was enabled to watch it at close
quarters were amongst the foliage of the lobelias.

The O-O is esteemed a great delicacy by the natives, and used formerly to be eaten
by them, fried in its own fat. J can vouch personally for its excellence, as one day,
after bringing in a fine specimen from a collecting-expedition, I placed it carefully on
a shelf to await my convenience; but at dinner the Chinese cook, Ah Lung, set down
in front of me a small dish, containing my lovely prize! On remonstrances being
addressed to him in no measured terms, he only smiled and said “ Me thinkee all
same Kolea (Plover).” However my host, Mr. Spencer, and I tasted it, and found it
excellent.

I never obtained a specimen in immature plumage, nor did I find a nest, but from
the bird’s evident preference in the breeding-season (May and June) for the topmost
branches of the lofty ohia-trees, 90 to 100 feet from the ground, I conclude that it
chooses a site amongst them, and venture to say that it will be long before its eggs are
taken, as not even a Hawaiian—bold, skilful, and withal utterly reckless climber as he
is—would be able to span that giant girth. The ordinary vertical range of this bird,
which I only observed on the island of Hawaii, is from 1200 to 4000 feet; but I am
told by my friend Mr. Ashford Spencer that he has observed it, at certain seasons of
the year, in the forest around the sheep-station of Kalaieha, of which the altitude is
above 6000 feet. It is probable that the O-O, like other Hawaiian birds, follows its
food, migrating to this high mountain-region as soon as the ohia-tree is out of flower
in the lower forest-zone.

Peale, quoted by Cassin (U.S. Expl. Exp. p. 171), says:—** The Oo is found in most
of the woody districts of the Island of Hawaii; it frequents the thick foliage of the
loftiest trees; in voice and manners it has some resemblance to the Oriole of North
America (Icterus Baltimore). ‘The natives capture it by means of bird-lime, and after
plucking out the yellow feathers from beneath the wings, restore it to liberty, until
again wanted to assist in paying the royal tax.” I never could ascertain with certainty
whether the natives really set the bird at liberty after plucking out its yellow tufts;
but doubtless at the time of Peale’s visit in 1840 many of the old bird-catchers were
alive, from whom he could get the information; yet I hardly fancy these birds were
taken as late as 1840 for the purpose of paying the poll-tax.

Dr. Pickering, also attached to the Expedition, states that the flight was high, some-
what after the manner of the Boat-tailed Grakle of the United States. The note was a
loud chuck, repeated two or three times, and the habits reminded him of the Poi-
bird of New Zealand. Cassin goes out of his way to warn us that native names
are not entitled to much consideration—a warning which, in the case of the Hawaiians
(a people with a most accurate ear for sounds), is utterly uncalled for. He then pro-
ceeds to observe that the name of this bird must sound quite different to different
persons, and certainly—Mo-ho, Hoohoo, Uho—are strangely at variance; however
we must ascribe this to the defects of ear of the individual explorers, since the

Hawaiian gives to it but one name, O-O.

Description.—Adult male. General colour black, inclining to dull umber on the
abdomen; axillary tufts bright yellow; terminal half of the two outer pairs of tail-
quills white; middle pair of tail-quills greatly elongated and spirally twisted ; irides
dark hazel; bill and feet black.

Adult female. Similar in colour to the male, but with the middle pair of tail-feathers
not nearly so much elongated or twisted.

Dimensions.— Adult male. Total length 12-5 inches, uae from carpal joint 5-95,
culmen 1:25, tarsus 1:5, tail 7°5,

Adult female. Total length 9°5, wing from carpal joint 4, culmen -95, tarsus 1-25,
tail 0°95.

FWErohawk del.et lth. West, Newman imp.

ACRULOCERCUS IsigsA Ou ay

ACRULOCERCUS BISHOPI.

Acrulocercus bishopi, Rothschild, Bull. Br. Orn. Club, no. viii. p. xli (1898).

SPECIMENS of this lately-described species were obtained in Molokai by Mr. Perkins in
the summer of 1893, and I am indebted to the Joint Committee appointed by the
Royal Society and the British Association for the opportunity of figuring one of them ;
but as yet nothing has been published respecting its habits, though these may be
presumed to resemble those of its allies which I have already described. So far as I
am aware, the bird is peculiar to the Island of Molokai, though I should not be
surprised to learn that it also inhabited Maui.

Description —Adult male. Upper parts black, with a brownish tinge on the back ;
underparts brownish black, the feathers of the latter and of the hind neck being lanceo-
late and having whitish shaft-streaks. A tuft of feathers with long golden-yellow tips
springs from near the ear-coverts and is directed backwards ; the under tail-coverts are
of the same colour, as are the axillary tufts, which are similar to those of A. nobilis,
but smaller. A little white shows itself on the lower surface of the wing near the bend,
while the plumage of the crown is slightly curled. The beak is slighter than that of
A. nobilis, but is a little longer; while the shape of the tail, which Mr. Rothschild
describes as more pointed, seems much the same. Bill and feet black.

The above author states that the female is similar to the male, but considerably
smaller.

Dimensions (of the specimen figured)—Total length 8°62 inches, wing about 4,
tail 4:25, tarsus 1:37, culmen 1°12.

an
het Kore tt

RG eet

ei 4 B Aging

ikke a

F WF rohewk. del.et lith. : West, Newman imp.

CHA TOPTILA ANGUSTIPLUMA

CHATOPTILA ANGUSTIPLUMA.

Entomiza? angustipluma, Peale, U.S. Expl. Exped., Birds, p. 147, pl. xl. fig. 2* (1848).

Anthochera? angustipluma, Hartlaub, Arch. f. Naturgesch. 1852, i. p. 181; G. R. Gray, Cat. B.
Trop. Isl. p. 13 (1859).

Mohoa angustipluma, Cassin, Proc. Acad. Sc. Philad. 1855, p. 440.

Moho angustipluma, Cassin, U.S. Expl. Exped., Mamm. & Orn. p. 168, pl. xi. fig. 1* (1858) ;
Dole, Proc. Bost. Soc. N. H. 1869, p. 296; id. Hawaiian Alman. 1879, p. 47.

Chetoptila angustipluma, “ Sclater, 1868,” G. R. Gray, Hand-list, i. p. 159 (1869); Sclater, Ibis,
1871, pp. 358, 360; id. op. cit. 1879, p. 92.

“* Figure notabiles.

In his ‘ Catalogue of the Birds of the Tropical Islands,’ Gray doubtfully cites Moho
atriceps of Lesson [Traité d’Orn. p. 646 (1831)] as identical with this species, but the
description shows that this is unlikely, for the flanks are not “vert-olive,” nor is the
breast black. However this may be, Peale during the Exploring Expedition in the
‘Vincennes’ and ‘ Peacock’ certainly met with the bird; and, failing Lesson, to him all
credit is due for the original description as well as for the discovery. Peale found it in
the wooded districts of the island of Hawaii, where he obtained a single specimen,
and, while premising that its habits were those of a Meliphaya, he included it doubt-
fully in Swainson’s genus Entomiza, pending further investigation; moreover, he
bestowed upon it the specific name of angustipluma, derived from the peculiar nature
of the feathers, and gave a figure in his account of the above expedition. Cassin trans-
ferred it to the genus Mohoa or Moho, where it remained until 1869, when the name
Chetoptila, suggested by Mr. Sclater, was accepted by G. R. Gray in his ‘ Hand-list ’ ;
and now Dr. Gadow’s examination of my specimen—the first brought to Europe—
indicates that the accepted view of its relationship to the Meliphagide is perfectly
correct. Judge Dole gives Molokai as an additional habitat of this species, a
statement which I am unable to corroborate at present. It may be of interest
to quote here Peale’s original remarks, as follows :—‘ This rare species was
obtained at the Island of Hawaii. It is very active and graceful in it’ motions,
frequents the woody districts, and is disposed to be musical, having most of the
habits of a Meliphaga; they are generally found about those trees which are in
flower.” .

“We have placed this . . . species in Mr. Swainson’s genus Entomiza, with a doubt

of the propriety of doing so, but trusting that our figure will prove sufficiently correct
to supply the means of a more systematic arrangement.”

Cassin, in his edition of the account of the Exploring Expedition, says of it :—

“Hab. Island of Hawaii. Specimen in Nat. Mus. Washington.

“Though we suspect that the bird above described is not in mature plumage, it
appears to be a distinct species of the genus Moho, Lesson, of which the only species
heretofore known are Moho nobilis (Merrem), and probably the bird described as
Certhia pacifica, Gmelin, Syst. Nat. i. p. 470 (Vieill. and Aud. Ois. Bor. pl. Ixiii.), and
Moho braccata, Cassin. It does not appear to belong to the genus Strigiceps, Less.
Rey. Zool. 1840, p. 266, though evidently related to it.

‘The feathers on the head and breast in this bird present a remarkable character on
account of the filaments composing the webs of the feathers being unusually few in
number, and at such a distance from each other as not to touch, or become adherent.
This structure of the feathers gives to the plumage of the parts mentioned a somewhat
hairy appearance, and prevails also, in some measure, on the abdomen and other
underparts of the body. Many of the feathers on the throat and neck in front
terminate in bristles curved outwardly, and readily discernible on viewing the specimen
in profile.”

After quoting part of Peale’s remarks, already given above, Cassin continues :—
«Dr. Pickering mentions having seen this species ‘alighting in the tops of the trees
and uttering a loud chuck.’ ih

‘We regard this bird as one of the most interesting of the ornithological discoveries
of the Expedition, and much regret to find a single specimen only in the collection. It
is represented in our plate above cited of the size of life.”

I obtained an example of this curious-looking bird from the collection of the late
Mr. Mills, through the generosity of the present owner, the Hon. C. R. Bishop, of
Honolulu, and it is now in the Museum of the University of Cambridge. It was pro-
bably procured by Mr. Mills in the district of Hilo near Olaa, that having been his
favourite hunting-ground. Why this bird should have become extinct seems in-
explicable, as its feathers were not used for ornaments; yet the natives of the present
day do not know it even by tradition, moreover the local name Kiowea given to it by
Judge Dole is certainly that applied to the Whimbrel (Wumenius femoralis). ‘The
specimen obtained by Peale during his visit I had the advantage of examining while
at Washington on my way to the Islands.

Description.—Top of the head and neck blackish brown, each feather with a greyish-
white shaft-streak, which is strongly tinged with yellow on the nape and sides of the
neck. A greyish-white stripe over the eyes. Wuing-coverts and back hair-brown,
tinged with ochreous on the rump, the feathers of the mantle with a white shaft-streak
widening into a tear-shaped spot towards the tip. Remiges and rectrices deep brown,
their outer margin yellow, giving a greenish effect to the whole. A greyish-white

stripe over the eye. Lores, sides of the head, and ear-coverts dull black, the feathers
immediately under the eye mottled with greyish white. Chin and throat dull white,
tinged with yellow, the shafts and the hairs with which this part is beset black.
Breast and abdomen dull white, striped longitudinally with darkish brown, flanks
strongly tinged with ochreous. Bill and legs very dark brown, almost black.

Dimensions.—Total length about 13 inches, wing 95:5, tail 6, bill (allowing for a
slight injury at the tip) from forehead 1:31, from gape 1-5, tarsus 1°75, middle toe
without claw -93, hind toe °56.

ee,
aut

FW Frohawk del et lth. West, Newman imp.

PHALORNIS. MYIADESTINA.
PHAORNIS LANAIIENSIS.

PHHORNIS MYIADESTINA.

KAMAO.

? Tenioptera obscura, ? , Cassin, U.S. Expl. Exped., Mamm. & Orn. p. 155 (1858).

Pheornis myadestina [sic|, Stejneger, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1887, p. 90; id. op. cit. 1889, p. 383 ;
S. B. Wilson, Ibis, 1890, p. 195.
$a mytadestina, Sclater, Ibis, 1888, p. 143.

THs species, which inhabits Kauai, has been lately described as new by Dr. Stejneger
(as above cited). I obtained specimens on that island from nearly the same locality
as he did, several being in immature plumage. Dr. Stejneger gives as native names
Ou or Uapauau, neither of which is, as far as I know, applied to this bird, Kamao being
that by which it is generally known.

In a letter received lately from my friend Mr. F. Gay, he raises the question of
there being another species of Pheornis found on Kauai, and his remarks on a skin
recently obtained by a collector are as follows:—“It appeared to me to be a species
of Kamao, the only difference being a narrower bill, lighter coloured feet, and a
smaller body, and, according to the collector, lighter coloured feathers about the head.
Our natives always said there was a different variety called the Puaiohi, which they
said had a different note from the common Kamao. I never believed much in what
the natives said about it, as the Kamao varies so much in colour and spots. This bird
may be more common on the windward side of the island, as the name of Puaiohi is
more commonly used there than here.” Mr. Gay adds: “the single skin I saw was a
poor one, having been partly eaten by rats.”

rt”
Al ae
vee

aha ot

Mapa 2A
ts, iy

: PHAORNIS LANAIENSIS.
OLOMAO.

Pheornis lanaiensis, S. B. Wilson, Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist. ser. 6, vol. vii. p. 460 (1891).

I OBTAINED several specimens of this bird on the island of Lanai, which from its much
smaller size and the whiteness of the underparts is deserving of separation from either
Pheornis obscura of Hawaii or P. myiadestina of Kauai. It appears to be identical
with the species inhabiting Molokai,—as was to be expected, seeing that the two
islands are separated only by a narrow channel, some ten miles in width—and is
known by the name of Olomao there: on Lanai, where I first obtained it, and after which
island it is named, I met with no natives who knew the names of birds ; indeed, in a
few years there will not be many natives remaining.

It closely resembles P. obscura and P. myiadestina, but is smaller in dimensions
than either; while the bill is distinctly intermediate in size between those of the two
species. ‘The outer pair of tail-feathers alone have very slight white markings at the
tip, while the abdomen and under tail-coverts are nearly pure white.

The length of the wing from the carpal joint is only 3°65 inches, as against 4 in
P. obscura. .

F.W.Frohawk del.etlith.

PHAORNIS OBSCURA.

West, Newman imp.

PHAORNIS OBSCURA.

OMAU, OLOMAU, KAMAU.

“Dusky Flycatcher,” Latham, Gen. Synops. 1. p. 844 (1783).

Muscicapa obscura, Gmelin, Syst. Nat. i. p. 945 (1788); Latham, Ind. Orn. p. 479 (1790) ;
Stephens, Shaw’s Zool. x. p. 405 (1817); Vieillot, N. Dict. d’Hist. nat. xxi. p. 465 (1818) ;
id. Eneycl. Méthod., Ornithol. p. 809 (1828).

“ Gobe-mouche brun des iles Sandwich” (sp. 2), Virey (Sonnini), Hist. Nat. Buffon, Ois. xiv. p. 172
(1802).

Tyrannula obscura, Peale, U.S. Expl. Exped., Birds, p. 310 (1848).

Chasiempsis obscura, Hartlaub, Arch. f. Naturgesch. 1852, 1. p. 183.

Tenioptera obscura, Cassin, U.S. Expl. Exped., Mamm. & Orn. p. 155, pl. ix. fig. 3* (1858); Dole,
Proc. Bost. Soc. N. H. 1869, p. 300; id. Hawaiian Alman. 1879, p. 48.

Pheornis obscura, Sclater, Ibis, 1859, p. 327, 1871, p. 360; id. Proc. Zool. Soc. 1878, p. 347; Von
Pelzeln, Ibis, 1874, p. 462; Sharpe, Cat. B. Br. Mus. iv. p. 5 (1879); Scott Wilson, Ibis,
1890, p. 195.

Lopsaltria (Chasiempsis) obscura, G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Isl. p. 22 (1859).

(Pheornis) obscura, G. R. Gray, Hand-l. i. p. 390 (1869).

* Figura notabilis.

As was the case with so many other Sandwich-Island species, this was first described by
Latham from examples in the Leverian Museum, brought home by Cook’s companions
on his third and fatal voyage ; and, from Herr von Pelzeln’s note in ‘The Ibis’ for 1874,
it appears that the type specimen still exists in the Museum of Vienna!. Gmelin, in
1788, gave it the name of Muscicapa obscura, nor has it since received a different
specific title; but Peale, who obtained additional specimens during the United States
Exploring Expedition in the ‘Vincennes’ and ‘Peacock,’ placed it in the genus
Tyrannula, the remarkable distinctness of the Family to which that belongs not being
then fully appreciated. Cassin, in his account of this Expedition, redescribed and
figured it under the designation of Twnioptera obscura, with notes taken mainly from
Peale; while, unless the variety of Turdus sandwichensis, from Oahu, be meant for the
same bird in Bloxam’s list in the narrative of the voyage of the ‘Blonde’ (p. 250), it does
not seem to have been observed by the naturalists on board that ship. No later visitors
to the Islands appear to have procured examples until I did so in 1887, but the dingy

* The difficulty as to its habitat, noticed by Herr von Pelzeln, seems explicable on the supposition that
“Christian’s Isle under the Line” is a transcriber’s mistake for Christmas Island, which was discovered and so
named by Cook a few days before he found the Sandwich Islands; but even then another mistake has probably
been made, for there is no evidence that the species inhabits that lonely spot, which is also called Turtle
Island.

appearance of the bird is of itself almost sufficient explanation of the slight interest
taken in it, except by ornithologists such as Mr. Sclater, with whom considerations of
science outweigh those of beauty of plumage. That distinguished naturalist was the
first to propose for it the new generic name of Phwornis in 1859.

This sombre-coloured bird is still fairly common in most districts of Hawaii, and in
some is perhaps the species most frequently met with; yet this may be due to its
familiar habits, for the Omau, to use its most common native name, is a very tame
bird, and while not absolutely courting man’s society, shows little fear of his presence.
Indeed, it was no uncommon occurrence for one of them to alight within a few yards
of me and begin its melodious strain, which somewhat resembles that of our Common
Thrush, though inferior in volume, and is so varied and sweet that the bird is fairly
entitled to be called the Hawaiian Nightingale. Mr. D. H. Hitchcock, of Hilo, told
me that many years ago the people used to bring him the young, which he caged for
the sake of their song; and this is the only instance I know of a native forest-bird
being successfully kept for any length of time in captivity. ‘The Lark-like habit of
singing on the wing, characteristic of P. mytadestina of Kauai, mentioned by Dr.
Stejneger on Mr. Knudsen’s authority, I observed also in this species. ‘The call-note
of P. obscura is a particularly clear tweet, easily recognized; but it utters a very
remarkable hissing sound when approached closely. Its flight is slow, and it may be
shot without difficulty while flying from tree to tree; while it possesses a very
peculiar habit (not noticed by Mr. Knudsen with regard to P. myiadestina) of quivering
with its wings when perched on a branch, as if shivering with cold or seized with an
attack of ague. ‘The chief food consists of berries, particularly those of the kopiko
(Straussia hawatiensis), a tree which is very common in forests throughout the group.
The vertical range extends from the lowest forest-zone up to 5000 feet, and probably
higher. The branch shown in the Plate is that of the lama (Maba sandvicensis), a
very conspicuous shrub in some districts of Hawaii, particularly between Waimea and
Puuanahulu ; its shining red berries have a slight resemblance to those of the coffee,
and are habitually eaten by the inhabitants.

Description. Adult male. Entire upper surface dull hair-brown, except the fore-
head, which is grey; lower parts ashy grey, shading into white on the abdomen; under
tail-coverts buff; flanks dull russet; wing-quills dull brown, russet at the base, and
edged on the outer web with the same colour; tail brown; irides dark hazel; bill
and feet. dark brown, the soles yellow.

Adult female. Differs from the male in having the ashy grey of the underparts
somewhat lighter and more uniform in tint.

Dimensions.—Total length 6°75 inches, wing from carpal joint 4, culmen ‘62, tarsus
1:35, tail 3.

Hs 9

FW Frohawk del.et lth, West, Newman imp.

PHA ORNLS PAM Sie

PHAORNIS PALMERIL
PUAIOHI.

Pheornis palmeri, Rothschild, Avif. Laysan, p. 67.

Unver the heading of Phwornis myiadestina, I have already mentioned in this work that
Mr. Gay believed that a second species of the present genus existed in Kauai, of which
he had seen a skin, subsequently destroyed by rats. That gentleman stated that it
was smaller than its congener, with lighter-tinted feet, light colour about the head,
and narrower bill, thereby giving a very good idea of the points wherein P. palmeri
differs from P. myiadestina. ‘This species Mr. Rothschild’s collectors, from one
of whom it takes its specific title, thereafter procured. For a knowledge of the habits
I am indebted to Mr. Perkins, the following being an epitome of his notes taken from
a letter to Mr. Evans.

It has the appearance of a diminutive Kamao (2. myzadestina), but it is difficult to
obtain a good view of the bird on account of its excessive shyness. ‘The favourite spots
are those where koas grow amongst the brushwood, and the ground is covered with
dead leaves and fallen twigs; here it flits about the lower branches in a restless
manner, and at times descends to the ground in search of food, consisting of lepi-
dopterous larve, beetles, spiders, and, exceptionally, of small molluscs. ‘The flight is
generally low, rapid, and direct, recalling that of the Kingfisher, while the song is
usually uttered from the top of a tree, though occasionally when on the wing, as
is the case with its congeners. ‘he notes, which are very strong and constantly
repeated, resemble those of the Nukupuu (Heterorhynchus hanapepe), but are louder
and shorter; a squeaking noise is also produced when in company with the female, and
the alarm-note is of a grating nature. This species is found up to an altitude of at
least 4000 feet.

Description.— Adult male. Above dull brown, with darker head and almost uniform
wingsand tail, the latter when expanded showing buff on the inner web of the external
pair of feathers and in the centre of the next pair. A white ring surrounds the eye.
Beneath greyish, becoming nearly white on the abdomen and buff on the lower tail-
coverts, while a distinct whitish patch marks the under swiface of the wing-quills.
Iris brown, bill blackish, feet pearly white.

Dimensions.—Total length 6°75 inches, wing 3°87, tail 2°5, tarsus 1°37, culmen °62.
2

2
Adult female. Apparently similar to the male. ,
Young male. Some spots of buff on the upper parts; lower parts with blackish-
brown crescentic markings, caused by the dark margins of the feathers.

As compared with the present species, P. myzadestina is somewhat more rufous
above, and has whitish tips to a few of the lateral tail-feathers, the patches under the
wings are buff rather than white, and the white feathers of the lower parts show slight
grey margins. ‘The young have similar dark crescentic markings, but the feathers
incline to buff in the central portion, and the Se a generally is more plentifully
marked than in P. palmert.

FW EYrohawk

clel.et lith.

CHASIEMPIS

SANDVICE NSIS.

West,Newman imp.

CHASIEMPIS SANDVICENSIS,
ELEPAIO.

“Sandwich Flycatcher,’ Latham, Gen. Synops. i. p. 344 (1783).

2“ A small bird of the flycatcher kind,’ King, Voy. Pacif. Ocean, iii. p. 119 (1784).

Muscicapa sandwichensis, Gmelin, Syst. Nat. i. p. 945 (1788); Donndorff, Orn. Beytr. 11. p. 591
(1795) ; Tiedemann, Anat. und Naturgesch. Vog. ii. p. 429 (1814) ; Vieillot, N. Dict. d’Hist.
Nat. xxi. p. 472 (1818); id. Encycl. Méthod. p. 814 (1823); G. R. Gray, Gen. B. i. p. 263
(1846).

Muscicapa sanduicensis, Latham, Ind. Orn. 1. p. 479 (1790).

“ Gobe-mouche brun des iles Sandwich” (sp. 1), Virey (Sonnini), Hist. Nat. Buffon, Ois. xiv. p. 171
(1802).

Muscicapa sandvicensis, Stephens, Shaw’s Zool. x. p. 894 (1817).

Chasiempis sandvicensis, Cabanis, Arch. f. Naturgesch. xii. p. 208 (1847); Sclater, Ibis, 1871,
p. 860; id. Proc. Zool. Soc. 1878, p. 8346; id. Voy. ‘ Challenger,’ p. 94 (1881) ; Sharpe, Cat.
B. Brit. Mus. iv. p. 232 (1879).

Chasiempsis sandwichensis, Bonaparte, Consp. Av. 1. p. 827 (1850); Finsch & Hartlaub, Faun.
Centralpolyn. p. xxxv (1867). .

Chasiempsis sandvicensis, Hartlaub, Arch. f. Naturgesch. 1852, 1. p. 183; id. Journ. f. Orn. 1854,
p- 170.

Cnipolegus, sp.?, Sclater, Cat. Am. B. p. 203 (1862) (ef. Proc. Zool. Soc. 1873, p. 555).

Hopsaltria sandvicensis, Dole, Proc. Bost. Soc. N. H. 1869, p. 300; id. Hawaiian Alman. 1879, p. 48.

Chasiempis sandwichensis, Sclater, Ibis, 1885, p. 18 (artim), pl.1.; Rothschild, Avif. Laysan, p.71,
pl. —. figs. 1, 2, 3, and pl. —. fig. 1 (1893) ; Perkins, Ibis, 1893, p. 109.

Chasiempis ridgwayi, Stejneger, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1887, p. 89; S. B. Wilson, Proc. Zool. Soc.
1891, p. 166; Rothschild, Bull. Brit. Orn. Club, i. p. lvi (1898).

Chasiempis ibidis, Stejneger, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1887, p. 89; 8. B. Wilson, Proc. Zool. Soc.
1891, p. 166.

Soon after my return to England at the end of the year 1888 I proceeded to sort out
and examine the large series of specimens of birds of the genus Chasiempis that I had
procured from each of the three islands of the group on which it occurs, namely,
Hawai, Oahu, and Kauai. Owing to the change of plumage which its members
undergo in their progress to maturity, and also to the fact that they occasionally pair
and, to all appearance, breed before assuming the fully adult dress, this was no easy
task; but I presently arrived at the conclusion that there were three species, each of
them peculiar to one or the other of the three islands named, and then the difficulty
was to assign to them proper names out of the many that had been conferred, for I
hardly ventured to suppose that I had to bestow a new one. My conclusion I now find
to have been right; but, unfortunately, I was induced subsequently to abandon that
opinion, to which I now recur.
2¥2

Before doing anything else it was necessary to ascertain, if possible, which was the
species originally described by Latham as the “Sandwich Flycatcher,” from a specimen
in the collection of Sir Joseph Banks. Though this specimen had, of course, long ago
perished, it must have been obtained during Cook’s voyage, and therefore either on
Kauai or Hawaii—but the latter preferably, since his ships made the longest stay there,
and we know that most of the birds they brought home were procured there, while
Latham’s description, on which was founded the Muscicapa sandwichensis of Gmelin,
does not ill accord with the younger stage of the Hawaiian bird. But Latham also
described, as belonging to a second species, which he called the “ Spotted-winged
Flycatcher,” a specimen in the Leverian Museum “Supposed to inhabit the Sandwich
Islands,” and now wholly lost to sight, for I have failed to find any mention of it, by
which it could be traced, in the sale-catalogue of that collection. This, being the
foundation of Gmelin’s Muscicapa maculata, has been generally regarded as specifically
identical with the other, and I am certainly not in a position to urge a contrary view;
but since it may possibly have been a Kauaian example, I think it better to exclude
from the already complicated synonymy of Chasiempis sandvicensis any reference to
this second species, which after all may have been something very different, since its
having come from the Sandwich Islands was only a matter of supposition; and, even if
its locality could be proved, the name given to it by Gmelin is forestalled.

Pursuing my investigation I found little help obtainable from collections or books.
The meagre list of Bloxam included Muscicapa sandwichensis, the specific name being
wrongly assigned, as was the fashion in those days, to Linneus instead of Gmelin, but
rightly identified with the “ Elepaio” (or Hrepeio as the word was then written) of the
natives. Nothing more, however, was said of it, though Bloxam obtained specimens of
at least one of the species, which were in the British Museum so lately as 1868; but
none seem to have been procured by the naturalists of the French or the United States’
expeditions, and evidence is wanting that any ornithological author, the late Mr. G. R.
Gray excepted, had examined an example until, in 1547, Prof. Cabanis founded upon
Latham’s species the genus Chasiempis, though he, as has since been shown by
Mr. Sclater, had not specimens of the true sandvicensis to examine, but only those,
collected by Deppe, of the species which inhabits Oahu. In 1850 Reichenbach (Natiirl.
System der Vogel, p. Ixvii) gave an outline of the head, wing, and foot of the new
genus, but these figures are not particularly discriminative. ‘The rarity of this form in
collections and the little that was known of it is shown by the fact that, in 1862, so
skilful an ornithologist as Mr. Sclater referred (though with doubt) a specimen of it
which had passed under the practised eye of Verreaux to a genus of a wholly different
family. In 1882 Mr. Ridgway, on receiving specimens of Chasiempis from Kauai,
rightly described them as belonging to a distinct species, C. sclateri; but three years
after Mr. Sclater was loth to admit its validity. He, however, in ‘ The Ibis’ for 1885,
rendered the great service of giving, for the first time, two coloured figures of the true
C. sandvicensis, though it must be said that these figures were temporarily the cause
of confusion, for on one of them Dr. Stejneger in 1887 founded his C. ridgwayi, and
on the other his C. ibidis. Moreover, the remarks of the latter were the means of

leading me astray, as I saw in them what appeared to be a solution of my difficulties,
which had been rather increased by the contribution to the subject of HH. von
Berlepsch and Leverkiihn in 1890; but I found that the Oahu bird was without a
name, and in 1891 I gave it one, C. gayi. So matters remained until the following
year, when Mr. Perkins was despatched by the Joint Committee of the Royal Society
and the British Association, and his attention was particularly drawn to the desirability
of clearing up the question. This he has most effectually done, with the result, to me
satisfactory, of confirming my original conclusion as to the existence in the islands of
three species, neither more nor fewer. It is also gratifying to find that in this point
Mr. Rothschild agrees with me.

This small Flycatcher is extremely common on Hawaii, and by far the tamest and most
familiar bird of any I met with in -the islands. Its call very much resembles a man’s
sharp whistle, which may be expressed almost exactly as ‘“‘¢wee-ou,” and is uttered
repeatedly and with piercing shrillness; besides this, its general note, it has a great
variety of others—at times giving vent to a gurgling sound like that of our Whitethroat,
while at, others its note may be readily mistaken for that of the Quail.

We found a nest in an alii tree (Dodonea viscosa) in Kona on the 11th of June, the
two old birds being close by ; unfortunately it contained no eggs, but from the anxious
way in which the birds were hopping about and watching us, there could be no doubt
of the ownership. A few days later I found another nest, composed almost entirely of
the bleached seed-vessels of the cape gooseberry—in Hawaiian parlance poha or
pahina—an introduced plant which has taken firm hold in many upland regions of
Hawaii; it was attached on three sides to the slender branches of a small sandalwood
tree (Santalum album), somewhat after the manner in which the Sedge-Warbler
attaches its nest to the stems of plants: unfortunately this nest, too, was empty.

Mr. Perkins remarks :—‘ Of Chasiempis I have several times found the nest (without
eggs, unfortunately). It is small, very neat and compact, placed from 10 to 30 feet
from the ground, and generally well concealed.”

On the 3lst of May, 1887, in the ohia forests above Kadwaloa in Kona, we met
with an entire family of this species: the young were being fed by the parents,
and I was loth to shoot them; but as young birds had, so far as I knew, never before
been obtained, I secured two, which show no trace whatever of the white on the smaller
wing-coverts seen in the mature birds. One very charming habit, possessed by the
Hlepaio, is that of spreading its tail in the shape of a fan on alighting on a branch,
reminding one much of the Fan-tailed Warbler.

I have often seen this species catch small moths on the wing, and, as Mr. Perkins
remarks in his notes (Ibis, 1893, p. 110) :—“ These birds live chiefly on insects and
their larve. ‘The insects they often take on the wing, their beaks closing with a very
audible snap, often nearly as loud as the ‘cracking’ of Chloridops. ‘They frequently
descend to the ground or on to fallen trees, where they get wood-boring larve or small
myriapods.” The writer then goes on to relate the following anecdote which he had
from a native woman in Kona, and which was told me several times while living
on Hawaii :—“ ‘Of all the birds the most celebrated in ancient times was the Elepato,

and for this reason: When the old natives used to go up into the forest to get wood
for their canoes, when they had felled their tree the Hlepaio would come down to
it. If it began to peck it was a bad sign, as the wood was no good, being unsound ;
if, on the contrary, without pecking, it called out ‘ Ono ka ia,’ ‘Sweet the fish,’ the
timber was sound.’ The names Hepaio and Ono ka ia (pronounced dndkaia) are
both creditable word-imitations of the cry of Chasiempis under various emotions, here
presumably of disgust.”

The range of the Chastempis found on Hawaii is from the lower forest-region at
about 1400 feet to over 5000, and probably a good deal higher, as Mr. Perkins says
“to the limits of proper forest on Mauna Loa and also high up Hualalai.”

The members of this genus occasionally breed before assuming the adult plumage.

Description. Adult male. Above brown with a tinge of rufous, the forehead and
superciliary streak decidedly redder. A few of the inner secondaries have white inner
margins, the lateral rectrices have broad white tips; the rump is white, as are the tips
of many of the wing-coverts, giving an appearance of spots. The throat is black,
with white tips to the feathers of the lower portion, which extend to the sides of the
neck; the breast is rich yellowish-brown, the middle of the abdomen white. The bill,
which is much larger than in the other species, is black, as are the feet.

Adult female. The forehead, superciliary stripe, and throat are nearly white. with
very little black on the latter, below which is a brown crescent. The whole plumage
is browner than in the male.

The young, which vary considerably, have rufous rump and wing-spots, being almost
uniform dingy white below.

Dimensions.—Total length 5°5 inches, wing 8, tail 2°75, tarsus 1, culmen -44.

The synonyms of the supposed species Chastempis maculata are as follows :—

“ Spotted-winged Flycatcher,” Latham, Gen. Synops. i. p. 3845 (1783).

Muscicapa maculata, Gmelin, Syst. Nat. i. p. 945 (1788) '; Latham, Ind. Orn. 11. p. 480 (1790) ;
Donndorff, Orn. Beytr. ii. p. 593 (1795) ; Tiedemann, Anat. und Naturgesch. Vog. u. p. 429
(1814) ; Stephens, Shaw’s Gen. Zool. x. p. 890 (1817); Vieillot, N. Dict. d’Hist. Nat. xxi.
p- 473 (1818); id. Enecycl. Méthod. p. 815 (1828); G. R. Gray, Gen. B.i. p. 263 (1846) ;
Dole, Proc. Bost. Soc. N. H. 1869, p. 299; id. Hawaiian Alman. 1879, p. 48; Sclater, Ibis,
1871, p. 359.

“‘ Gobe-mouche brun des tles Sandwich” (sp. 3), Virey (Sonnini), Hist. Nat. Buffon, Ois. xiv.
p. 173 (1802).

? Eopsaltria (Chasiempsis) maculata, G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Isl. p. 22 (1859) *.

? Eopsaltria (Chasiempis) maculata, G. R. Gray, Hand-l. B. i. p. 890 (1869) *.

' Nec Muscicapa maculata, P. L. 8. Miller, Natursyst. Anhang, p. 169 (1776).
2 For the reasons assigned under the heading of C. gayi these references must be considered doubtful.

West, Newman imp.

PW. Frohawk del et lith,

GAY I, Ad.3 and Juv

CHASIB MPIS

CHASIEMPIS GAYI

ELEPAIO.

? Muscicapa sandwichensis, Bloxam, Voy. ‘ Blonde,’ p. 250 (1826) *.
Chasiempis sandvicensis, Cabanis in Lichtenstein’s Nomencl. Av. Mus. Berol. p. 19 (1854) (nee

Cabanis, 1847).

? Eopsaltria (Chasiempsis) sandwichensis, G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Isl. p. 21 (1859) ’.

? Eopsaltria (Chasiempis) sandwichensis, G. R. Gray, Hand-l. B. 1. p. 390 (1869) °.

Chasiempis sandwichensis, Sclater, Ibis, 1885, p. 18 (partim); Von Pelzeln, Ibis, 1874, p. 462 ;
Von Berlepsch & Leverkiihn, Ornis, 1890, p. 2 (partim), tab.i. fig. 3; Rothschild, Bull. Brit.
Orn. Club, i. p. lvi (1893).

Chasiempis gayi, S. B. Wilson, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1891, p. 165 ; Rothschild, Avif. Laysan, p. 75, pl. —.
figs. 2, 3 (1893).

THIS species, confined to the island of Oahu, had long been confounded with C. sand-
vicensis of Hawaii, until my paper in the ‘ Proceedings of the Zoological Society’ for
1891 appeared; but the whole matter may now be considered finally settled, owing
to the exertions of Mr. R. C. L. Perkins, who obtained both young and old of all the
three members of the genus, and proved conclusively that the former had the rump
tawny and the latter white.

The habits of this bird are apparently identical with those of the forms from the
other islands. ‘The nest, according to Mr. Rothschild, is placed in a fork about ten to
thirty feet high, and 4s composed of fine rootsand moss, with a lining of the former and
herbage, being decorated externally with lichens. The eggs are white, with small spots
and blotches of brick-red.

Deseription.— Adult male. Above much as in C. sandvicensis, but the spots on the
wing-coverts have the appearance of bars. The throat is more conspicuously marked
with white, and the breast is almost entirely white.

Adult female and young differ from the male as do those of C. sclateri.

Dimensions.—Total length 5:4 inches, wing 2°75, tail 2-76, tarsus 1, culmen °4.

* These references must be regarded with doubt, though Bloxam’s specimens were most likely obtained in
Oahu. Two of them were in the British Museum so lately as 1868, as stated by Mr. G. R. Gray in a letter
written by him in that year, and shown to me by Prof. Newton. They are not, however, included by
Dr. Sharpe in his ‘ Catalogue’ (iv. p. 232) as existing in 1879, any more than is a specimen of the “ Muscicapa
maculata” of Gmelin, which Mr. Gray in the same letter mentions as being in the Museum, and then thought
to be the young of C. sandvicensis.

Pte!

(me

aes ; “any BL f ating
¥ ,, att

FW. Frohawk lth.

CHASIEMPIS

SCLATERT.

West, Newman imp.

CHASIEMPIS SCLATERI

Chasiempis sclateri, Ridgway, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. iv. p. 337 (1882) ; S. B. Wilson, Proc. Zool.
Soc. 1891, p. 166; Rothschild, Bull Brit. Orn. Club, i. p. lvi (1898) ; id. Avif. Laysan, p. 77,
pl. —. figs. 1, 2 (1893).

Chasiempis sandwichensis, Sclater, Ibis, 1885, p. 19 (partim) ; Von Berlepsch & Leverkiihn, Ornis,

1890, p. 2 (partim).
Chasiempis dolei, Stejneger, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1887, p. 90; 8S. B. Wilson, Proc. Zool. Soc.

1891, p. 166.

Mr. Ripeway was perfectly justified when, in 1882, he differentiated this form (found
only in Kauai) from those of the neighbouring islands ; but, unfortunately, Mr. Sclater,
in his article on the genus in the ‘Ibis’ for 1885, suggested that it was the female of
C. sandvicensis, at the same time rightly determining the latter, of which he figured
the male and female. Dr. Stejneger, in 1887, separated the birds from Kauai as two
species, giving the name of C. dolei to that which he considered undescribed; but
Mr. Perkins, to whom we owe the elucidation of so many knotty questions, has now
been able to ascertain that one form only inhabits the above-mentioned island. ‘The
habits cannot be said to differ from those of the other members of the genus, the nest

and eggs resembling those of C. gayt.

Description. Adult male. Nearly uniform greyish above, with white rump and an
indistinct rufous nuchal collar. The wing and tail much as in C. sandvicensis. The
throat is orange-rufous, with no black markings, the colour gradually merging into the
white of the central abdomen. ‘The chin is whitish, and there is very little rufous on
the forehead or above the eye.

Adult female. The throat and forehead are much whiter.

The young are very rufous above and chiefly orange-rufous below.

Dimensions.—Total length 5°5 inches, wing 2°76, tail 2°78, tarsus 1, culmen 38.

ASIO ACCIPITRINUS,
PUEO.

Strya accipitrina, Pallas, Reise d. versch. Prov. d. Russischen Reichs, i. p. 455 (1771).

Strix brachyotus, J. R. Forster, Phil. Trans. lxii. p. 3884 (1772).

“ Owl,” Cook, [Last] Voy. Pacif. Ocean, ii. p. 227 (1784).

“ Short-eared Owl,” Latham, Gen. Synops. Suppl. ii. p. 56 (1802).

Strix sandwichensis, Bloxam, Voy. ‘ Blonde,’ p. 250 (1826).

Otus galapagoensis, Gould, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1837, p. 10; Darwin, Zool. Voy. ‘ Beagle,’ Birds, p. 32,
pl. iti. (1841); Cassin, Cat. Strigidee Coll. Acad. N. 8. Philad. subfam. 1, gen. 3, sp. 6
(1851 ?).

Otus brachyotus, Nuttall, Man. Orn. i. ed. 2, p. 141 (1840) ; D’Orbigny, Voy. Amér. Mérid. iv.
pt. 3, Oiseaux, p. 134 (1835-44) ; Peale, U.S. Expl. Exped., Birds, p. 75 (1848) ; Sclater,
Proc. Zool. Soe. 1878, p. 348.

Otus palustris, Darwin, Zool. Voy. ‘ Beagle,’ Birds, p. 38 (1841).

Asio brachyotus, Strickland, Orn. Synon. 1. p. 209 (1855) ; Sclater, Voy. ‘Challenger, Birds, p. 96
(1881).

Brachyotus galapagoensis, Cassin, U.S. Expl. Exped., Mamm. & Orn. p. 107 (1858) ; Dole, Proc.
Bost. Soc. N. H. 1869, p. 296; id. Hawaiian Alman. 1879, p. 43.

Otus brachyotus, var., G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Isl. p. 3 (1859).

Asio sandvicensis, Blyth, Ibis, 1863, p. 27.

Asio accipitrinus, Gurney, in Yarrell’s Br. B. ed. 4, i. p. 167 (1872) ; Dresser, B. Eur. v. p. 257,
pl. 804 (1876) ; Stejneger, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1887, p. 85.

[Except as regards the first two citations the above refer to this widely-ranging species
only in relation to the Sandwich Islands or other localities in the Pacific Ocean. ]

TuE modern view that the Sandwich Island species is identical with the widely-distributed
Short-eared Owl of the Old and New Worlds, of which the races are usually deemed
barely separable, coincides with that of the earlier writers. It is mentioned by the
author of the account of Cook’s last voyage as the “Owl,” by Latham as the “Short-
eared Owl,” and by Peale as Otus brachyotus; Bloxam, however, preferred to call it
Strix sandwichensis, and Cassin, considering it to be identical with the bird from the
Galapagos Islands, included it under the heading of Otus galapagoensis, instead of
giving both these names as synonyms of the common species. Messrs. Strickland,
G. R. Gray, Sclater, and the late J. H. Gurney, on the other hand, have at various times
given it as their opinion that the original view is correct. Peale states that examples
were observed on all the islands of the Sandwich group, as well as in Oregon and Cali-
fornia, while as Cassin includes the name in his list of the collection of the Expedition,
some of these were doubtless procured at that time.

Dr. Stejneger (Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1887, p. 85) remarks :—“ The four specimens
of Short-eared Owls from the Hawaiian Islands before me do not justify the retention
of Asio sandwichensis as a separable race;” while the late Mr. J. H. Gurney, who
examined a specimen in my collection, was of the same opinion. Dr. Stejneger also
suggests that Owls on the Hawaiian Islands are in part migratory, but I do not think
they are so.

The subject of this article was held in great awe by the ancient Sandwich Islanders,
as it was believed by them to be an ‘** Akua” or Spirit; and to this day it is considered
that death will be the fate in the course of the same year of any one who is rash enough
to kill a Pueo. It was a bird held sacred to the gods, and therefore the natives
believed that if one were killed, not only would its slayer die within the year, but some
great calamity would fall on the nation. In a most interesting legend entitled ‘The
Sacred Spear-point”’ (* Legends and Myths of Hawaii,’ pp. 219-225), the Pueo plays
a prominent part; but in this story an evil spirit seems to have taken its form and to
have for many years visited different districts of Oahu, killing children, pigs, and fowls ;
the priests, moreover, declared it to be a Pueo, sacred to the gods, and therefore not
to be molested with safety, even if harm were possible from human hands.

The following abbreviation of the latter part of the legend may be of interest to my
readers :—

At last a prince bearing the name of Kaulalaau, who suspected it was an evil spirit,
followed the bird and was by supernatural agency impelled to hurl his javelin in its
direction. In twenty paces the point did not droop; in forty it did not fall to the
ground ; in a hundred a new energy seized it, and like a flash of light it sped out of
sight. .A moment later the prince saw the bird sink and disappear down a precipice.
Hie and his companion hastened to the base, where they found it dead with the
javelin buried in its breast. They carried it to the temple, but the high priest
declared that they should be sacrificed to the gods to avert their wrath. An appeal
was made to the king, and on the bird being examined in the presence of the Court,
it was found that its head was not that of a Pueo; nor did it bear a resemblance in
form to that of any bird known. It was narrow between the eyes, which in colour
were like those of a shark, and its long pointed mandibles, both of the upper and
under jaws, turned sharply upward. ‘The priests were severely reprimanded by the
king for thelr mistake, and the prince—the slayer of the monster—was asked to
explain what he knew about it. To this appeal he replied: “If I may rely upon what
seemed to be a dream last night, the bird was possessed by the spirit of Hilo-a-Lakapu,
one of the chiets of Hawaii who invaded Oahu-during the reign of your royal father.
He was slain at Waimano, and his head was placed upon a pole near Honouliuli for
the birds to feed upon. He was of “ Akua” blood, and through a bird-90d relative his
spirit was given possession of the monster which the gods enabled me to slay.” The
spirit of Hilo had come in with the head of the dead bird, and with the utterance of
these words by the prince the eyes rolled, the ponderous jaws opened and closed, and
with a noise like the scream of an “ Alae” the malignant spirit took its departure.

The shark-god was another “ Akua,” which, together with the Owl, was held in
great reverence by the ancient Hawaiians, and even now the natives will sometimes
tell you their “ Akua” or “ protecting spirit ” is the Mano (shark).

I did not succeed in obtaining the eggs, but while on the island of Lanai in 1888,
my young companion, Mr. Frederick Bickerton, found two half-fledged birds and took
one alive to Honolulu with him, where it lived for some time in confinement. On the
Waimea plains in Hawaii one often sees these Owls wheeling about in the daytime in
search of mice, and on the waste land round the great extinct crater, Diamond Head,
near Honolulu, they are also very common, while they are generally distributed
over the islands of the whole group. One point more must be noticed with
regard to them, and that is the presence of a large black parasite, about the size of
a small blue-bottle fly, which swarms among the feathers. 1 noticed this particularly
in the case of a specimen shot in Kona, and my friend Mr. F. Burchardt, who is well
acquainted with these birds in Kohala, assures me they are seldom free from them. I
secured specimens at the time, but unfortunately the glass tube in which they were
preserved has been lost.

ai}

Reno: aah Sat: + a, she fe

rick in Yor Bale git ‘ad stab hire Bay
fic Haw afetd bog Bol ttak ove fin i re
ehh at y. 3 rorceset it ites ae aa site

ene sche tee Voda: ae

adit jainoa in i ei it pt wane ee

Hie atuloiolt ‘ nt st alin?

crib ‘Sotihee isk
si “abinste reg $af ph Wo"

hia it iy SF

Hea s
ide av shite sf eshte

STERNA FULIGINOSA.

Sterna fuliginosa, Gmelin, S. N. i. p. 605 (1788) ; G. R. Gray, List B. Br. Mus. iti. p. 177 (1844) ;
Stejneger, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. xii. p. 379 (1889) ; Saunders, Cat. B. Br. Mus. xxv. p. 106
(1896).

Sterna oahuensis, Bloxam, Voy. ‘ Blonde,’ p. 251 (1826).

Sterna (Onychoprion) serrata, G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Is. p. 59 (1859).

? Sterna panaya, Dole, Proc. Boston Soc. N. H. 1869, p. 306 ; id. Haw. Alman. 1879, p. 56.

Onychoprion fuliginosus, Wiglesworth, Aves Polyn. p. 75 (1891).

Haliplana fuliginosa, Rothschild, Avif. Laysan, p. 39 (1893).

[Except in a few cases the above citations refer to the Sandwich Islands and some other
localities in the Pacific Ocean. The list could be easily extended. |

Tuis bird was noticed in the Sandwich Islands by Bloxam, who recorded it in his
Voyage of the ‘ Blonde’ by the name of Sterna oahuensis, under the impression that
he had discovered a new species. Two specimens from Oahu, an adult and a young
bird presented by Sir Edward Belcher, are still in the British Museum, as may be seen
from Mr. H. Saunders’s Catalogue of the Gulls and Terns. Mr. Dole apparently
included this species in his lists under the name of Sterna panaya, while Dr. Stejneger
received an adult from Mr. Knudsen, procured on Kauai, where it appears to be
common ; others were contained in the collection which I made in 1887, and Palmer
found large breeding colonies in the Laysan group in 1891. The bird is very widely
distributed throughout the tropical and subtropical seas, while it is even found outside
these limits.

Description.—Adult male and female. Sooty black, with white forehead, superciliary
stripes, sides of the neck, and under surface; the lores, crown, and nape still blacker,
while the two lateral tail-feathers shew white on their outer webs. Bill and feet
black.

Dimensions.—“ Total length about 17 inches, culmen 271, wing 11°75, tail about 7°5,
tarsus ‘9, middle toe with claw 1:1” (Saunders).

sit Pherae

iene ips it apg bert:

te te

sa aia

t P tet i ¥ .
BADEN Fehrs

Fs
i 7: eo
{ae a

enn

STERNA LUNATA,

Sterna lunata, Peale, U.S. Expl. Exped. p. 277 (1848) ; Cassin, U.S. Expl. Exped. p. 3882 (1858) ;
G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Is. p. 59 (1859) ; Stejneger, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. xii. p. 379
(1889) ; Saunders, Cat. B. Br. Mus. xxv. p. 100 (1896).

Onychoprion lunatus, Wiglesworth, Aves Polyn. p. 76 (1891).

Haliplana lunata, Rothschild, Avif. Laysan, p. 37, pl. (1893).

Iv is quite possible that this Pacific species passed through the hands of Mr. Dole
before 1879, though he does not include it in either of his lists; but, if so, he did not
distinguish it from the much more widely spread S. fuliginosa. In 1887 I obtained
specimens when in the Sandwich Islands, and in 1889 Dr. Stejneger received others
from Kauai (sent by Mr. Knudsen). Palmer afterwards met with the bird in the
Laysan group in abundance.

This bird is smaller than S. fuliginosa, and has the mantle dark grey, the nearly
allied S. anestheta having it brownish slate-coloured.

2pP2

[39

ANOUS STOLIDUS.

Sterna stolida, Linneus, Syst. Nat. ed. 12, i. p. 227 (1766).

Anous niger, Stephens, Gen. Zool. xiii. p. 140 (1825).

Anous stolidus, Cassin, U.S. Expl. Exped. p. 391 (1858); G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Is. p. 59
(1859) ; Finsch & Hartlaub, Faun. Centralpolyn. p. 234 (1867); Dole*, Proc. Boston Soc.
N. H. 1869, p. 307; id. Haw. Alman. 1879, p. 57; Wiglesworth, Aves Polyn. p. 76 (1892) ;
Rothschild, Avif. Laysan, p. 41, pl. (1893) ; Saunders, Cat. B. Br. Mus. xxv. p. 186 (1896).

[All the above citations, except the first two and the last (in part), refer to the Sandwich Islands
and some other localities in the Pacific Ocean. The list could be easily extended. ]

Tur Noddy Tern, widely distributed as it isin many parts of the world, is not to be
found in such abundance in the neighbourhood of the Sandwich Islands as it is
elsewhere. It is true that Palmer found it breeding on Laysan and on French Frigate
Island, to the north-west of the above group, but its numbers were considerably less
than those of Anous hawatiensis, which was met with at the same time, while it must
for the present remain doubtful whether it ever visits the main archipelago, though it
probably does so. Mr. Dole quotes from Dr. Elliott Coues a tabulated form of the
differences existing between specimens from the Pacific and from America; and,
although he refers his specimen to A. stolidus, it seems that he intended to describe
the bird now known as A. hawaiiensis. No certain record, therefore, exists of the
occurrence of the typical Noddy in the Sandwich Islands.

Description. Adult male and female. Sooty brown with whitish forehead, grey
crown, and often black lores and throat; wings and tail blacker. Bill black; feet
reddish brown with yellowish webs.

Dimensions.—* Total length about 16 inches, culmen 2:1, wing 10-25-11, tail 6-7,
tarsus 1, middle toe with claw 1:55” (Saunders).

* The two citations from Mr. Dole very possibly refer in part, if not entirely, to Anous hawatiensis.

duar UETIMA HT S39

¢ PP’? SISNHIVMVH VNUELS

“DHL PP MET LT ME

ANOUS HAWALIIENSIS.
NOIO.

“ Sterna owhyhaensis,’ Bloxam, MS. (1825) (specimen in Br. Mus. from Owhyhee).
Anous tenuirostris, G. R. Gray, List B. Br. Mus. iii. p. 180 (1844), partim (nec Temminck) ;

Lichtenstein, Nomencl. Avium, p. 97 (1854).
Anous melanogenys, Stejneger, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. xi. p. 94 (1888) (nec Gray, Gen. B. iii. pl. 182,

fide Saunders, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. xxv. p. 148).
Anous hawaiiensis, Rothschild, Bull. Brit. Orn. Club. i. p. lvii (1898) ; id. Avif. Laysan, p. 43, pl.

(1898).
Micranous hawaiiensis, Saunders, Cat. B. Br. Mus. xxv. p. 148 (1896).

Tus northern form of the smaller Noddy, A. melanogenys, was recognized as distinct
from its larger congener by Bloxam, the naturalist of H.M.S. ‘ Blonde,’ so long ago as
1825. It was described in his manuscripts, which, by favour of his son, Mr. A. Roby
Bloxam, of Christ Church, New Zealand, have recently been examined by the writers,
under the name of “ Sterna owhyhaensis” ; but, through the mischance or mismanage-
ment which attended their publication, the name has never found its way into print.
There can be no doubt of the identity of Bloxam’s examples, for one which was
obtained by the ‘ Blonde’ expedition under Lord Byron has escaped destruction and
still exists in the British Museum, as testified by Mr. H. Saunders.

Dr. Stejneger, however, who received four specimens from Mr. Knudsen of Kauai,
which had been obtained in Niihau, did not in 1888 distinguish this species from
A. melanogenys; and it was therefore left to Mr. Rothschild to give it the above
specific name, which luckily agrees, except in spelling, with that originally proposed
by Bloxam.

Mr. Dole asserts that in the Sandwich Islands this Noddy breeds on cliffs, but such
seems very unlikely to be the case; and Palmer, who met with colonies in Laysan,
Lisiansky, and Midway Islands, tells us that its habits are in general those of the
typical form, and that it lays its eggs upon the sand. He also observed the bird on
Kauai, whence Knudsen reported it to Dr. Stejneger as living “on the rocks about the
coast.” Mr. Perkins says that it is quite common throughout the group.

Description.— Adult male and female. Forehead and crown greyish white; lores
black ; cheeks and throat dark lead-grey ; nape, shoulders, mantle, and tail lavender-
grey ; lower parts black: bill black ; feet brown, with yellowish webs.

Dimensions.—‘ Total length 13°5 inches, culmen 1°8, wing &°66, tail 5, tarsus -75,
middle toe with claw 1°25 ” (Saunders).
2Q

GYGIS ALBA.

“White Tern,” Latham, Gen. Synops. iii. p. 363 (1785) ; Portlock, Voyage round the World,
p- 312, pl. (1789).

Sterna alba, Sparrman, Mus. Carlsonianum, no. 11 (1786); Gmelin, Syst. Nat. 1. p. 607 (1788).

Sterna candida, Gmelin, Syst. Nat. 1. p. 607 (1788).

Gygis candida, Wagler, Isis, 1832, p. 1223; Saunders, Cat. B. Br. Mus. xxv. p. 149 (1896).

Gygis alba, Lichtenstein, Nomencl. Av. p. 97 (1854) ; Cassin, U.S. Expl. Exped. p. 389 (1858)
(fig. of egg, p. 390) ; Dole, Proc. Boston Soc. N. H. 1869, p. 306; id. Haw. Alman. 1879,
p. 56; Wiglesworth, Aves Polyn. p. 78 (1891); Rothschild, Avif. Laysan, p. 35, pls. (bird
and eggs) (1893). ‘

[Several of the above citations refer to the Sandwich Islands and some other localities in the
Pacific Ocean. ‘The list could easily be extended. |

As will be seen from the synonymy, Mr. Dole included this species in both of his lists
of the birds of the Sandwich Islands, but in 1879 he was still uncertain as to whether it
was really found there. Since, however, Palmer subsequently met with it in abundance
on Laysan and Lisiansky Islands, where it was breeding on the rocks and among the
scrub, there can be little doubt that it visits the group first mentioned, at least
occasionally. ‘The habits recorded by Palmer differ considerably, as Mr. Rothschild
tells us in his ‘ Avifauna of Laysan,’ from those commonly observed in more southern
climes, where the bird habitually lays its egg on the branch of a tree.

It should be mentioned that King (Voy. iii. p. 120, 1784) says that he observed a
“large White Pigeon”; and this statement may possibly refer to the present species, as
what he saw certainly could not have been a Pigeon.

Description —Adult male and female. White, with a black ring round the eye; bill
black ; feet dark brown, with yellow webs.

Dimensions.— Total length about 12 inches, culmen 1-8, wing 9°5, tail 4:25 to 5,
tarsus °6, middle.toe with claw 1:1” (Saunders).

WFrohawk delet hth:

BM ami ih

NUMENIUS

ASE ea

ANSIS.

PBB casio

| Pike ye

West, Newman imp,

NUMENIUS TAHITIENSIS.
KIOEA.

“Otaheite Curlew,” Latham, Gen. Synops. iii. p. 122 (1785).

Scolopazx tahitiensis, Gmelin, Syst. Nat. i. p. 656 (1788).

Numenius tahitiensis, Latham, Ind. Orn. ii. p. 711 (1790) ; Vieillot, N. Dict. d’Hist. Nat. viii.
p. 808 (1817); id. Encycl. Méth. p. 1157 (1823); Stephens, Shaw’s Zool. xii. pt. 1, p. 32
(1824); G. R. Gray, Gen. B. iii. p. 569 (1847) ; id. Cat. B. Trop. Isl. p. 49 (1859) ; Ridgway,
Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1880, p. 201; Baird, Brewer, & Ridgway, Water-B. N. Am. i. p. 324
(1884) ; Turner, Contr. N. H. Alaska, p. 190 (1886) ; Seebohm, Geogr. Distr. Charadriide,
p- 333 (1887) ; Nelson (& Henshaw), Rep. N. H. Coll. Alaska, p. 121, pl. (1887); Wigles-
worth, Aves Polynesiz, p. 66 (1891).

“ Le Tevrea,” Sonnini, Hist. Nat. Buffon, Ois. xxii. p. 280 (1803-4).

Scolopax pheopus ?, Forster, Descr. Anim. (Lichtenstein), pp. 156, 242 (1844).

Numenius femorahs, Peale, U.S. Expl. Exped. Birds, p. 233, pl. 64. fig. 1 (1848) ; Hartlaub, Arch.
f. Naturgesch. 1852, i. p. 120; id. Journ. f. Orn. 1854, p. 170; Cassin, U.S. Expl. Exped.,
Mamm. & Orn. p. 316, pl. xxxvii. (1858) ; G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Isl. p.50 (1859) ; Finsch
& Hartlaub, Beitr. Fauna Centralpolyn. p. 175 (1867) ; Ridgway, Am. Nat. 1874, p. 435 ;
Finsch, Ibis, 1880, pp. 220, 432; Tristram, Ibis, 1881, p. 251; id. op. cit. 1883, p.47; Layard,
Ibis, 1882, p. 533°.

Numenius pheopus (partim), Schlegel, Mus. Pays-Bas, Scolopaces, p. 93 (1864).

Numenius australis, Dole, Proc. Bost. Soc. N. H. xii. p. 303 (1869); id. Hawaiian Alman. 1879,
p- 51 (nec Gould).

Numenius taitensis, Coues, Check-List, ed. 2, p. 105 (1882); id. Key N. Am. B. ed. 2, p. 646
(1884).

Great credit is due to Peale, the chief ornithologist of the United States Exploring
Expedition under Commander Wilkes, for detecting what is unquestionably the most
remarkable character of the present species, namely, that afforded by the shafts of some
of the flank-feathers, which are elongated and devoid of barbs near the tip. At the same
time he seems to have been mistaken in supposing that the bird had not been described
before, even though this peculiarity escaped the observation of Forster and of Latham,
as it may well have done. ‘There can be scarcely any doubt that it was the bird found
on Otaheiti and the adjacent islands, and taken by the former authority to be the
Scolopax pheopus of Linneus, while the latter more properly recognized it as a new
species of Curlew. ‘The specimen he described from Sir Joseph Banks’s collection has
of course long since perished, and it is certainly true that no other is known to have
been since brought from Tahiti, where it was called by the natives “Tevrea” or

* By an error in a second passage on this page, and also in a footnote of the page following, the epithet
jfemoralis appears as tibialis.

“'Teweh,” and where it inhabited marshy places, being sometimes found also on the
hills; but there is nothing in Lathatn’s description of his ‘ Otaheite Curlew ” incon-
sistent with its being specifically identical with that subsequently described by Peale
from Vincennes Island, one of the Paumotu archipelago; while the latter, according to
Drs. Finsch and Hartlaub, was obtained also by Dr. Graffe on the Phceenix group, as
well as by Dr. Finsch himself on the Marshall and Kingsmill Islands, and Canon
Tristram’s collection contains specimens from the Marquesas and from Fanning Island.
Moreover, the claims of no other species to the title of Nwmenius tahitiensis have been
established, for that described and figured by Cassin under the name in the Ornitho-
logical Appendix to Commodore Perry’s Expedition to Japan (p. 228, plate) is
assuredly a very different bird, not at all agreeing with Latham’s diagnosis. It is
probable that Schlegel in assigning the Nwmenius femoralis of Peale and Cassin to
NV. pheopus had no specimens of the former before him, or he would hardly have
declared them to be merely “individus & plumes des jambes usées et depourvus de
barbules.” Indeed there is no evidence to show that the present species, whatever be
the trivial name assigned to it, frequents the western part of the Pacific Ocean. Its
first appearance in North America was recorded by Mr. Ridgway in 1874, an example
having been taken by Mr. Bischoff at Fort Kenai on Kadiak Island in May 1869.
The authors of ‘The Water-Birds of North America’ were, in 1884, under the
impression that the occurrence of this specimen at a distance of some 5000 miles from
its presumed habitat, “in a locality so remote and so unlike its natural haunt, can
only be regarded as being something purely accidental.” ‘They did not then know
that four years before Mr. Nelson had procured one of a pair of “ Bristle-thighed
Curlews”’ (as the species has now been called) in Alaska, That gentleman writes
(op. cit. p. 121) :—“ On May 24, 1880, while I was shooting Black Brant, a pair of
these birds settled near by on a rising stretch of land covered with large tussocks.
They uttered a loud whistling call-note very much like that of hudsonicus, but some-
thing in their general appearance led me to stalk and secure one of the birds. To my
gratification it was a Bristle-thighed Curlew, and I made great. efforts to secure the
mate, which had stopped a hundred yards or so beyond. As she raised on my approach
I fired at long range and the bird fell mortally hurt on a distant hill-side, where it was
lost amid a host of large tussocks.

“The specimen secured was a male in fine plumage, and this is the second known
instance of the bird’s occurrence on our shores, the former record resting on the capture
of a specimen at Kadiak Island by Bischoff, as announced by Mr. Ridgway in the
‘American Naturalist’ for July 1874, under the name of Nuwmenius femoralis, Peale.
Nothing is known of its habits in America, but the presence of the pair at the date
mentioned in the vicinity of St. Michael’s would indicate that it nests, at least occasion-
ally, in Alaska... .. Dr. Streets also found them very abundant on Palmyra Island,
but only a few were seen on the other islands of the Fanning group.”

That Mr. Nelson’s opinion will be proved correct there can scarcely be a doubt.
Numenius tahitiensis may be regarded as having its home in Alaska, and migrating

southward in autumn to the Sandwich Islands and other groups in the Eastern half of
the Pacific Ocean. As a species it is probably not very numerous, though Peale
writes that the birds were abundant on Vincennes Island “‘in the month of September,
when they had become exceedingly fat by feeding on the berries of a species of
Canthium(?), then very plenty. The birds were rather tame, and uttered a clear
plaintive whistle when flushed.”

Judge Dole, in his Catalogue, only remarks of this species, referring it to WV. australis :
“Curlew. Not very common.” Dr. Stejneger (Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1887, pp. 83, 84)
gives a short account of some specimens sent him by Mr. Knudsen from Kauai, in
which he says :—

“The bristly thigh-feathers of V. femoralis are quite characteristic, and are not due
to abrasion, as has been supposed by some authors, for they are certainly present in a
quite young bird collected by Mr. Charles H. Townsend in Alaska during the summer
of 1885.”

Dr. Stejneger also states, in another contribution (Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1888,
p. 97) :—“ Four additional specimens from Niihau show that this bird, originally added
to the Hawaiian avifauna by Mr. Knudsen, was by no means an accidental stranger to
the islands. In his letter to me he remarks, however, that the “ Kioea”’ is a rare bird
there, though almost always to be found in the localities affected by it, but he does not
believe it to nest in the islands.”

“The bristly elongation of the shafts of thigh-feathers are well developed in all four
specimens. I may add that all four specimens are molting their inner primaries.”

The Kioea ! is, I believe, generally distributed throughout the Hawaiian group, but
in no locality is it plentiful. I myself obtained specimens on Molokai and Oahu, and
heard of it on Hawaii and Maui, while Dr. Stejneger, as will be seen above, received
others from Kauai and Niihau. Near Kaunakakai, on Molokai, I obtained examples
out of a flock of a dozen birds, my kind host Mr. R. W. Meyer having driven me
down to the beach at a spot which he knew to be frequented by them. I could
not ascertain that the Kioea nests in the Islands; some natives, however, assured me
that it does.

Description.— Adult. The crown is clear brown, with a pale streak down the centre
and another over the eye. ‘The upper parts are dark brown, mottled with cinnamon-
brown and ochreous; upper tail-coverts cinnamon; tail slightly darker, inclining to
tawny and barred with dark brown ; neck, breast, and abdomen pale buff; fore part of
breast and flanks tinged with cinnamon and finely streaked and barred with brown ;
under tail-coverts pale cinnamon ; primaries brown, shafts white.

The feathers on the flanks have the shafts (which are white) much elongated, in some
cases projecting fully an inch beyond the barbs.

* Judge Dole apples the name spelt Kiowea to Cheetoptila angustipluma, whereas Mr. Knudsen gives Kioea as
the name of this bird—this latter being, I believe, the correct orthography.

Dimensions.—Total length 16°50 inches, wing from carpal joint 9, culmen 3°26,
tarsus 2°25, middle toe with claw 1:75, tail 3°50.

Another example measures 17°75 and has the bill 0:40 inch longer, wing and tarsus
also slightly longer; primaries black, shafts white. In other respects the specimens are
similar,

pl. 5¥

Sey | HIS
TT. . 7

FWP rohawk delet hth. West, Newman rump

TOTANUS INCANUS

TOTANUS INCANUS.

ULILI.

« Ash-coloured Snipe,” Latham, Gen. Synops. 11. p. 154 (1785).

Scolopax incana, Gmelin, Syst. Nat. 1. p. 658 (1788) ; Latham, Ind. Orn. i. p. 724 (1790).

“ Le Chevalier cindré,’’ Sonnini, Hist. Nat. Buffon, Ois. xxii. p. 101 (1803-4).

Totanus incanus, Vieillot, N. Dict. d’Hist. Nat. vi. p. 400 (1816) ; id. Encycl. Méth. p. 1098
(1823) ; Stephens, Shaw, Zool. xii. pt. 1, p. 156 (1824) ; Schlegel, Mus. Pays-Bas, Scolopaces,
p- 74 (partim) (1864) ; Sclater, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1878, p. 851; id. Rep. Voy. ‘ Challenger,’
Birds, p. 99 (1881) ; Seebohm, Geogr. Distr. Charadriide, p. 360 (1887) ; Ramsay, Tab. List
Austral. B. ed. 2, p. 20 (1888).

Scolopax solitaris, Bloxam, Voy. ‘ Blonde,’ p. 252 (1826).

Totanus pedestris, Lesson, Traité d’Orn. p. 552, partim (1881).

Totanus fuliginosus, Gould, Voy. ‘ Beagle,’ Birds, p. 130 (1841) ; Gray & Mitchell, Gen. B. p. 578,
pl. 154, partim (1846).

Scolopaxy undulata, Forster, Descr. Anim. (ed. Lichtenstein), p. 173 (1844).

Totanus polynesia, Peale, U.S. Expl. Exped., Birds, p. 287, pl. 65. fig. 1; Hartlaub, Arch. f. Natur-
gesch. 1852, i. p. 120; id. Journ. f. Orn. 1854, p. 169.

Totanus oceanicus, Lesson, Compl. Buffon, p. 244 (1847); Cassin, U.S. Expl. Exped., Mamm. &
Orn. p. 818 (1858).

Totanus solitarius, Hartlaub, Journ. f. Orn. 1854, p. 170.

Gambetta fuliginosa and G. oceanica, Bonaparte, Comptes Rendus, xliii. p. 597 (1856).

Heteroscelus brevipes, Baird, Expl. & Surv. R. R. Route Pacif. ix. pt. ii. pp. 728 and 734 (1858) ;
id. B. N. Am. pl. 88 (1860) ; Dall & Bannister, Tr. Chicago Acad. 1869, p. 293 (nec Vieillot).

Totanus (Gambetta) incanus, G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Isl. p. 50 (1859).

Totanus undulatus, Verreaux, Rev. et Mag. Zool. 1860, p. 437.

Totanus brevipes, Sclater & Salvin, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1870, p. 323 (nec Vieillot).

Heteroscelus incanus, Salvin, Trans. Zool. Soc. ix. p. 503 (1876) ; Elliott, Monogr. Seal Isl. Alaska,
p. 180 (1882) ; Baird, Brewer, & Ridgway, Water-B. N. Am. i. p. 290 (partim) (1884).
Heteractitis incanus, Stejneger, Auk, 1884, p. 236 ; id. Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus. no. 29, p. 182 (1885) ;
id. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1887, p. 133; Turner, Auk, 1885, p. 157; id. Contr. N. H. Alaska,

p- 148 (1886); Nelson (& Henshaw), Rep. N. H. Coll. Alaska, p. 118 (1887).

[N.B.—The above list of synonyms and references is based on that given by Dr. Stejneger in his
“Results of Ornithological Explorations in the Commander Islands and in Kamtschatka’ (Bull.
U.S. Nat. Mus, no. 29), as he seems to be the first author who clearly shewed the distinction
between this species and the nearly allied Totanus brevipes of Vicillot. It might yet be extended. |

Tuts species, first made known by Latham from specimens in the Banksian collection
obtained at Himeo and Palmerston Island, has been the cause of much perplexity to
ornithologists, as the above long list of synonyms will show. According to Forster it

was also met with at Otaheite, Uliatea, and Tonga Tabu, and he seems to have discri-
minated between it and the ally with which it has often been confounded, as both are
said by him to have occurred at the island last named. It has, however, been made
pretty clear, chiefly by the labours of Dr. Stejneger, that the present species prevails
over the eastern part of the Pacific Ocean, breeding in Alaska; while the true
Totanus brevipes has its home in Asia, and during the winter months overruns the
more westerly shores and islands of the same ocean. ‘Thereisno doubt that 7. incanus
visits the Sandwich Islands, and as yet there is no authority for believing that 7. brevipes
occurs there. JI met with the former on several parts of the Kona coast on Hawaii,
where it is usually seen in pairs.

The main points of distinction, according to Dr. Stejneger, are as follows:—In the
larger H. incana the nasal groove extends to one third of the exposed part of the
culmen, in H. brevipes only to half. In the barred stage of the former (presumably
the breeding-plumage) the back is greyish, the middle of the abdomen and the under
tail-coverts distinctly and uniformly barred with blackish grey; in the same state of the
latter the back is browner and the other parts mentioned pure white. In the unbarred
stage the grey and brown tints similarly prevail.

A new genus, Heteroscelus, was proposed by Baird for these forms; but this being
preoccupied in entomology, Dr. Stejneger suggested in its place Heteractitis. I preter,
however, still to include them under Totanus.

Judge Dole’s note on 7. incanus is :—‘‘ Frequent the shores singly or in pairs. Are
called Ulili by the natives, from their note, which is a clear utterance of that word.”
Mr. Nelson, who gives a good account of it in his ‘Report upon Natural History
Collections. made in Alaska’ (p. 118), describes it as an unsuspicious bird with a flute-
like note, found solitary or three or four together on rocky parts of the coast; in fact
its habits appear to be very much what those of the Common Redshank would be in
an equally desolate region. :

The figure in the background is that of a bird which has not completed the first
year and shews signs of immaturity: the wings are not fully grown.

CALIDRIS ARENARIA

HUNAKAIL.

Tringa arenaria, Linneus, Syst. Nat. ed. 12,i. p. 251 (1766); Gay, Hist. Chile, Zoologia, 1.
p. 425 (1847); Schlegel, Mus. Pays-Bas, Scolopaces, p. 57 (1865); Philippi, An. Univ. Chile,
Xxxl. p. 276 (1868) ; Wiglesworth, Aves Polynesiz, p. 64 (1891).

Calidris arenaria, Cassin, U.S. Nav. Astron. Exped. 8. Hemisph. ii. p. 194 (1855) ; Baird, Proc.
Acad. N.S. Philad. 1859, p. 306; Suckley, Rep. Expl. Railr. Mississ. xii. Bk. ii. p. 74:1 (1860) ;
Sclater & Salvin, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1868, p. 176; iid. op. cit. 1870, p. 823; Dall & Bannister,
Trans. Chicago Acad. Se. 1. p. 292 (1869) ; Finsch, Abh. Naturw. Ver. Bremen, ii. p. 65
(1872) ; Lawrence, Mem. Bost. Soc. N. H. ii. p. 808 (1874); Salvin, Trans. Zool. Soe. ix.
p- 503 (1876) ; Finsch, Ibis, 1880, p. 331; id. Mitth. Orn. Ver. Wien, 1884, p. 127; Sharpe,
Proc. Zool. Soc. 1881, p. 16; Nelson, Cruise ‘Corwin,’ p. 88 (1883) ; id. (& Henshaw), Rep.
N. H. Coll. Alaska, p. 115 (1887); James, List Chil. Birds, p. 13 (1885) ; Turner, Contr.
N. H. Alaska, p. 189 (1886) ; Taczanowski, Orn. Pérou, ii. p. 853 (1886) ; Stejneger, Proc.
U.S. Nat. Mus. 1887, p. 82; Oustalet, Miss. Sc. du Cap Horn, Oiseaux, p. B. 296 (1891).

[Except the first, the above citations refer mainly to the West Coast of America, the Sandwich
Tslands, and the Galapagos. |

To Mr. Knudsen we are indebted for the transmission of the first specimens of the
Sanderling from the Hawaiian Islands. They were taken, as recorded by Dr. Stejneger
(Joc. supra cit.), on the island of Kauai, probably in the winter months. It does not
seem to be a common bird in that region, and I was only able to procure one example,
for which I am indebted to Mr. Francis Gay, who shot it on the island of Niihau. It
is worthy of notice that though met with on the coasts of Japan and China, and
occasionally on the Commander Islands and at Sitka, whence it becomes more common
to the eastward, this species did not come under the observation of Mr. Nelson in the
southern part of Alaska during his stay there between 1877 and 1881. It was, how-
ever, observed in numbers by Mr. Dall at the mouth of the Yukon, both in spring and
autumn. It passes down the whole western coast of America to Cape Horn, and has
been found in the Galapagos, but the only unquestionable record of its occurrence in
Polynesia seems to be that of Dr. Finsch. The statement of Temminck (Man. d’Orn.
iv. p. 849) that it had been found in the Sunda Islands and in New Guinea, though
widely copied by authors, and by some extended generally to “the islands of the
Malay Archipelago” (Seebohm, Geogr. Distr. Charadriide, p. 432), is not borne out
T

by recent experience.

is no proper evidence that the species appears on other (aoe in ihe Thale we

or Papuan areas. Two examples, however, from New South Wales, a Heteelty hitherto
unrecorded, are » contained i in the Derby Museum at Liverpool.

PW. Frohawk del. et ith

pussencqncnte

nnyyaeyeeanre

HIMANTOPUS KNUDSENL. o¢.

‘West, Newman imp.

HIMANTOPUS KNUDSENLI,

AKO’.

Himantopus nigricollis?, Pelzeln, Verh. z.-b. Gesellsch. Wien, 1873, p. 159 (nec Vieillot).

Himantopus candidus, Dole, Hawaiian Alman. 1879, p. 52 (nec Bonnaterre).

Himantopus knudseni, Stejneger, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1887, p. 81, pl. vi. fig. 2 (errore kandsent
in plate) ; id. op. cit. 1888, p. 96; id. op. cit. 1889, p. 381.

As cited above, Dr. Stejneger, to whom Mr. Knudsen sent specimens from Kauai,
described this bird as new in 1887, giving woodcuts by which it may be easily sepa-
rated from H. meavicanus ; his remarks, diagnosis, and table of relative measurements I
here quote, giving a figure from an example in my collection. He says:—_

“‘ This species is most nearly related to the two American species, H. brasiliensis and
H. mexicanus, and differs from the last one in about the same degree as do the species
mentioned inter se, H. mexicanus being in a measure intermediate as far as the relative
amount of black and white in the coloration of the plumage is concerned.

“ H. knudseni, which I take great pleasure of naming in honor of Mr. Valdemar
Knudsen, who made the interesting collections upon which the present paper is based,
needs only comparison with H. mexicanus, and the most salient differences have already
been pointed out in the diagnosis?. I may add that I have before me 17 specimens
of the latter species, representing very fairly the individual and seasonal variation, as
well as that due to age and sex. ‘The type of H. knudseni is evidently an old male.

“The accompanying cuts (see Plate vi.) explain at a glance the different distribution
of black and white in the two species, and make a more detailed comparison super-
fluous. Suffice it to say, that in the whole series of H. meaicanus I have not found a
single individual that even approaches H. knudseni, and in none of them, old or young,
is the black mottling on the fore neck even indicated, the border-line between the
black of the hind neck and the white of the sides being quite abrupt.

‘““The coloration of the tail is very peculiar, as already described in the diagnosis.
Only in a single specimen of H. meaicanus (No. 84669, from Florida) is there any
approach to the pattern exhibited by the type of H. knudseni, but the dusky markings
are not so large, nor so dark and well-defined. It may be, therefore, that these marks
have no diagnostic value.

* The natives on Molokai and Oahu gave me the name as ‘“‘ Kukuluaia,” but I expect that “ Aco,” given by
Mr. Knudsen, is more correct.
* Infra, p. 4.

“In regard to the dimensions, it will be seen from the subjoined table of measure-
ments of adult H. mexicanus compared with those of H. knudseni, as given above, that
in the latter the billis 4 mm. longer than maximum of the former, the tarsus 7 mm.
longer, and the tail-feathers 13 mm. longer, while the wing is slightly shorter than that
of the largest H. meaicanus. ‘The extraordinary length of the tail in the Hawaiian
bird is especially remarkable, it being more than 25 per centum longer than the
average of five adult males of the North American species.

“The occurrence of a Stilt in the Hawaiian Islands was first recorded by Dr. A. v.
Pelzeln (/. ¢.), who named the bird /. nigricollis, with a query. The specimen was
a female, collected at Honolulu, February 21, 1870, by Mr. H. Kraus, who noted
the colour of the iris as ‘red.’ Dr. O. Finsch (J. c.), during his recent visit to the
islands, observed the Stilt on Maui, and now we have it, thanks to the liberality of
Mr. Knudsen, from Kauai. This gentleman states that the name by which it is known
to the natives is ‘ Aeo,’

“* Measurements of Himantopus mexicanus.

d 2
U.S. Nat. | Hes Ete
Mus., ae Collector. ie Locality. Date. = 3 i 2 ;
i me |G | 2 | 2 lee
Hee | 2 a | 8 |S"
Flea |a |e {=
€4669....| Maynard. Saket] Jellies 222| 68 | 66
30332....) Marsh. g ad.| Jamaica. Apr. —, 1863. | 200| 64 | 66 |114] 45
59754....) Sumichr. 3g ad.| Tehuantepec, Mexico.) Aug. 4,1869. |227| 69 | 68 | 114] 46
17274....| Xantus. 3 ad.| Sierra de Santiago, | Jan. — 1860. | 228| 74 | 66 | 112
Lower California.
79839....| Henshaw. g ad.| Colorado. Sunes les 234) 70 | 71 | 113} 46
WME oo | Serna, Q ad.| Sierra de Santiago, | Jan. —, 1860. | 220| 74 | 63 | 102) 42
Lower California.
80998.. .) Ober. @ eels || Sig, “Wovens, Mee | oe cca 214) 70 | 66 |107} 48
Indies.
1154....) Baird. 2 ad.) Cape May, N. J. July 21, 1843. | 215| 68 | 65 |107)| 43”

The same author, in a second paper, refers to this bird as follows :—

“Two specimens from Niihau confirm the validity of this species. The peculiar
coloration of the tail alluded to in the original description is also found in these, though
less pronounced in No. 113463. The additional specimens, however, present another
very strongly marked character which I did not mention in describing the type speci-
men, because most of the feathers in question were wanting, viz., that the longest upper
tail-coverts have the inner webs entirely black, and that the down surrounding the
uropygial gland is blackish. In some of the specimens of ZH. mewxicanus the upper

tail-coverts are more or less suffused with light grey, but I have found nothing like the
broad median black stripe covering the base of the tail in H. knudsend.

“The type specimen, having a greenish black back, is undoubtedly a male, while the
two Niihau birds appear to be females, having the back brownish.

‘The appended table of dimensions corroborates the deduction previously made as to
the relative proportions of the two species. Their wings and toes are of the same
length, but H. knudseni has longer bill, tarsus, and tail.

“< Measurements.

g ee)
ee Sex | ee) We
va Ne | Collector. ae Locality. | Date. | eal eeleoe

ob | & | 2] 2 iss

deh |) ee || FE. || eis

Fla|al as ja
110024 ..| Knudsen *,.|( gad.) Kauai, Hawaiian Islands ...... | 232) 87 | 75 | 121) 47
118463 ..; do. (@)ad.| Niihau, Hawaiian Islands) ...... 227) 81 | 80 | 117) 46
113464 ..| do. ( @ jad. dos a ge A 221| 80 | 74 [1138] 45”

* Type.

Dr. Stejneger, to whom I sent all my specimens for inspection, has recently written
to me as follows :—“TI have carefully compared them with the type, with which they
agree in all essential points. The coloration seems to be most reliable, especially the
relative amount of black and white on head and neck, clearly shown in the figure
accompanying my first paper. ‘The dimensions of bill and feet give less definite results,
as might be expected in birds of this kind, since the individual variation in these exag-
gerated parts is so enormous; but you will find that the length of the tail (middle tail-
feathers to base between them) is constantly larger in the Hawaiian birds. Although
most of the specimens of the latter are females, the measurements of the tail-feathers
average considerably over 80 mm., while in the American birds the average of about
an equal number of g and @? is about 66 mm., with a maximum in the ¢ not
reaching the minimum of the @ of H. knudseni. ‘There is therefore not the slightest
doubt in my mind as to the specific distinctness of the latter.”

Judge Dole says:—“ Legs very long, and bright pink in colour. -Common in ponds
and swamps all over the group. Generally wades, but is able to swim. Is not very
shy, and often troubles sportsmen by keeping just out of gunshot, and warning other
birds away by its peculiar cry of defiance. It carries its legs straight out behind when
it flies.”

I obtained specimens near Koko Head, some few miles from Honolulu, also near
Kaunakakai on Molokai; at the latter place in June I found young in the down, of

whose presence I was made aware by the noisy cries and behaviour of the parent birds,
who swept to and fro quite near me in their anxiety. I heard that it was fairly
abundant at some lagoons near Kekaha on Kauai, and as Dr. Finsch observed it on
Maui’, it is doubtless distributed throughout the entire group, as might have been
expected.

“ Piagnosis.—Similar to Himantopus meaxicanus (Miuu.), from North America, but
with the black of the head extending further down on the forehead and occupying the
proximal half of the lores; black on neck extending to the sides and the front of the
neck, except the middle line, mottled with black, the feathers being narrowly
tipped with black; tail-feathers broadly and abruptly tipped with greenish black,
nearly the entire outer web of the outer pair being of the same colour ; tail-feathers,
with the outer webs, light smoky gray, and the inner ones white, except the middle
pair, which has both webs light smoky gray; bill, tarsus, and tail considerably longer
than in H. meaicanus.

“ Dimensions of type specimen.—Wing 232 mm., tail-feathers 87 mm., exposed
culmen 75 mm.; tarsus 121 mm., middle toe with claw, 47 mm.”’ ,

* Dr. O. Finsch (‘ Ibis,’ 1880, p. 79) says :—“ Here [at the lagoon of Kahalui on Maui] I also observed
Actites incana, a Charadrius (like C. hiaticula), a Himantopus, which Mr. Dole designates H. candidus, but
which seems to be identical with the American species, and a Snipe like our G‘allinago scolopacina.”

STREPSILAS INTERPRES.
AKEKEKE.

Tringa interpres, Linneeus, Syst. Nat. ed. 12, i. p. 248 (1766).

Strepsilas interpres, Uliger, Prodr. p. 263 (1811) ; Darwin, Voy. ‘ Beagle,’ Birds, p. 182 (1841) ;
Peale, U.S. Expl. Exped., Birds, p. 238 (1848); Hartlaub, Arch. f. Naturgesch. 1852, i. p. 185;
id. Journ. f. Orn. 1854, p.170; Schlegel, Mus. Pays-Bas, Cursores, p. 44 (1865); Von Pelzeln,
Reise ‘ Novara,’ Vogel, p. 117 (1865) ; Finsch & Hartlaub, Beitr. Orn. Centralpolyn. p. 197
(1867) ; Dole, Proc. Bost. Soc. N. H. xii. p. 804 (1869) ; id. Hawaiian Alman. 1879, p. 51;
Salvin, Tr. Zool. Soe. ix. p. 502 (1876) ; Wiglesworth, Aves Polynesiz, p. 63 (1891).

Tringa oahuensis, Bloxam, Voy. ‘ Blonde,’ p. 251 (1826).

Cinclus interpres, G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Isl. p. 48 (1859).

Arenaria interpres, Stejneger, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. xii. p. 380 (1889).

[Except as regards the first two citations the above refer to this widely-ranging species only in
relation to the Sandwich Islands and some other localities in the Pacific Ocean. The list could

be easily extended. |

Tue first occurrence of this well-known and almost cosmopolitan species in the Sandwich
Islands is that noted by Mr. Bloxam, to whom, however, it must have been unfamiliar,
for he described and named it, as if new, Ziringa oahuensis—no doubt from having
met with it on the island on which Honolulu stands. Yet, beyond stating that the
natives called the birds “ Korea,” and that they are “gregarious,” he added nothing.
Judge Dole described an example shot at Kapaa on the island of Kauai, and says:—
“They frequent the shores, but are often found on grass-lands.” From the same island
Mr. Knudsen sent two specimens to Dr. Stejneger with the native name of “ Akekeke” ;
but in a former paper (Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus. 1887, p. 82) that name is also applied to
the Sanderling (Calidris arenaria), which rejoices in the more poetical and yet very
apposite name of Hunakai, signifying “ Sea-foam.”

I shot three examples when in the Sandwich Islands—two on the island of Oahu,
one on Molokai. The dates varied from April to June.

(Me rind aaa
ih teal

Re ade Ie NE ASG » WR Te

+ Sink lever seegs

CHARADRIUS FULVUS.

KOLEA.

“ Plover, nearly the same as our whistling plover,” Ellis, Narrat. Voy. Cook & Clerke, ii. p. 143
(1782).

“Plover .. . very like the whistling plover of Europe,” King, Voy. Pacif. Ocean, iii. p. 120 (1784).

“Fulvous Plover,” Latham, Gen. Synops. iii. p. 211 (1785).

* Golden Plover,” Latham, Gen. Synops. i. p. 194 (partim) (1785).

Charadrius fulvus, Gmelin, Syst. Nat. i. p. 687 (1788); Latham, Ind. Orn. p. 747 (1790) ;
Donndorff, Orn. Beytr. i. p. 1092 (1794); Tiedemann, Anat. Naturgesch. Vog. ii. p. 434
(1814) ; Wagler, Syst. Av. (Charadrius, sp. 37) (1827); G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Isl. p. 47
(1859) ; id. Hand-l. iii. p. 14 (1869) ; Dole, Proc. Bost. Soc. N. H. xii. p. 304 (1869) ;
id. Hawaiian Alman. 1879, p. 50; Streets, Contr. Nat. Hist. Hawaiian and Fanning Isl. p. 16
(1877) ; Seebohm, Geogr. Distr. Charadriide, p. 99 (1887) ; Wiglesworth, Aves Polynesiz,
p- 63 (1891).

Charadrius pluvialis (partim), Gmel. Syst. Nat. i. p. 688 (1788) ; Latham, Ind. Orn. p. 740 (1790) ;
Peale, U.S. Expl. Exped., Birds, p. 239 (1848); Von Kittlitz, Denkwiird. Reise, i. pp. 141, 187
(1858) ; Coinde, Rev. Zool. 1860, p. 400; Von Pelzeln, Reise ‘Novara,’ Vogel, p. 115 (1865).

Charadrius wanthocheilus, Cassin, U.S. Expl. Exped., Mamm. & Orn. p. 325 (1858) (gu. Wagler ?).

Charadrius taitensis, Lesson, Man. d’Orn. ii. p. 321 (1828).

Charadrius glaucopus, J. R. Forster, Descr. Anim. p. 176 (1844).

Charadrius auratus orientalis, Temminck & Schlegel, Faun. Jap., Aves, p. 104, pl. xii. (18 ?).

Charadrius virginianus, Hartlaub, Arch. f. Naturgesch. 1852, i. p. 121 (partim).

Pluvialis longipes, “Temm.,” P. xanthocheilos, et P. fulvus, Bonaparte, Comptes Rendus, xiii.
p. 417 (1856).

Pluvialis fulvus, Schlegel, Mus. Pays-Bas, Cursores, p. 50 (1865).

Charadrius domimcus fulvus, Ridgway, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1880, p. 198; Nelson, Cruise ‘Corwin,’
1881, p. 84 (1883) ; Stejneger, Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus. no. 29, p. 104 (1885); id. Proc. U.S. Nat.
Mus. 1887, pp. 80, 126; id. op. cit. xii. p. 880 (1889).

[The foregoing references chiefly relate to localities in the North Pacific Ocean.]

Since the Sandwich Islands were first discovered it has been well known to ornitho-
logists that one of the forms of the Golden Plover frequented their shores at certain
seasons. Hllis and King both mention having met with the bird, and most subsequent
voyagers in that part of the Pacific have also observed it; while of late years the exact
species has been ascertained, and proves to be not the ordinary American C. virginicus,
but the Asiatic form (C. fulvus), the breeding-range of which just crosses the American
boundary-line into Alaska. Specimens sent by Mr. Knudsen from Kauai, and those
in the United States National Museum, agree with Asiatic and Alaskan examples, as
do mine.

Judge Dole states that the plovers appear at the end of August and leave again early in
May, and that the flocks “always assemble at the eastern or north-eastern shore of the

Islands preparatory to starting.” These flocks have often been encountered on the
high seas, and considerable interest attaches to Professor Forbes’s account of one such
instance recorded by Professor Newton in a communication to ‘ Nature’ for 1879 (vol. xix.
p. 580). The latter says, speaking of the Sandwich Islands :—* Prof. George Forbes

.. informs me that when there, on the occasion of the transit of Venus, he shot
scores of these birds, and that his friend Capt. Cator, R.N., of H.M.S. Scout, having
sailed thence, was overtaken in mid-ocean by them, flying ina direct line for Vancouver’s
Island, on arriving at which he found they had already reached it.” ‘This would imply
that these migrants are birds which breed in or near Alaska, and have nothing in
common with the bands that pour down by another route from Asia to the South
Pacific, reaching far within the confines of Australasia.

In April, shortly before their departure, plovers are in the best condition, and
indeed become so fat that they frequently burst on falling to the ground when shot:
I met with them, however, in the greatest numbers in December on the plains of
Waimea, where they may be seen in thousands, and their clear musical note may be
heard on every side. During a tour along the sea-coast of Hawaii—from Kawaihae to
Kiholo—made in the same month with my friend Mr. F. Spencer we had excellent
plover-shooting, waiting for the birds as evening fell and shooting them as they came
down to the shore to feed. I think the Golden Plover is the finest bird for the table
of all those found in the Hawaiian Islands, and resident sportsmen there agree with
me: in December, when the plains are covered with large grubs called by the natives
“‘noko,” the birds feed largely on them and fatten amain.

In olden times the islanders were very expert in snaring them, but like other of
their former arts the method has been forgotten, or the present generation is too
lazy to practice it. I am indebted to Mr. F. Spencer for one of the “ Kolea stones”
used for the capture, which is a piece of smooth lava, grooved to receive a hair-noose.
The natives used to set many hundreds of these snares, and on the authority of
Mr. Spencer enormous numbers were caught, the women and girls being quite as
expert as the men at the practice—a remark which also applies to the capture of the
various forest-birds described in this work.

:
—_.

PAT Gee WAI AU

FWFrohawk delet lith. West, Newman imp. :

FULICA ALAL,

ALAI KEOKEO.

Fulica atra, Bloxam, Voy. ‘ Blonde,’ p. 251 (1826) (nec Linnzeus).

Fulica alai, Peale, U.S. Expl. Exped., Birds, p. 224, pl. Ixii. fig. 2* (1848) ; Hartlaub, Arch. f.
Naturgesch. 1852, 1. pp. 119, 137; id. J. f. O. 1853, Ber. vii. Jahresversamml. deutsch. Orn. Ges.
pp. 75, 89; Cassin, U.S. Expl. Exped., Mamm. & Orn. p. 306, pl. xxxvi.¥ (1858) ; id. Proc.
Acad. Philad. 1862, p. 822; G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Isl. p. 54 (1859) ; Sclater, Ibis, 1871,
p. 3861; id. P.Z.S. 1878, p. 851; id. Rep. Voy. ‘ Challenger,’ Birds, p.99; Pelzeln, Verh. z.-b.
Gesellsch. Wien, 1873, p. 159; Streets, Contr. N. H. Haw. & Fanning Isl. p. 21 (1877);
Finsch, Ibis, 1880, p. 78 ; Stejneger, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1887, p. 80; id. op. cit. 1888, p. 95.

Fulica alae, Dole, Proc. Boston Soc. N. H. xu. p. 802 (1869) ; id. Hawaiian Alman. 1879, p. 54.

* Figure notabiles.

Buioxam appears to have been the first ornithologist to notice a Coot on the Sandwich
Islands, though he imagined it to belong to the common European species. The
credit of distinguishing it from the other members of the genus belongs to Peale,
who, while he was somewhat doubtful of his own correctness, named it Mulica alat,
from the native appellation of “Alai” or “ Alae,” which is also applied to the
Hawaiian Water-Hen, and is evidently tised indiscriminately for birds of this description.
The chief points of distinction relied on are the smaller size and more slender beak ;
but Dr. Finsch, who observed both Coots and Water-Hens at Waike, Kahalui in
Maui, and Waimanalo in Oahu, states that the pale greyish colour of the feet, without
any greenish band on the joint of the knee, constitutes a further mark of differentiation ;
adding that the cry is not so loud or harsh as in the European bird, nor are the eggs
so large.

Peale found this species not uncommon on marshy creeks and in the taro patches,
Dr. Finsch on the lagoons. ‘The latter author and Judge Dole agree in saying that
the habits are similar to those of its congeners; while the Judge further states that
‘the frontal knob” is “ivory-white, instead of pale blue, as Peale gives it.”

It was also obtained by Stimpson, of the N. Pacific Surveying and Exploring
Expedition of the United States, at Hilo, in Hawaii, in 1856, and by H. Kraus
during the Austrian Mission to E. Asia and America in 1870.

I regret to say that I did not obtain examples when in the Sandwich Islands;
Dr. Stejneger, however, received two from Mr. Knudsen, procured in Kauai, and ..was
thus able to corroborate his statement already made in 1887, that the bird, which is

IGR

abundant on the southern islands, occurs also on the northernmost. With regard to
it being a distinct species, Dr. Stejneger wrote to me quite recently :—“‘ In regard to
Fulica alai I would say that the difference between it and the American species is
very much greater than between the Gallinules. I consider it an offspring of the
American, of course, but now quite specifically distinct.”

Peale describes the bird as follows :—

“ Closely allied to Fulica americana, but smaller, and having a more slender bill;
head and neck black; body dark cinereous, tinged with brown on the back: wings brown,
margined with white; second primary longest, third nearly equal to the second, first
and sixth equal; shafts brown: tail very short, brown, the lower coverts white: bill
reddish white ; the frontal knob pale blue: legs bluish green.

“Total length, 143'5 inches ; wing, from the carpal joint, 73%; inches; bill to the
frontal knob 1,45 inch, including the knob, 2,4, inches; to the corner of the mouth,
1,45 inch ; tarsi, 2 inches; middle toe, including the nail, 358; inches, nail, 4% inch;

ae eee
hind toe, 1;%¢ inch; nail, 3 inch.

FW FProhawk del.et bth.

GALLINULA SANDVICENSIS.

West,Newman imp.

GALLINULA SANDVICENSIS,

ALAE or ALAT.

“Common Water or darker [gu. daker?] hen,’ King, Voy. Pacif. Ocean, iii. p. 120 (1784).

Fulica chloropus, Bloxam, Voy. ‘ Blonde,’ p. 250 (1826) (nec Linn.).

Gallinula chloropus, Peale, U.S. Expl. Exped., Birds, p. 220 (1848) ; Hartlaub, Arch. f. Naturgesch.
1852, 1. pp. 118, 187; Dole, Proc. Boston Soc. N. H. xi. p. 302 (1869) ; id. Hawaiian Alman.
1879, p. 53.

Gallinula ?, G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Isi. p. 53 (1859).

Gallinula galeata, G. R. Gray, Hand-l. B. i. p. 66 (partim) (1871).

Gallinula sandvicensis, Streets, Ibis, 1877, p. 25 (fig. of forehead) ; id. Contr. N. H. Haw. & Fanning
Isl. p. 19 (1877) ; Finsch, Ibis, 1880, p. 78.

“Gallinula galeata sandvicensis,’” Stejueger, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1887, p. 78; id. op. cit. xii.
p- 380 (1889).

AurnoueH King, Bloxam, and Peale all met with this Water-Hen, they did not
distinguish it from the American form of G. chloropus, since called G. galeata; but
in 1877 Dr. Streets endeavoured to show, by means of a full description and figure:of
the forehead in ‘The Ibis,’ that it should be separated as G. sandvicensis. The points
of distinction, however, on which he relied are by no means constant, and, if it were
not for the colour of the front of the tarsi, the bird could hardly claim even sub-
specific rank. his colouring is said by Peale to be “pale crimson blush;” by
Dr. Streets to be “ decided crimson blush ;” and though Dr. Stejneger was at first in-
clined to doubt whether such was invariably the case, Judge Dole has informed me that in
the freshly-killed bird the legs are “salmon-colour ;” while a specimen in my collection
shows unmistakable signs of red coloration on the same parts. In 1890 Dr. Stejneger
received further examples with decidedly red tarsi. Whether, however, the bird is to
be considered a species or subspecies, I have thought it best to figure it under the
above title as an island form of considerable interest, leaving it to those who prefer
doing so to denominate it G. galeata sandvicensis. The habits do not seem to differ
from those of the American or the European Water-Hen.

Dr. Stejneger’s full account is here reproduced; while I may add that there is an
unfinished sketch by W. Ellis among his drawings preserved in the British Museum,
evidently meant to represent this species. The former says (P. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1887,
pes) —

“Mr. Knudsen sends two specimens of this representative form of the American
G. galeata, Licut., which, compared with Streets’ type and typical specimens of

G. galeata, show that the differences between the alleged two species are much
smaller than supposed by the original describer of G. sandvicensis.

“Dr. Streets (d/. cc.) sums up the distinctive characters as follows :—‘[1] The greater
extent of the frontal plate, [2] the shorter wing, [3] the absence of white on the
abdomen and [4] on the under surface of the wing, as well as its reduction to a mere
trace on the margin of the latter, [5] the more robust and different form of the
tarsus, being broader and more rounded in front, [6] as well as the great difference in
the colour of the tarsus, are characters which separate it immediately from G. galeata,
and render its identification easy.’

**(1) There are numerous American specimens in the collection before me which have
just as large frontal shields as the Hawaiian birds, and some have it even larger.

**(2) It will be seen from the table of measurements given below that there is no
difference whatsoever in regard to dimensions or proportions, No. 84683, from Florida,
being, in fact, nearly identical with the type of G. sandvicensis in these respects. I
should remark that the American specimens were picked up at random for measuring,
except the last one, a young male, which was selected as being the largest of the
whole series before me, and the only one with the wing longer than the second
Hawaiian specimen.

(3) The absence or presence of white on the abdomen is simply due to season,
the type of G. sandvicensis being without white markings, while both the birds
collected by Mr. Knudsen have them. Both styles are well matched by American
birds,

“(4) Also in regard to the scarcity of white on the lining of the wing the Hawaiian
specimens are completely matched.

‘¢(5) The tarsus is of the same length in both forms, as shown by the table below.
As to robustness and different form, I can only state that I am unable to discover any
tangible difference.

“‘(6) There remains only the difference in the colour of the tarsus, which is said to
be, in the Hawaiian bird, of ‘a decided crimson blush on the front;’ while in the
American form the tarsus is uniformly ‘yellowish green.” J am, however, somewhat
doubtful as to the stability and value of this character; for in No. 110026 there is
every indication of the tarsus having been green like the toes, and not red like the
lower end of the tibia.

** A very careful comparison with numerous American specimens fails to reveal any
other differences, except, possibly, a somewhat deeper shade of plumbeous on the
lower parts.

‘Tt seems, therefore, that there are no characters upon which to base a specific sepa-
ration; and were it not that the difference in regard to the color of the tarsus may
hold good in the majority of specimens, I should be disinclined to regard the Hawaiian
bird as even subspecifically distinct.

‘The Gallinule is probably a comparatively recent immigrant to the islands from the
American continent, as shown by the very small amount of differentiation, for the

close resemblance to the original stock can hardly be accounted for by any other
supposition.

“ Bloxham, in 1826, mentions ‘ Mulzca chloropus’ as a Hawaiian bird; but he appa-
rently obtained no specimen. Peale, during the United States Exploring Expedition,
obtained a specimen from Oahu, but lost it, and Streets’ specimen was from the
same island. Dr. Finsch (/.¢.), during the summer of 1879, observed the Gallinule in
the lagoons near Waike and Kahalui, Maui, and near Waimanalo (Oahu). Knudsen’s
specimens show that it also occurs on Kauai. ‘This completes, so far as I know, the
published record of this bird on the islands.

‘Mr. Knudsen writes that this species is called by the natives ‘ Alai ula, Red Alai,
as distinguished from ‘ Alai keokeo,’ the coot with the white frontal shield (Mulica
alai). He says that the latter also occurs in Kauai.

“ Comparative Table of Measurements.

a. GALLINULA SANDVICENSIS.

ae 2 |
ex 2S 4 a oS
eas Collector. ae Locality. Date. < ete g i
ob] | gS) 8) 3 lek
& | i[sslas| & [Ss
Ela|o ia | & |e
| mm.; mm mm. / mm. / mm,}/ mm.
110025 ..| Knudsen. | ad. | Kauai, Hawaiian Islands.| ...... 174) 68 | 46 | 26 | 56 | 72
110026 ..| Ditto. ad. WWW, | ee 178| 65 | 44 | 29 | 59 | 70
67361* ..| Streets. ad. | Honolulu, Oahu. Tree ec 168} 63 | 45 | 27 | 55 | 75
| ¥ =
* Type.
b. GALLINULA GALEATA.
|
809112...) Over: GuadeuieNoncserrateWel. 9 | waernsee 169] 63 | 48 | 27 | 58 | 78
84683 ....| Maynard. | @ ad. | Florida. Jan. 3, 1872. |174] 70 | 43 | 26 | &5 | 79
60317 ....| Latimer. adem Rortomrkicos Wa dls is rate: 165| 63 | 44 | 27 | 53 | 71
84684 ....) Nelson. ¢ jun. | Illinois. Aug. 25, 1874. |195] 83 | 40 | 28 | 56 | 81”
|

I regret to say that I obtained but a single specimen, shot near Kiholo, on the
Island of Hawaii; while I failed to note the colour of the tarsus, upon which so much
stress is laid in the foregoing account. The Alae is common in the swampy taro
patches throughout Hawaii, Oahu, Maui, and Kauai, on all of which islands I
personally observed it, though I neglected to secure more examples. Mr. Dole, in his
‘List,’ briefly refers to the derivation of its native name a-lae—burnt forehead—

from a tradition of the Hawaiians of its being the discoverer of fire. This legend is—

so quaint that I quote a translation of it (I believe from the able pen of the Hon.
F. D. Alexander, F.R.G.S.) which appeared some few years back in the ‘ Hawaiian
Almanack ’ :—

“ Origin of Fire-—Maui and Hina dwelt together, and to them were born four sons,
whose names were Maui-mua, Maui-hope, Maui-kiikii, and Maui-o-kalana. These four
were fishermen. One morning, just as the edge of the dawn lifted itself up, Maui-mua
roused his brethren to go fishing. So they launched their canoe from the beach at
Kaupo, on the Island of Maui, where they were dwelling, and proceeded to the fishing-
ground. Having arrived there, they were beginning to fish, when Maui-o-kalana saw
the light of a fire on the shore they had left, and said to his elder brethren: ‘ Behold,
there is a fire burning; whose can this fire be’? And they answered, ‘ Whose
indeed! Let us return to the shore that we may get our food cooked; but first let us
get some fish.’ So, after they had obtained some fish, they turned toward the shore,
and when the canoes touched the beach Maui-mua leaped ashore and ran toward the
spot where the fire was burning. Now, the curly-tailed Alae (mud-hen) were the
keepers of the fire, and when they saw him coming, they scratched the fire out and
flew away. Maui-mua was defeated, and returned to the house to his brethren. Then
said they to him, ‘ How about the fire’? ‘ How, indeed,’ he answered; ‘ when I got
there, behold there was no fire, it was out. I supposed some man had the fire, and
behold it was not so; the Alae are the proprietors of the fire, and our bananas are all
stolen.’

“When they heard this they were filled with wrath, and decided not to go fishing
again, but to wait for the next appearance of the fire. But after many days had
passed without their seeing the fire, they went fishing again, and behold, there was the
fire! And so they were continually tantalized. Only when they were out fishing
would the fire appear, and when they returned they could not find it.

“ This was the way of it: The curly-tailed Alae knew that Maui and Hina had only
these four sons, and if any of them staid on shore to watch the fire while the others
were out in the canoes, the Alae knew it by counting those in the canoes, and would
not light the fire. Only when they could count the four men in the canoes would
they light the fire. So Maui-mua thought it over, and said to his brethren, ‘‘lo-morrow
morning do you go fishing, and I will stay ashore. But do you take the tall calabash
and dress it in kapa, and put it in my place in the canoe, and then go out to fish.’

“They did so, and when they went out to fish the next morning, the Alae counted
and saw the four figures in the canoe, and then they lit the fire and put the bananas
on to roast. Before they were fully cooked, one of the Alae cried out, ‘ Our dish is
cooked! Behold, Hina has a smart son.’ And with that Maui-mua, who had stolen
close to them unperceived, leaped forward, seized the curly-tailed Alae, and exclaimed,
‘ Now I will kill you, you scamp of an Alae! Behold it is you who are keeping the
fire from us. Jl be your death for this!” Then answered the Alae, ‘If you kill me
the secret dies with me, you won't get the fire. Then Maui-mua began to wring its
neck. But the Alae again spoke and said, ‘ Let me live and you shall have the fire.’

So Maui-mua said, ‘Tell me, where is the fire’? ‘The Alae replied, ‘ It is in the leaf-
stalk of the ape plant.’ So, by the direction of the Alae, Maui-mua began to rub the
leaf-stallk of the ape with a piece of stick, but the fire would not come. Again he
asked, ‘ Where is the fire’? And the Alae said, ‘In the leaf-stalk of the kalo” And
he tried that also without success. And that is the reason why there is a long hollew
on the leaf-stalk of the ape and kalo to this day. Again he asked, ‘Where is the fire
that you are hiding from me’? ‘The Alae answered, ‘Ina green stick.’ And he
rubbed a green stick, but got no fire. So it went on, until finally the Alae told him
he would find it in a dry stick. And so indeed he did. But Maui-mua, in revenge
for the conduct of the Alae, after he had got the fire from the dry stick, said ‘ Now
there is one more thing to try:’ and he rubbed the top of the Alae’s head till it was
red with blood, and the red spot remains there to this day.”

Frontal shield of Gallinula sandvicensis. (‘Ibis,’ 1877, p. 25.)

FW. Prohawk del.et lith

|
i

PENNULA ECAUDATA.

West, Newman ump.

PENNULA ECAUDATA.

MOHO.

Rallus ecaudatus, James King, Voy. Pacif. Ocean, iii. p. 119 (1784) ; S. B. Wilson, hujus operis,
pt. i. art. Acrulocercus nobilis, p. 2, note (December, 1890).

“Dusky Rail,” Latham, Synops. ili. p. 237 (1785).

Rallus obscurus, Gmelin, Syst. Nat. i. p. 718 (1788); Latham, Ind. Orn. p. 759 (1790) ;
Donndorff, Orn. Beitr. i. p. 1151 (1794) ; A. Newton, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1889, p. 5.

Rallus obscurus et R. acaudatus, Tiedemann, Anat. und Naturgesch. Vog. ii. p. 434 (1814).

Corethrura obscura, G. R. Gray, Gen. B. iti. p. 5 (1846).

Porzana obscura, Hartlaub, Arch. f. Naturgesch. 1852, pt. i. p. 187; id. Journ. fiir Orn. 1854,
p. 170.

Oriygometra obscura, G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Isl. p. 58 (1859).

Ortygometra? sandwichensis (partim), id. tom. cit. p. 52 (1859).

“Wingless bird . . . which the natives call ‘Moho, ” Pease (fide J. E. Gray), Proc. Zool. Soc.
1862, p. 145 (cf. Sclater, Ibis, 1880, p. 241).

Oriygometra obscura, Dole, Proc. Boston Soc. N. H. xii. p. 802 (1869) ; id. Hawaiian Alman. 1879,
p. 53.

Pennula millsi (errore typogr. ‘“ millet’), Dole, Hawaiian Alman. 1879, p. 54; (reprint) Ibis, 1880,
p. 241; A. Newton, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1889, p. 5.

Pennula ecaudata, Hartlaub, Abhandl. naturwissensch. Vereins Bremen, xii. p. 396 (1892).

Pennula sandwichensis, Sharpe, Bull. Br. Orn. Club, no. iv. p. xx (21 Dec. 1892) (nec Rallus sand-
vichensis, Gmel.; ¢f. Hartlaub, op. cit. no. v. p. xxiv; Sharpe, op. cit. no. viii. p. xlii).

I rHiInK there can be no doubt that the species of which a figure is here for the first
time published is that mentioned by Captain James King ! (doc. cit.) among the birds
met with on Cook’s expedition, to the command of which he ultimately succeeded, as
a “‘a rail, with very short wings and no tail, which on that account we named rallus
ecaudatus.” It seems to be just as certain that this species is also the “ Dusky Rail ”
of Latham (ut supra), described by him from a specimen in the Leverian Museum, the
fate of which I have been unable to trace. On this last was founded, as shown by the
synonymy above given, the Rallus obscurus of Gmelin, while the R. ecaudatus of King
was wrongly referred by Mr. G. R. Gray to the “ Sandwich Rail” of Latham (Synops.
li. p. 236), a wholly different bird. Since the disappearance of Latham’s type of the
former, it is probable that no example of it had been seen in Europe until the specimen
here figured was brought home by me in 1888. ‘This was exhibited at a meeting of

* Of course not to be confounded with the Captain Philip Parker King, who some fifty years later surveyed
the coasts of Australia and South America.

the Zoological Society on the 15th January, 1889 by Professor Newton (ut supra), who
then referred it to Latham’s *‘ Dusky Rail,” which had not since been recognized, but
soon after informed me that he believed it to be identical with the previously designated
Rallus ecaudatus of King. I obtained the specimen, which I subsequently presented
to the Museum of my University, through the kindness of Mr. Bishop, it being one of
five, procured nearly thirty years before by the late Mr. Mills and preserved in his
collection, where they were described by Judge Dole (/oce. citt.) as belonging to a new
species, which in his second paper on Hawaiian ornithology he ascribed to a new genus
in the following terms :—

“ PENNULA MILLEI'. Joho. Not previously described. 63 in. long. Bill 2 in.
long, black, straight, sides compressed, curved at tip. Tail not visible. Wings rudi-
mentary, hidden in the long, loose, hairy feathers. Plumage dark, dull brown, ashy
under the throat; feathers loose, hairy, long. Lower part of tibia naked. Legs long,
set far back. Toes 3 front, 1 back. Habitat, uplands of Hawaii. Nearly extinct.
Specimen in Mills’ Coll.

“T feel confident that this remarkable bird belongs to the Radlidw, but am unable
to fix its place more definitely. It is the only bird which the natives call Moho, which
word is nearly synonymous with the New Zealand word Moa, which is their name for
the gigantic wingless bird of that country. Regarding it as a new genus I have taken
the liberty of naming as above, gladly thereby recognizing Mr. Mills’ valuable services
in preserving specimens of this bird, and giving others opportunities of studying it.”

Mr. Sclater (Joc. cit.), in remarking on the above passages, pointed out that this was
the bird “‘ with rudimentary wings ”’ mentioned in a letter from Mr. W. H. Pease, the
well-known authority on the conchology of the Hawaiian and other Pacific-Island
groups, an extract from which the late Dr. J. E. Gray had communicated to the
Zoological Society in 1862 (ut supra) as follows :—‘“ There is a wingless bird of small
size living in the Island of Hawaii, which the natives call ‘Moho,’ which is now
nearly extinct, having been killed off by the wild cats and dogs within late years;
I have seen but a single specimen.”

Though the bird is not “ wingless,” Mr. Sclater’s identification is doubtless correct,
and it is quite likely that Mr. Pease’s information may have been based upon one of
Mr. Mills’s specimens. If so, it may indicate the time about which they were procured,
and that, should the species be (as is supposed) really extinct, would be a matter of
some interest. ‘The inference would seem to be that at the date of Mr. Pease’s letter
(20th November, 1861) Mr. Mills possessed only one specimen, and that the other four
which I myself saw were obtained subsequently. Two of them have since passed into
Mr. Rothschild’s collection, and the remaining two are still in that of Mr. Bishop.
No further examples have been secured, though it is doubtful whether any extended
search has been made. In the month of November 1887 I visited Olaa, where I
resided some ten days at ‘The Halfway House,’ Mr. L. Severance (an old resident

* A printer’s error for millsi.

in Hilo) having told me that in that neighbourhood Mr. Mills had procured the
birds. Mr. Severance, moreover, had kindly given me a letter to Hawelu, the landlord
of ‘The Halfway House ’—the man who actually shot the original specimens; this
house is halfway between Hilo and the Volcano of Kilauea, and is very finely
situated on the outskirts of the forest, commanding a splendid outlook over the
sea, while a fine clump of tall Eucalyptus trees close at hand adds greatly to its
picturesqueness.

The weather was very wet at the time of my visit; nevertheless I went out shooting
every day, and when I visited the forest, Hawelu and other natives, encouraged by the
promise of a large reward, scoured the country round for the Moho, but to no purpose.
However, owing to the fact of my having no dog, and Hawelu but a poor one, our
chances of success were not great ; and in my opinion the bird may, nay probably does,
still exist on the scrub-covered plains between Olaa and Kilauea. Moreover, Hawelu
told me that the mail-carrier had seen the bird cross his path within the last three
years ; on the same authority, the Moho outruns any dog possessed by the natives, and
it is possible to track it by its cry—a whirring sound resembling the rising of a bevy of
Quail, while its nest is made on the ground.

The five specimens were all procured by Hawelu in the scrub-covered lava-flats
about five miles south of the Volcano House, but more information than this I could
not obtain, and my intelligent informant is now a leper on Molokai. The aspect of
the region where the Moho was found much resembles a Scotch moor, with a sbort
densely-growing Vaccinium in the place of heather; this is intermingled with a species
of Carex and the Ukiuki1 (Dianella ensifolia), a bright silver-leaved plant bearing
a blue berry—the whole forming the thickest of cover. The only trees in this
region are scrubby stunted Ohias, though here and there are thickets of fern inter-
spersed with small bushes.

I may add that the late King Kalakaua was most anxious to procure specimens
of the subject of the present notice, and had for some years before my visit offered
the natives a large reward for them. Olaa used to be a noted locality in olden times
for bird-catching, and his late Majesty, through his Chamberlain, Mr. C. P. Jaukea,
gave me a written permission to shoot specimens of the Mamo (Drepanis pacifica)
and O-o (Acrulocercus nobilis) there, believing that I should meet with both of them
as well as the Moho; he afterwards expressed great disappointment at my failing in
my object.

Description (taken from the specimen at Cambridge).—Upper parts rufous brown,
somewhat lighter upon the forehead, the outer primary being marked with reddish buff
on the outer web ; sides of the face, chin, and throat whitish; the rest of the under-
parts rufous or ruddy buff, becoming much browner around the thighs; the feathers,
near the vent, which meet beneath the place where the tail should be, with subterminal
buff cross-bars. Beak brown; feet now almost white.

* My father has flowered this (since my return) from seeds I brought home.

The wings have a very thin appearance and are short and rounded, each feather
being also rounded at the tip and rather broad; tail absent, its place supplied by the
coverts ; all the feathers soft and lax.

Dimensions.—Totai length about 13 inches, wing 6, tarsus 34, middle toe with claw

<5
) just under 3, culmen ‘75.

GLLL pemop buomomp ssa ve eynuns omy
‘SISNHOIAGCNVS WIOINN@Gd
| - Gor wearmep 48244 j . SST AE NE

a ayn a er, ie el

Ab 7,

FB. W.Frohawk del. et hth. West,Newman imp.

PHNNULA WILSONL

PENNULA SANDVICENSIS.

“ Sandwich Rail,” Latham, Syn. iii. p. 236 (1785).

Rallus sandwichensis, Gmelin, Syst. Nat. i. p. 717 (1788) ; Tiedemann, Anat. und Naturgesch.
Vog. ii. p. 434 (1814) ; Vieillot, N. Dict. d’Hist. Nat. éd. 2, xxii. p. 564 (1817); id. Tabl.
Encyclop., Orn. p. 1069 (1823).

Rallus sanduicensis, Latham, Ind. Orn. p. 759 (1790).

Zapornia sandwichensis, Reichenbach, Handb. sp. Orn., Rasores, tab. cix. figg. 1184, 1185 (1846).

Corethrura sandwichensis, G. R. Gray, Gen. B. iii. p. 595 (1846).

Porzana sandvicensis, Hartlaub, Arch. fiir Naturgesch. 1852, i. p. 137.

Ortygometra? sandwichensis, G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Isl. p. 52 (1859) (partim).

Ortygometra sandvicensis, Dole, Proc. Boston Soc. N. H. xii. p. 302 (1869) ; id. Hawaiian Alman.
1879, p. 58 (partim) *.

Rallus sandvichensis, Hartlaub, Abhandl. naturw. Vereins zu Bremen, xii. p. 897 (1892) (partim).

Pennula ecaudata, Sharpe, Cat. B. Br. Mus. xxi. p. 114 (partim, sed minime P. sandwichensis,
ejusd. tom. cit. p. 386) (1894).

Pennula sandwichensis, Stone, Proc. Acad. N. 8. Philad. 1894, p. 147.

ReELyine on the statement of Schlegel (Muséum des Pays-Bas, Ralli, pp. 25, 26) that
the Leyden Museum possessed a specimen of the Rallus sandwichensis of Gmelin,
which had been procured on Cook’s voyage, I went to Holland, being anxious to
examine the alleged unique example of an extinct species, and to obtain a drawing of
it by Mr. Frohawk, who accompanied me for that purpose. Arrived at Leyden we
were most kindly received by Dr. Finsch ; but it immediately became evident that the
specimen did not correspond with the ‘Sandwich Rail” of Latham, on which Gmelin’s
name was based, and Dr. Finsch, considering it to belong to an undescribed species,
gave shortly after an account of it (Notes from the Leyden Museum, xx. pp. 77-80),
and did me the honour of calling it Pennula wilsoni.

No living example of the Sandwich Rail has apparently been met with within human
memory, and it may be safely asserted that no specimen exists in any Museum. I
have therefore thought it advisable to give a facsimile copy by Mr. Frohawk of the
drawing of it (no. 70) by W. W. Ellis in the British Museum (Natural History). This
drawing, it will be seen, is signed by the artist and dated 1779, besides having the
words ‘*Sandwich Isles” written on the back, apparently by him. The bird is

’ The description of the species given by Mr. Dole is that of O. quadristrigata, copied from Finsch and
Hartlaub (Orn. Centralpolynesiens, p. 165).

obviously a Pennula, and its colouring fairly corresponds with Latham’s description of
it, which is as follows :— .

“Size small. Bill dusky ash-colour; general colour of the plumage pale ferruginous ;
the feathers on the upper parts darkest in the middle; tail short, hid by the upper
coverts ; legs dusky flesh-colour.

“Tnhabits Sandwich Isles. Was also found on the island of Tanna; but the
plumage is darker on the upper parts; and the bill and legs yellowish.—Sir Joseph
Banks.”

Latham was no doubt in error when he imagined that a bird like this could also
inhabit ‘Tanna, which is one of the New Hebrides, and, indeed, Mr. Wiglesworth
(Aves Polyn. p. 61) identifies the latter with Ortygometra cinerea (Vieillot).

Where Reichenbach saw the specimens which he professes to figure it is impossible
to say. They do not now exist in the Dresden Museum, as we are obligingly informed
by Professor A. B. Meyer. Indeed, the whole ornithological coilection there was burnt
in the disturbances of 1849.

PENNULA WILSONI.

Mr. Frohawk having executed a plate from Schlegel’s wrongly-called <“ Crea
sandwichensis,” I here present an impression of it to my readers, together with extracts
from Dr. Finsch’s remarks upon the species, which they will perceive has no claim as
yet to be included in the ‘ Aves Hawaiienses,’ nor can the Leyden specimen possibly be
the type of Latham’s species as asserted by Dr. Sharpe.

“ On the so-called ‘ Sandwich Rail’ in the Leyden Museum. By Dr. O. Fuyscu.

* Crex sandwichensis, Schleg. (nec Rallus sandwichensis, Gml.), Mus. P.-B., Ralli, 1865, p. 25.

“ Rallus sandwichensis, Hartl. (nec Gml.), Abhandl. naturw. Vereins in Bremen, xii. (1892), p. 397
(syn. part.) ; Sharpe, Lbis, 1893, p. 443.

“ Pennula sandwichensis, Sharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. xxiii. (1894), p. 336 (syn. part.).

“ Pennula wilsoni, Finsch.

“‘ Schlegel’s type in the Leyden Museum :
“‘Upper parts dark ruddy brown with blackish centres to the feathers of the back
and wings, producing on these parts well marked blackish longitudinal stripes; head

~and neck somewhat lighter and uniform ruddy brown, like the sides of head and neck;

underparts uniform rusty brown, shading into vinous red, a little darker on the flanks;
middle of chin somewhat lighter ; anal region and lower tail-coverts dark vinous-red,
forming a well marked darker patch ; primaries blackish, very narrowly margined with
brown on the outer web; broad and lax upper tail-coverts with very narrow light
rusty-brown apical margins, showing as lighter undulations.—Bill and feet light horny-
brown (as far as can be judged greenish in life).—Sex and Habitat unknown.

«“ Measurements taken from the above type :

Total length. Wing. Culmen. Tarsus. Tibia. Middle toe with claw.
150 mm. 73 mm. 19 mm. 30 mm. 7 mm, 35 mm. Finsch.
(French) 3:2 inch. 10 lin. 12 lin. 4 lin, 13 lin. \ oat
¥ in mill. 85mm, 23mm, 27mm. limm. 30mm, f SHlesel’.
150 mm. 73 mm. 20 mm. 29 mm. 34 mm. Hartlaub.
(English) 5:3 inch. 2-8 inch. 08 lin. 1:3 inch. 1:35 inch. ) ,
= 135 mm. 68 mm. 19 mm. 34 mm. 37mm. =f Sharpe.

“The wing is round; the primaries nearly hidden under the long and soft coverts ;
the first primary is 40 mm. long and 15 mm. shorter than the 3rd and 4th, which are
the longest, though only a little longer than the 2nd and Sth; the exact number of
primaries is difficult to ascertain without injuring the specimen. For the same reason
I am able to find only two tail-feathers (dark-coloured, soft, narrow, and 20 mm. long),
as they are hidden under the extremely thick, long, and soft upper tail-coverts, and are
difficult to distinguish from the latter. So this species may be called ‘ ecaudatus’ as
truly as Pennula ecaudata, King, and, as seen by the structure of the wings, isno doubt
a flightless form. The feet are feeble; the nails short and small.

‘The type specimen in the Leyden Museum is stuffed and not too well; the stuffing,
however, is apparently not of very old date, as may be judged from the artificial eyes
(with red irides), which seem to be of enamelled glass, or—at any rate—of a kind
which was unknown in the beginning of this century. The wire used for stuffing is of
brass, as commonly used by the taxidermists of the Leyden Museum.

‘“‘On the underside of the stand of the specimen is written, undoubtedly by the hand
of Temminck, ‘ Rallvs—Latham,’ and perhaps also by Temminck ‘ Rall. obscura’; to
this is added ‘ Crex sandwichensis, Cat. No. 1,’ no doubt written by Schlegel, as possibly
also are the words ‘Sandwich. Cook.’ In the ‘Catalogue of the Ralli’ Schlegel says
unhesitatingly ‘observé dans les iles Sandwich; voyage de Cook,’ but this statement
does not seem to rest on any reliable foundation, for there does not exist any notice
when and from whom Temminck acquired the specimen! This fact must be mentioned,
as Dr. Hartlaub assures us that Temminck bought this Rail at the auction of Bullock’s
collection (3 June, 1819) for £1 15s., which may have been the case; but it cannot
be proved that it was the specimen in question.

“Latham’s ‘Dusky Rail’ (Rallus obscurus, Gml.), said to come also from the
Sandwich Islands, is, according to his description, a quite different and much larger
bird (‘legs two inches’=50 mm. ; ‘legs red-brown’; ‘bill scarcely one inch’—our
specimen has the bill only 74 lines long!), and is most likely not a ‘ Pennula’ at all.
Evidently Latham would have mentioned the rudimentary tail 2, as he did not overlook
this prominent character in the description of his ‘Sandwich Rail. The type of

1 “The measurements of the wings and culmen given here are not exact.”

* “The identity with Pennula ecaudata (King) seems therefore rather doubtful, as already mentioned by
Dr. Hartlaub.”

Latham’s ‘Dusky Rail’ was in the Leverian Museum, but unfortunately appears to
have been also lost.

““Schlegel’s ‘ Crex sandwichensis’ is only known from the specimen in the Leyden
Museum and is no doubt one of the rarest of birds, being most certainly not the same
as ‘ Rallus sandwichensis’ or ‘ Rallus obscurus’ of Gmelin; it must therefore be
renamed. I have the pleasure to name it after Mr. Scott B. Wilson}, to whom
science is so highly indebted, and whom we have to thank for figuring this rare type
through the skill of Mr. Frohawk.

“ Although not referable at present to the Avifauna of the Hawaiian Islands, and
probably one of the species ‘nearly or quite extinct,’ perhaps we still may hope for
the rediscovery of Pennula wilsont in one of the neighbouring small islands as yet
unsatisfactorily explored.”

‘“ Leyden Museum, February 1898.”

1 «This gentleman, in company of the artist, came over from England only for describing and figuring the
bird in question.”

’ FW. rohawk del.et lith. a West,Newman imp

BNE OD “S/OveN A Teele,

&
nm
:
ia
=

FW Prohawk del et lith

BUTEO SOLITARIUS.

West,Newman imp.

PW. Frohawk delet lith,

BUTEO SOLITARIUS.

BUTEO SOLITARIUS,
10.

« Brown Hawks or Kites,”’ Cook, [Last] Voy. Pacif. Ocean, i. p. 227 (1784).

Buteo solitarius, Peale, U.S. Expl. Exped., Birds, p. 62, pl. xvi.* (1848) ; Hartlaub, Arch. f. Natur-
gesch. 1852, i. p. 181; Sclater, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1878, p. 348; id. Ibis, 1879, p. 92; id. Rep.
Voy. ‘ Challenger,’ Birds, p. 96, pl. xxi.* (1881) ; Gurney, List Diurn. B. Prey, p. 64 (1884).

Pandion solitarius, Cassin, U.S. Expl. Exped., Mamm. & Orn. p. 97, pl. iv.* (1858) ; Dole, Proc.
Bost. Soc. N. H. 1869, p. 295; id. Hawaiian Alman. 1879, p. 42.

Pandion (Polioaetus) solitarius, G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Isl. p. 1 (1859) ; id. Hand-list, 1. p. 15
(1869).

Onychotes gruberi, Ridgway, Proc. Acad. N. 8. Philad. 1870, p. 149; id. Rep. U.S. Geol. & Geogr.
Surv. 1876, p. 185; Baird, Brewer, & Ridgway, Hist. N. Amer. B. ii. p. 254 (1874) ; Sharpe,
Cat. B. Br. Mus. i. p. 158 (1874); Gurney, Ibis, 1876, p. 476; id. op. cit. 1881, p. 396
pl. xii.*; id. List Diurn. B. Prey, -p. 71 (1884).

Polioaetus solitarius, Sharpe, Cat. B. Br. Mus. i. p. 452 (1874).

Onychotes solitarius, Ridgway, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1885, p. 38.

Buteo (Onychotes) solitarius, Gurney, Ibis, 1891, p. 21 (posthum.).

* Figure notabiles.

Wuen Captain Cook discovered the Sandwich Islands on his last voyage, ‘“‘ Brown Hawks
or Kites” are said to have been observed, though apparently no specimen of them was
then procured; they were therefore not brought to the notice of scientific men until
Peale returned from the U.S. Exploring Expedition in the ‘ Vincennes’ and ‘ Peacock.’
He only observed the bird on the island of Hawaii, but he gives a brief account of its
habit of sitting “ solitary on dead trees patiently watching small birds, which constitute
its principal food.” No examples were contained in the collection of the Expedition,
most of the birds from Hawaii being lost in the wreck of the ‘ Peacock’; but Peale
described and figured as Buteo solitarius a specimen of which he says it was “ obtained
near Karakakoa Bay by the Rev. Mr. Forbes, Presbyterian missionary on that station ;
he transmitted it to Mr. J. K. Townsend, who kindly loaned it to be drawn.”
Judge Dole, however, in the ‘ Proceedings of the Boston Society’ for 1869, states that
this species is not confined to Hawaii, but is found also on Niihau and Molokai.
Though Cassin, in 1858, by some misconception referred it to the genus Pandion,
and as late as 1870 Mr. Ridgway redescribed it in one of its phases under the title of
Onychotes gruberi, these errors were not allowed to remain long uncorrected; while the
late Mr. Gurney’s notes written for this work effectually settle the whole question.

This is the only member of the Hawk tribe peculiar to the Hawaiian group, and, so
far as I absolutely know, it is confined to the large island of Hawaii. ‘The first example
I obtained in the forest of Kona, at an elevation of about 5000 feet, in June 1887.
The bird was perched motionless in a mamane tree (Sophora chrysophylia) and seemed
to be on the watch for its prey—consisting of the brilliant-plumaged liwi (Vestiaria
coccinea) or some other small forest bird. I have found in the stomach, in two instances,
remains of Vestiaria, so the fact that this Buzzard feeds at least occasionally on small
birds is clearly proved. On the 23rd of June, 1888, I was so fortunate as to find in
the same locality a nest of this species, containing a single young bird in the down;
it was placed in a koa tree (Acacia koa) about 50 feet from the ground, in a fork
between two thick branches, and was a large structure of nearly circular form,
being a foot and a half deep, and a foot in diameter, composed of dead koa branches
and twigs. I subsequently obtained several more specimens in Kona, and others in
the hills above Puuiki near Waimea. The bird does not seem to be confined to a single
district of the island as is the case with the Crow (Corvus hawaiiensis), but it must at
the same time be considered rare, as during a long stay on Hawaii I procured but seven
examples. The naturalists of the ‘Challenger’ Expedition in 1875 secured two near
Hilo; while there are two others in the Mills collection from the same neighbourhood.
All the specimens preserved have therefore been obtained on the island of Hawaii,
though certainly the koa forests in the district of Kula, on the island of Maui, seem
eminently suited to this species; but I did not make a stay of sufficient duration on
that island to be able to say whether it is found there, though I heard reports from
natives of a large Hawk to be found “in the mountains,” which was probably this bird.
Judge Dole, as above cited, narrates an incident which occurred to his brother, Mr.
G. H. Dole, on the island of Kauai, relating to a Hawk which I imagine to have been
of this species, which surmise, if correct, proves that it is to be found on Kauai. It is
true that Judge Dole puts the story under the heading of Accipiter hawaii, which is
Circus hudsonius, but I do not think it is likely that it was that bird. The incident was
as follows :—‘ Mr. G. H. Dole while riding one day in Koloa, Island of Kauai, accom-
panied by a Scotch terrier, noticed one of these birds and was led by his peculiar
movements to watch him carefully. The bird appeared much disturbed by the presence
of the dog, and after circling about him a few times flew to a pile of stones and took
one in his claws and flew back with it to his old position over the dog and balanced
himself in the air asif intending to drop it on to the dog’s back, but after some
apparent hesitation he gave up whatever he was intending to accomplish with the
stone, and carrying it back, he placed it on the pile whence he had taken it.”

There are three distinct phases of this species, differing strikingly from one another
in regard to coloration, as my series of specimens shows, and therefore I have thought
it well to have a figure drawn of each. Three of my examples, which were acquired
by the late Mr. Gurney, are now to be seen in the Norwich Museum, and four
others in that of the University of Cambridge; and Mr. Gurney, in response to a

request of mine that he would send me some notes upon them, was kind enough to
furnish me with the following for publication in this work !.

“ Notes on Buteo (Onychotes) solitarius,

‘ Butco solitarius of Peale was originally described under that name in the first
edition of the Zoology of the United States Exploring Expedition (Birds, p. 62),
published in 1848, from a specimen obtained near Karakakoa Bay, in the island of
Hawaii, by the Rev. Mr. Forbes, and sent by him to Dr. J. K. Townsend, who pre-
sented it to the collection of'the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia.

“In the second edition of the above work, edited by the late Mr. Cassin, and
published in 1858, this specimen was described at p. 97, and figured on pl. 4 of the
accompanying atlas. In the letterpress of this article the specimen is stated to be
‘adult, but the accompanying plate shows it to be in the paler stage of plumage,
which appears to me to be indicative of immaturity.

“Mr. Cassin inserted this specimen in his work under the title of ‘ Pandion solitarius,
but in 1874 it was again (and certainly more correctly) referred to the genus Buteo in
Messrs. Baird, Brewer, and Ridgway’s ‘ History of North-American Land-Birds,’ vol. 11.
p. 295; and Mr. Ridgway’s views as to the Buteonine character of the species were
quoted by me in ‘ The Ibis, 1876, p. 231. ‘The preceding page of the same volume of
the * North-American Birds’ contained a description and woodcut of a melanistic speci-
men of the same species under the name of ‘ Onycheotes gruberi, by which it had
previously been described by Mr. Ridgway in the ‘ Proceedings’ of the Philadelphia
Academy of Sciences for December 1870, p. 149.

‘It was only at a later period that, through the acute discrimination of Mr. Ridgway,
the identity of Onychotes gruberi with Buteo solitarius was demonstrated, the specimen
originally described under the former name having been sent to the Smithsonian Iinsti-
tution from San Francisco, and having been supposed (as it is now thought, erroneously)
to have been obtained in California.

‘The Smithsonian Institution subsequently obtained an additional specimen in the
plumage which I now consider to be the normal adult dress, but without any reliable
information as to the locality where it was originally obtained. Both the above
specimens were described by Mr. Ridgway under the name of Onychotes gruberi in his
‘Studies of American Falconide,’ published in 1876, p. 135, and they were referred to
by myself under the same title in ‘ The Ibis’ for 1876, p. 476, and for 1881, p. 596, the
latter notice being accompanied by coloured figures (on pl. 12) of both the specimens
in question.

‘“ H.M.S. ‘Challenger’ visited the island of Hawaii in August 1875, and brought
home amongst other specimens two examples of Butco solitarius. One of these was
for a time accidentally mislaid, but the other, a normal adult female, was recorded in

1 The younger Mr, Gurney finding the draught of this treatise among his father’s papers, and not knowing
the purpose for which it had been intended, forwarded it for publication to the Editor of ‘ The Ibis,’ in which
journal it was accordingly printed (Ibis, 1891, pp. 21 e seqq.).

n
}

a paper on the collection of birds brought home by the ‘ Challenger,’ contributed by
Mr. P. L. Sclater to the ‘ Proceedings’ of the Zool. Soc. for 1878, which included a de-
scription of this specimen drawn up by myself, and subsequently reprinted in the Official
Scientific Report of the Voyage of the ‘ Challenger,’ Zoology, vol. ii. pt. 8, p. 96. This
description was in both cases rendered inaccurate by an unfortunate printer’s error,
owing to which the occiput and hinder part of the neck were misprinted as being
‘white-coloured’ instead of ‘whole-coloured;’ this error was, however, rendered less
important by an accurate coloured figure of the specimen, which formed plate 21 of
the ornithological volume of the ‘Challenger’s’ Report. The missing specimen subse-
quently came to light, and proved not to be very different in plumage to the female
which had been figured, though probably a somewhat younger bird. This specimen
was described by me at p. 141 of my ‘ List of Diurnal Birds of Prey,’ published in 1884.

“Both the specimens brought home by the ‘ Challenger’ are now preserved in the
British Museum. ,

“The figure of Buteo solitarius published in the Report of the ‘ Challenger’ Expedi-
tion struck Mr. Ridgway as so closely resembling the second example of Onychotes
grubert which had been acquired by the Smithsonian Institution that he was led to a
further investigation of the subject, which resulted in his being convinced that these
two names had in fact been assigned to one and the same species.

“Mr. Ridgway published the conclusion at which he arrived, and the data which led
to it, in the ‘ Proceedings’ of the United States National Museum for 1885, p. 36.

“The Editors of ‘The Ibis, at p. 450 of the volume for 1885, announced and
accepted the conclusion at which Mr. Ridgway had arrived, and as to the correctness
of which there can, I think, be no possible doubt.

“Mr. Ridgway, in his paper above referred to, expresses the opinion that ¢ the genus
or subgeius Onychotes . . . . is tenable’ for the present species, and gives a diagnosis
in support of that view; but my own feeling is that the Hawaiian Buzzard does not
differ sufficiently from other members of the genus Buteo to make it needful to refer it
to a distinct subgenus. It is of very similar dimensions to Buteo pennsylvanicus, and
their proportions, though different, do not differ very greatly, as may be seen by the
annexed comparative measurements (in inches and decimals) of an adult of each of
these two species; but I ought to add that I believe the sexes of the specimens
measured are different, B. solitarius being probably a male, and B. pennsylvanious a
female.

Culmen Middle toe Clawof Hind toe Claw of
Cere. without Wing. Tail. Tarsus. without middle without hind
cere, claw. toe. claw. toe.
DESOULOMIUSE: ty. 30 95 10°75 6-20 2°80 1-70 80 *7) 1:30
B. pennsylvanicus.. +25 ‘TO 11:30 6-40 2-50 eso °65 “70 1:10

“Tf Iam correct in my view as to the normal immature and adult plumages of
Buteo solitarius, the following list will enumerate the specimens now existing in
different English and American collections so far as I am acquainted with them:—

« Nestling in down.

“One specimen collected by and in the possession of Mr. Scott B. Wilson }.

“ Hirst year’s plumage (normaz).

“Type specimen of Buteo solitarius in the collection of the Academy of Natural
Sciences of Philadelphia, figured in the second edition of the Zoology of the United
States Exploring Expedition, Ornithology, pl. 4.

“One obtained by Mr. Wilson, and placed in the Norwich Museum.

“One retained in Mr. Wilson’s collection 1.

« Adulé or nearly adult plumage (normal).

“ One in the United States National Museum, Washington, figured in ‘The Ibis,’
1881, p. 396 (right-hand figure), under the name of Onychotes gruberi.

‘<Two in the British Museum, brought home by the ‘ Challenger,’ one of which is
figured in the Zoology of the Voyage of H.M.S. ‘Challenger,’ Birds, pl. 21.

“One obtained by Mr. Wilson, and placed in the Norwich Museum.

“One retained in Mr. Wilson’s collection 1.

“ Melanistic specimens.

“Type of Onychotes gruberi in the United States National Museum, Washington,
figured at p. 204 of vol. i. of Baird, Brewer, and Ridgway’s ‘ North-American Land-
Birds,’ also in ‘ The Ibis,’ 1881, p. 396 (left-hand figure).

‘“¢One obtained by Mr. Wilson, and placed in the Norwich Museum.

“One retained in Mr. Wilson’s collection !.

“Summary of Specimens referred to.

In Philadelphian Museum ...........-2.-...200 1
In Washington Museum ............. Pete ares 2
Jira TEXAS CNY Biel 06 0c See eee 2
SrmlNiorwich Maaseuma os cceccepe ceees setearee ces 3
nie hiee\Valson's collection... mass .ctasse.s 4
BLO pall Pa tector ty ps Weaken tect a WHE

Description.—(Fig. 1.) Adult male. Above dark brownish black, the feathers all
more or less edged with rusty brown; wing-quills darker, with white on inner webs of
primaries; tail bluish black above, narrowly but very distinctly barred with dark
brown ; beneath, throat white, rest of the under surface white variously mottled with
brown. Legs light yellow, bill black.

Dimensions.—(Fig. 1.) Total length 15°70 inches, wing 11, culmen 1:30, tarsus 3,
tail 6°60. |
Obs. This bird was shot at the nest.

* Now in the Museum of the University of Cambridge.
n2

/ 3

(Fig. 2.) This specimen is of nearly the same colour above as fig. 1, but has no white
on the under surface, which is brown edged with dark rusty brown, approaching rusty
red on tibiz and abdomen.

Total length 15 inches, wing 10-90, tarsus 3, tail 6°25.

(Fig. 3.) This very light variety has the head buff with a few dark streaks of brown,
while the rest of the under surface is also buff with a few faint streaks of brown on the
sides. The tail is light brownish white, very indistinctly barred.

Total length 15°50 inches, wing 11-20, tarsus 3, tail 6°30.

CIRCUS HUDSONIUS.

Falco hudsonius, Linneus, Syst. Nat. ed. 12, i. p. 128 (1766).

? Strix delicatula, Dole, Proc. Bost. Soc. N. H. 1869, p. 295; Sclater, Ibis, 1871, p. 358 (nec
Gould).

Accipiter hawaii, Dole, Hawaiian Alman. 1879, p. 43; Ibis, 1880, p. 24.

Circus cyaneus hudsonius, auctt. American. recentiorr.

Tus Harrier, possibly a mere straggler to the Sandwich Islands, is undoubtedly identical
with that so abundant in North America, and had it not been that Judge Dole in the
‘ Hawaiian Almanack’ renamed it Accipiter hawati, no certain synonyms would exist so
far as our group is concerned. The mistake is the more important as it was reproduced
in ‘ The Ibis’ for 1880.

Of the subject of our notice I obtained a single specimen in November 1888—on the
morning of my final departure from the Islands—which had been shot near Honolulu,
while Judge Dole was also kind enough to present me with askin obtained by a friend of
his some years since during a shooting expedition to one of the mountain ranges of Oahu.
Though I made several excursions on that island and camped out for a considerable
time in a particularly favourable locality, I did not meet with the bird. The natives
have no name for it—Jo (Buteo solitarius) being the only species of Hawk recognized
by them ; and such being the case, 1 am of opinion that it is confined, as far as
the Sandwich Islands are concerned, to Oahu, an island which has never been famed
for its bird-catchers, and where, therefore, it would be more likely to have been
overlooked by the residents. ven there it may be of comparatively recent introduc-
tion and so may not as yet have spread to the other islands of the group.

The habits of this species, so well known in North America as the “ Marsh Hawk,”
require no notice here. It is recorded as occurring all over that continent to the
Isthmus of Panama, as well as in Cuba and in the Bahamas; but the present is the
first publication of the fact that its range extends to the Sandwich Islands.

HW. Prohawk del.et hth. West, Newman imp

BERNICLA SANDVICENSIS

BERNICLA SANDVICENSIS.
NENE.

1« Geese . . . not unlike the Chinese Geese,” Ellis, Narrat. Voy. i. p. 148 (1782).

Anser sandvicensis, Vigors, List of Anim. inthe Gardens of the Zool. Soc. ed. 11, p. 4 (for June
1833).

Bernicla sandvicensis, Vigors, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1888, p. 65; id. op. cit. 1884, p. 43; Stanley, tom.
cit. p. 41; Jardine and Selby, illust. Orn. ser. 2, pl. viii.* [no pagination]; Hartlaub,
Arch. f. Naturgesch. 1852, 1. p. 187; Dole, Proc. Bost. Soc. N. H. xii. p..805 (1869) ; id.
Hawaiian Alman. 1879, p. 54; Pelzeln, Verh. z.-b. Gesellsch. Wien, 1873, p. 159.

Anser hawatiensis, Eydoux & Souleyet, Voy. ‘ Bonite,’ Zool. i. p. 104, pl. 10 * (1841).

Anser hauaiénsis, Peale, U.S. Expl. Exped., Birds, p. 249, pl. lix.* (1848).

Anser hawaiensis, Hartlaub, Arch. f. Naturgesch. 1852, i. p. 122.

Bernicla sandwichensis, Cassin, U.S. Expl. Exped., Mamm. & Orn. p. 338 (1858) ; G. R. Gray, Cat.
B. Trop. Isl. p. 54 (1859).

Branta (Leucopareia) sandwichensis, G. R. Gray, Hand-l. B. iu. p. 76 (1871).

* Figure notabiles.

Vigors, as cited above, was apparently the first author to give a specific name to the
Sandwich Island Goose, a pair of which were presented to the Zoological Society of
London by Lady Glengall in 1833; but the birds had been noticed before that time
both by Ellis and Bloxam. The former author writes :—‘‘ Upon our first arrival at
Karacacooah Bay, the natives brought off several Geese, which were quite tame; they
were not unlike the Chinese Geese; they called them Na-na.” ‘To this account Latham
also refers, as noted below, under the account of Anser cygnoides. Bloxam merely
mentions ‘“ wild geese and ducks of a small size” during the voyage of the ‘ Blonde,’
and did not apparently obtain specimens; but Eydoux and Souleyet, while cruising in
the ‘ Bonite,’ were more successful, and, thinking that they had made a new dis-
covery, figured it and named it Anser hawatiensis. Peale, who repeatedly observed the
bird, also called it after the island on which he found it, in ignorance of the previous
accounts; but Cassin, when editing that author’s work, seems to have been aware of
the prior claims of A. sandvicensis. Herr Kraus, as stated by von Pelzeln, also noticed
it during the Austrian Mission to Kastern Asia and America in 1870.

An interesting account is given by the then Lord Stanley, in the ‘ Proceedings’ of the
Zoological Society of London for 1854, of the breeding of some of these birds at

1 Of, Latham, Gen, Syn. iii. p. 448 ; id. Gen. Hist. B. x. p. 238.
x2

Knowsley, which were received at about the same time as Lady Glengali’s, four eggs
being laid and three young birds hatched.

The figure given by Jardine and Selby was taken from an example in Lord Derby's
possession.

This Goose shows extreme docility in captivity, instances of which I adduce below.
Judge Dole states that it builds its nest in grass on the high lava-fields (5000-7000 feet),
and lays two or three white eggs, about the size of those of the Common Goose.

‘This interesting species, almost entirely confined as it is to one district of the island
of Hawaii, is clearly doomed to extinction before many years are past. At present,
however, it exists in fair numbers in Kona on Hawaii, where its favourite breeding-
haunts are, strangely enough, the old lava-flows, than which nothing more unsuited
to a goose can be imagined. I heard that it nested in the crater of Haleakala, on Maui,
but I did not visit that place. A. pair bred near Kiholo, and a native who saw the
place assured me there was little or no nest. Dr. O. Finsch (Ibis, 1880, p. 81) says :—
‘‘ Just as unsuccessful was our trip to the spot where Bernicla sandvicensis breeds in
the gigantic crater of Haleakala, as, on account of the exhausted condition of our
horses, we could not get into the crater, but were forced to be satisfied with a look into
it—a sight never to be forgotten.” It has been observed occasionally on Kauai and
Niihau, on neither of which, however, does it breed.

In July 1887 I forwarded a pair to England, where they were deposited in the
Gardens of the Zoological Society, and were kept for some three years in perfect health
in company with another of the same species. My birds did not breed, to my great
disappointment ; but Mr. A. D. Bartlett assures me that some years ago he was
successful in rearing a considerable number, while my friend Judge R. F. Bickerton
was equally fortunate in Honolulu. The Nene, in June and July, is to be found at an
elevation of some 5000 feet, showing a preference for the clinker-beds of the old
lava-flows, and its food consists principally of fruits of plants, such as the ohelo '

* Peale, as quoted by Cassin, says :—“ We observed them on the volcanic mountains of the Island of Hawaii ;
they were generally in pairs at the season of our visib in the month of November, rarely four or five were seen -
together feeding on the berries of a very abundant species of Vaccinium growing on the old beds of lava;
on these they became very fat, and were delicious eating; grass appeared, however, to be their ordinary
food. We never saw them near water, which is scarce in those regions, our party being obliged to carry the
necessary supply for the journey in calabashes ; but they are said to breed near shallow ponds, some few such
occurring between the mountains. What is most remarkable is the story related to us by natives, and which
we have every reason to believe is a fact, that this Goose, which has the powers of flight which would enable
it to move to as great distances as any others of the genus, is limited to the single Island of Hawaii; rarely
visiting any other islands of the group, although several are in sight. It bears confinement well, is hardy, and
soon becomes domesticated. Its voice resembles that of the Snow Goose, Anser hyperboreus.”

Cassin (U.S. Expl. Exped., Mamm. & Orn. p. 339) says that “ Dr. Pickering, in his Journal, now in our
possession, mentions having seen this Goose in the mountains, especially numerous at a height which
he estimates as having been about seven thousand feet above the level of the sea. He states that it appeared to
be much less suspicious than other species with which he was acquainted, and when disturbed, flies off,
near the surface of the ground, without rising in the air, like the species of North America. Dr. Pickering
mentions haying seen this bird feeding on berries.”

(Vaccinium reticulatum), the strawberry (Fragaria chiliensis), and a black berry called
by the natives “popolo”: possibly Sonchus asper, as given by Mr. Dole, may be also
a food-plant of this goose. The weird cry of the Nene, according to Peale resembling
that: of the Snow Goose (A. hyperboreus), is very distinct from that of any other species
that I know; and in olden times the bird was kept in captivity by the natives, acting
as a sentinel by giving loud warning of the advent of a stranger. It is easy of approach,
and I am told that when one of a flock is wounded the remainder will not leave their
companion, so that the collector, if heartless enough, may kill the entire number.

As an instance of its tameness and attachment, I may mention a bird which would
follow its mistress for a distance of fifteen miles; and this not once, but on many
occasions—indeed, it was in the habit of accompanying her on her rides as a dog
would do.

The flesh of this goose is good eating ', and from it may be made the most excellent
soup, which I remember to have formed the most delicious item amongst many other
delicacies—as roasted goat, golden plover on toast, quail, bananas, bread-fruit, pine-
apples, custard apples, mangos—of my Christmas dinner at Kiholo on Hawaii.

One point remaining to be noticed is the peculiar sweet musky scent found in the
neck of the Nene—a fact well known to Hawaiians, but not, I believe, recorded in
print hitherto, My birds in the Zoological Society's Gardens were caught one day for
my friend Captain F. H. Salvin’s inspection ; and that gentleman confirms the statement

made above.

Description.—Adult male. Wead, neck, and throat black, which colour extends a little
below the eye and for about two inches down the back of the neck ; sides of neck tawny
buff, becoming lighter towards the lower part, the feathers blackish at their bases,
giving the neck a peculiarly mottled appearance ; breast and belly pale greyish brown,
feathers darker on flanks, barred with umber, and almost white at the tips; abdomen
and under tail-coverts pure white; upper surface dark umber, the feathers variously
barred with brown ; rump and tail dusky black. Irides dark hazel; bill and feet black.

Adult female. The black extending further down the throat and occupying a greater
space below the eye; feathers on flanks paler than in the adult male; lower breast not
so pale, but uniform in colour with the flanks.

The young male is similar in colour to the adult female.

Dimenstons.—Total length 22°50 inches, wing from carpal joint 16°30, culmen 1°6,
tarsus 2°80, tail 6°75.

* In ‘Pearls of the Pacific, the author, Mr. J. W. Boddam-Whetham, agrees with me; for he says
(p. 100) :—“On returning to the house I found a very tempting repast ready, and amongst other luxuries
was a strawberry-fed goose, which had been enveloped in leayes and baked in a hole in the earth.” This was
during his stay at the Veleano House at Kilauea on Hawaii.

PW-F'rohawk del etdith West,Nevaman imp.

ANAS WYVILLIANA.

ANAS WYVILLIANA,
KOLOA MAOLI.

Anas superciliosa, var. a, sandwichensis, Bonaparte, Comptes Rendus, xliii. p. 649 (1856).

Anas superciliosa, var., G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Isl. p. 54 (partum) (1859).

Anas boschas ? “ (Mus. Berol.) Oahu,” Hartlaub, Arch. f. Naturgesch. 1852, 1. p. 187; Cassin,
Proc. Acad. Philad. 1862, p. 322.

Anas superciliosa, Dole, Proc. Bost. Soc. N. H. xii. p. 305 (1869) ; id. Hawaiian Alman. 1879,
p- 55 (mec Gmelin).

Anas wyvilliana, Sclater, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1878, p. 350; id. Voy. ‘Challenger,’ Birds, p. 98

pil. xxii.* (1881) ; Ridgway, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1878, p. 251; Finsch, Ibis, 1880, p. 79;
Stejneger, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1888, p. 98.

? Anas superciliosa et boschas, Hartlaub & Finsch, Beitr. Faun. Polynes. p. xxxix (1867).

* Figura notabilis.

DovstiEss it will be the opinion of some ornithologists that this bird should be
denominated Anas sandvicensis, in accordance with the subspecific name bestowed in
1856 by Bonaparte; but as that author seems to have considered it a mere variety of
A. superciliosa, and gives no description, I follow Dr. Sclater in calling it A. wyvilliana,
a name based upon two examples obtained in 1875 at Hilo, in Hawaii, during the
voyage of the ‘Challenger.’ There is no longer any doubt of its specific distinctness
from either A. superciliosa or A. boscas, though its superficial resemblance to the former
and to the female of the latter has no doubt been the cause of its being often passed over.

It will be seen, however, in the article on Bernicla sandvicensis, that Bloxam noticed

“ducks” when at the Sandwich Islands ; while the specimens from “Oahu” mentioned by
Hartlaub were no doubt obtained by Deppe, and Cassin records the fact that Stimpson
noticed “ A. boschas” during the United States North Pacific Surveying and Exploring
Expedition in 1856. Dr. Stejneger, as above cited, considers our species very closely
related to A. aberti, Ridgw., of N.W. Mexico; but it rather resembles A. obscura.

I shot specimens in November near Waialua, on the island of Oahu, and observed
others on the island of Hawaii near Hilo; while Mr. W. H. Purvis told me he used
to kill them at small ponds which occur in the forest near Kukuihaele, in the district
of Hamakua. Dr. O. Finsch remarks (‘ Ibis,’ 1880, p. 79):—“ Of the latter (Anas
wyvilliana, Sclater) I saw flocks in the swamps near Waimanalo (Oahu).” Dr. Stejneger
also received four specimens, obtained by Mr. Knudsen on Kauai, of which he gives an
exhaustive account (Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1888, p. 99). Judge Dole’s statement that
it inhabits the whole group is therefore probably correct.

9
ol

My specimens agree in measurements with those of Dr. Sclater, except that the total
length is about 24 inches more and the wing rather shorter.

Iniagnosis of the male (translated {rom that of Dr. Sclater).—Above black, the feathers
bordered with dusky; crown black, minutely dotted with dusky; beneath pale dusky,
ratker redder on throat and breast, more ochraceous on belly, feathers dotted and
blotched with black ; wings exteriorly brownish grey ; speculum broad, purple, enhanced
by a white edge above and below, followed by black; axillaries white; beak black
above, flesh-coloured below; feet orange. ‘Total length 15-0 inches, of wing 9-3, of
tail 3:0, of beak from gape 2:0, its breadth under the nostril 0-7, length of tarsus 1-5.

Mr. Ridgway describes the female at length in the ‘ Proceedings of the United
States National Museum’ for 1878; but as he considers it “to differ but little in
coloration” from the male, it is not necessary to reproduce his account here. It may
be added that the “A. freycineti, Bp.,” of Gray’s ‘ Hand-list,’ which Mr. Ridgway
thought might possibly be A. wyvilliana, is, according to the original describer, an
European species.

DAFILA ACUTA,
KOLOA MAPU.

Anas acuta, Linneus, Syst. Nat. ed. 12, 1. p. 202 (1766); Schlegel, Cat. Mus. P.-B. Anseres, p. 88
(1866).

Dafila caudacuta, Stephens (Shaw), Zool. xii. pt. 1, p. 127 (1824).

Dafila acuta, Cassin, U.S. Expl. Exped., Mamm. & Orn. p. 341 (1858) ; Sclater & Salvin, Ibis,
1859, p. 231; ud. Proc. Zool. Soc. 1876, p. 891; Baird, Brewer, & Ridgway, Water-B. N. Am.
i. p. 511 (1884) ; Stejneger, Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus. no. 29, p. 158 (1885) ; id. Proc. U.S. Nat.
Mus. 1887, p. 136.
[The above references are almost limited to the appearance of this well-known Holarctic

species in the countries bordering on the North-Pacific Ocean. ]

THE well-known Pintail Duck is only a winter visitor to the Sandwich Islands, in this
respect resembling the Shoveller. The first record of its occurrence there is that by
Dr. Stejneger, in the ‘ Proceedings of the United States National Museum’ for 1888, a
male having been procured for him in Kauai by Mr. Knudsen, who gave its native name
as ‘ Koloa mapu.” I also observed several on the sea-coast near Kiholo, in Hawaii, in
the month of December. Drs. Townsend and Pickering are stated by Cassin to have
noticed it in Oregon; but no specimens were brought home by the United States
Exploring Expedition.

According to Messrs. Sclater and Salvin, the furthest locality to the southward in
which the bird has been observed is the Isthmus of Panama, where McLeannan found
it. Northwards its distribution is, of course, general throughout the Arctic Regions ;
while it has been found in California, and commonly during winter in Guatemala, Cuba,
and Jamaica. As regards the other side of the Pacific, Messrs. Dresser and Sharpe, in
their ‘ Birds of Europe,’ record it from the whole of Siberia to Japan and China.

ad naga.
ete

; : Lut é L ye.

4 Be ee |
ey ee a ie J ,

SPATULA CLYPEHATA.
KOLOA MOHA'.

Anas clypeata, Linneus, Syst. Nat. ed. 12,1. p. 200 (1766); Schlegel, Cat. Mus. P.-B. Anseres,
p. 34 (1866) ; Dole, Proc. Bost. Soc. N. H. xu. p. 805 (1869) ; id. Haw. Alman. 1879, p. 55.

Spatula clypeata, Boie, Isis, 1822, p. 564; Sclater & Salvin, Ibis, 1859, p. 231; iid. Proc. Zool. Soe.
1876, p. 896; Lawrence, Mem. Bost. Soc. N. H. i. p. 314 (1874); Peale, U.S. Exp]. Exped.,
Birds, p. 251 (1848) ; Cassin, U.S. Expl. Exped., Mamm. & Orn. p. 843 (1858) ; G. R. Gray,
Cat. B. Trop. Isl. p. 55 (1859) ; Gould, Handb. B. Austral. 1. p. 370 (1865) ; Baird, Brewer,
& Ridgway, Water-B. N. Am. p. 526 (1884) ; Stejneger, Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus. no. 29, p. 159
(1885) ; id. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1887, p. 187.

Rhynchaspis clypeata, Hartlaub, Arch. f. Naturgesch. xviii. Heft 1, p. 186 (1852).

[Nearly all the above references indicate the occurrence of this widely-ranging Holarctic
species on the shores or islands of the Pacific Ocean only. ]

J OBSERVED this species in some brackish lagoons on the sea-coast near Kiawaiiki, in
Hawaii, during December 1887, but failed to procure specimens. Peale, in his
account of the United States Exploring Expedition, says :—‘‘ Good specimens of this
beautiful Duck were obtained at the islands of Hawaii and Oahu; they appear to be
identical with the Americans, and in this respect are worthy of attention, as but few
of the birds found on that group of islands have analogues on either of the shores of
the Pacific Ocean opposite to them.”

Dr. Stejneger, in the ‘ Proceedings of the United States National Museum’ for
1888, records a male specimen received through Mr. Knudsen from Kauai in winter
plumage, apparently a bird of the year; and on the authority of that gentleman gives
the native name as “ Koloa moha.” He remarks that at that season it seems a com-
paratively common bird.

The Shoveller ranges throughout the Arctic Regions, and thence to Australia; and
Mr. Gould’s account in his ‘ Handbook’ of the birds of that country may be found
interesting. He says:—‘ When I visited New South Wales during the rainy season
of 1839, all the depressed parts of the land were filled with water, and the lagoons
here, there, and everywhere were tenanted by hundreds of Ducks of various species,
and every now and then one, two, or more beautifully plumaged Shovellers were seen
among them; but I did not succeed in shooting one of them, and must have left the

* Mr. Dole gives the native name as “ Moha,” and proceeds to say:—‘ They spend the winter months at
the Islands, and migrate in the spring to the North-west coast of America, returning late in the fall. Frequent
fresh water.”

yng

matter in doubt as to the particular species, if the late Mr. Coxen, of Yarrundi, had
not had the skin of a splendid old male in his possession, which he had himself shot,
and which, after a careful examination, I found to be identical with the Spatula
clypeata of Britain and the European continent.”

Messrs. Sclater and Salvin, as cited above, state that the bird is common in winter
on the Lake of Duefias, in Guatemala, occurring also in Cuba, Jamaica, and Mexico;
while Messrs. Dresser and Sharpe, in their ‘ Birds of Europe,’ trace it from the north-
west of Asia to Ceylon, China, and Japan.

PLEGADIS GUARAUNA.

Scolopax guarauna, Linneus, 8. N. ed. 12, i. p. 242 (1766).
Plegadis guarauna, Ridgway, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. i. p. 163 (1878) ; id. Water-B. N. Am. i. p. 97
(1884) ; Stejneger, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1887, p. 84.

[The list of references to this American species might, of course, be easily extended. |

A SINGLE immature bird was sent by Mr. Knudsen from Kauai in 1872, which
Mr. Ridgway referred somewhat doubtfully to this species of Glossy Ibis. It appears

to be a mere straggler to the Sandwich Islands, as it does not appear to have been
observed by anyone else.

202

ARDEA SACRA,
AUKU.

“ Sacred Heron,” Latham, Gen. Synops. iii. p. 92; “ Blue Heron,” var. B, id. tom. cit. p. 78.

? Ardea cerulea, var. y, Gmelin, Syst. Nat. 1. p. 631 (1788).

Ardea sacra, Gmelin, Syst. Nat. i. p. 640 (1788) ; Finsch & Hartlaub, Orn. Centralpolyn. p. 201
(1867) ; Dole, Proc. Boston Soc. N. H. 1869, p. 303 (partim) ; id. Hawaiian Alman. 1879,
p. 52 (partim) ; Finsch, Ibis, 1880, p. 79 (parti).

Ardea (Herodias) sacra, G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Isl. p. 48 (1859).

Demiegretta sacra, Wiglesworth, Aves Polyn. p. 67 (1891) ; Sharpe, Cat. B. Br. Mus. xxvi. p. 137
(1898).

[This list of references could, of course, easily be extended. |

EVIDENCE as to the occurrence in the Sandwich Islands of this widely ranging species
rests only on the observations of Mr. Dole and Dr. Finsch 4, each of whom records the
appearance of a white Heron, which may very likely have been an example of the
white form of Ardea sacra, though neither of them obtained a specimen, and it is
pretty clear that the others named by them were Night-Herons (Nycticorax)—the only
species of the family Ardeidw there commonly met with. None of the more recent
ornithological explorers (not even Mr. Perkins, who passed so long a time in the
islands) observed or much less procured an example which could have belonged to
either the blue or the white form of Ardea sacra, and we know from specimens which
that gentleman obtained that the young of Nycticorax griseus are not white, but have
the same plumage there as elsewhere. .

That Ardea sacra should occasionally stray to the Sandwich group is quite probable,
since it appears on almost every cluster of islands in the Pacific Ocean; but it is
certain that Mr. Dole’s information as to its being “common all over the group,” and
laying “ two eggs, which are mottled,” must be incorrect, while the fine specimen shot
near Honolulu, and described by him from memory, was doubtless an adult Nycticoraz.
Dr. Finsch’s evidence is simply: “'The white form I observed once at Kahalui.”

eh ae A
Description—Adult male and female. ‘“Saturate cinereo-cerulescens, abdomine
subfuscescente, linea a mento per mediam gulam decurrente lata nivea; criste, tergi et

* Tt is true that Mr. G. R. Gray (loc. cit.) assigned the Sandwich Islands as a locality for this species, and
even gaye “Otoo” (probably an old way of writing Aukw) as the native name it there bore, but on what
authority he made either statement is unknown.

pectoris plumis elongatis, apice ligulatis; rostro supra fusco, infra.
pedibu flavidis; iride flavo. Sar cece Ce Ge wed 1 ‘a

“ Jun, Tota alba.” (Minsch & Hartlaub.) ;

Dimensions—“ Long. c. 172! ; rostr. 8” QI"; al. 102”; ca
(Finsch & Hartlaub). ;

NYCTICORAX GRISEUS,

AUKU KOHILI.

Ardea nycticorax, Linn. Syst. Nat. ed. 12,1. p. 285 (1766) ; A. grisea, id. tom. cit. p. 239.

Ardea nevia, Boddaert, Tab]. Pl. Enl. p. 56.

Ardea exilis, Peale, U.S. Expl. Exped. p. 216 (1848) ; Dole, Proc. Boston Soc. N. H. 1869, p. 303;
id. Haw. Alman. 1879, p. 53 (nec Gmelin).

Botaurus exilis, Cassin, U.S. Expl. Exped. p. 800 (1858) (ex Peale, nec Gmelin).

Ardea sacra, Dole, Proc. Boston Soc. N. H. 1869, p. 803 (partim) ; id. Haw. Alman, 1879, p. 52
(partim) ; Finsch, Ibis, 1880, p. 79 (partim) (nec Gmel.).

Nycticorax nycticorax nevius, Stejneger, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1887, p. 84; 1888, p. 102.

Nycticorax griseus, Wiglesworth, Aves Polyn. p. 69 (1891).

Nycticorax nycticorax, Sharpe, Cat. B. Br. Mus. xxvi. p. 146 (1898).

[Except with regard to a few cases, the above citations refer to the Sandwich Islands,
or at least to the Pacific Ocean. |

Dr. StesNuGER was the first to determine the Night-Heron as a bird of these islands,
though it had doubtless been seen there previously by Mr. Dole and Dr. Finsch—the
former of whom described what must have been an adult of this species under the
name of Ardea sacra, while he referred other specimens (as the above synonymy will
shew) te A, eatlis—a species which there is no reason to believe occurs in the group!.
Dr. Stejneger was at first troubled with doubts as to whether the specimens sent to him
by Mr. Knudsen from Kauai belonged to the New or Old World form of Nycticoraz,
and finally came to the conclusion that they agreed in every respect with American
examples. Fortunately these doubts need not trouble us, since it is now generally
allowed that no specific distinction between the two alleged forms can be maintained.

I observed many individuals in the neighbourhood of Waikiki, in Oahu, during my
visit to the islands in 1887, while I obtained some immature specimens on Kauai ;
but I never met with an instance of this species breeding. Mr. Perkins, however, says
that the bird is very abundant throughout the islands, at fish-ponds near the sea, on
mud-flats, and on mountain streams. It breeds together in numbers at low elevations
on the mountains, generally on kukui trees.

Description.— Adult male and female. Crown, nape, and back glossy greenish black,

* Mr. G. R. Gray, however (Cat. B. Trop. Isl. p. 49), has under the name of A. eailis “Society Islands

(Oahu) ”!
20

with two long, narrow, white nuchal feathers; wings, lower scapulars, tail, and back of
the neck puce-grey, as are the sides of the body, rump, and upper tail-coverts. Base
of the forehead, sides of the head, and entire lower parts white; under wing-coverts
and axillaries very pale grey; bill black, lighter below; feet yellowish.

Juv. Upper parts with buff spots on the wing-coverts and longer rufous lines else-
where; tips of wing- and tail-feathers whitish. Lower parts streaked with dark brown,
light brown, and creamy white ; throat whiter.

Dimensions.—“ Total length 18 inches, culmen 3, wing 105, tail 4, tarsus 2°8”
(Sharpe).

oth
Vi

FREGATA AQUILA.

IWA.

Pelecanus aquilus, Linneus, Syst. Nat. ed. 12, 1. p. 216 (1766).

Tachypetes aquila, Vieill. N. Dict. d’ Hist. Nat. xi. p. 143 (1817).

Tachypetes aquilus, Kittlitz, Kupfertafeln zur Naturgesch. der Vogel, p. 15, pl. xx. (1833); id.
Mus. Senckenb. i. p. 121 (1834 ?); Cassin, U.S. Expl. Exped. p. 858 (1858) ; Dole, Proc.
Boston Soc. N. H. 1869, p. 308.

Attagen aquilus, G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Isl. p. 61 (1859).

Tachypetes palmerstoni, Dole, Haw. Alman, 1879, p. 58.

Fregata aquila, Stejneger, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1888, p. 102; Wiglesworth, Aves Polyn. p. 71
(1891); Rothschild, Avif. Laysan, p. 21 (1893) ; Grant, Cat. B. Br. Mus. xxvi. p. 443 (1898).

[The above citations refer chiefly to the Sandwich Islands and some other localities in the
Pacific Ocean. This list could easily be extended. ]

As there was at one time some misunderstanding with regard to the species of Frigate-
Bird found in the Sandwich Islands, it may be of interest to our readers to peruse the
remarks of Dr. Stejneger, which are quoted below. Palmer met with large colonies
nesting on bushes both in Laysan and the neighbouring islands from May to July;
Mr. Perkins observed it on Oahu; and Mr. Dole quotes from Kittlitz the statement
that it “ breeds on Nihoa,” while the last-named also found it in the Laysan group.

Dr. Stejneger says :—

“In his first edition of his ‘Synopsis’ (Proc. Boston Soc. Nat. Hist. xii.) Mr. Dole
enumerated the Frigate-Bird under the above specific name | Tachypetes aquilus|, but
in 1879 (‘ Hawaiian Almanac’) he corrected the identification as erroneous, and substi-
tuted for it the name Tachypetes palmerstoni, without stating his reasons for so doing.
It seems, however, as if he made the change under the impressica that ‘ Tachypetes
aguila, a similar but much larger bird of the Atlantic Ocean,’ is confined to the latter,
and that no other species than the small one (the correct name of which is fregata
minor) occurs in the ‘tropical belt of the Pacific and Indian Oceans.’ This is not quite
exact, for while F. minor is restricted to the Pacific, and particularly its southern part,
F. aquila is found, in both oceans, especially north of the Equator, and the specimen
from Kauai, sent by Mr. Knudsen, belongs to the large form. As Dr. Streets has
found F, minor on the Fanning Islands (Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus. no. 7, p. 25), it is quite
likely that it may also occur, at least oecasionally, in the Hawaiian Archipelago.
Knudsen’s specimen is a female, with the head, neck, lower breast, and belly

blackish ; upper fore neck grayish; chest whitish, strongly suffused in the middle
with ochraceous buff; smaller upper wing-coverts grayish brown with darker centers
and paler margins.

“The measurements of this specimen are as follows :—

J.S. Nat. : Mavis E Middle
re No. Collector. | Sex. Locality. Date. | Wing. ates is cy Tarsus. | toe with

claw.

113446 Knudsen. | 2 | Kauai, Hawaiian Islands.| .... | 595 345 120 25 Wa”

Description Adult male. Blackish brown with reflexions of green and purple. Bill
bluish white in the middle; feet more or less red; orbits, lores, and pouch scarlet.

Adult female. Browner, with white underparts and pinkish feet. Little or no
pouch.

Dimensions.—‘ Total length about 40 inches, culmen from feathers on forehead
3°6-5:2, wing 20°5-26°7, tail 14-19, tarsus -7-1” (Ogilvie Grant).

PHAETHON RUBRICAUDA.

Phaeton rubricauda, Boddaert, Tabl. Pl. Enl. p. 57 (1783); Cassin, U.S. Expl. Exped. p. 395
(1858); G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Isl. p. 60 (1859) ; Dole, Proc. Boston Soc. N. H. 1869,
p-. 808; id. Haw. Alman. 1879, p. 58; Wiglesworth, Aves Polyn. p. 73 (1891); Rothschild,
Avif. Laysan, p. 33 (1893); Grant, Cat. B. Br. Mus. xxvi. p. 451 (1898).

Phaeton phenicurus, Gmel. Syst. Nat. i. p. 583 (1788).

Phaeton ethereus, Bloxam, Voy. ‘ Blonde,’ p. 251 (1826) (nec Linn.).

Phaethon phenicurus, Brandt, Mém. Acad. Sc. St. Pétersb. sér. 6, p. 252, tab. 1. (1839).

[The above citations refer chiefly to the Sandwich Islands and some localities in the
Pacific Ocean. The list could easily be extended. |

Owine to Bloxam’s error, noticed by Mr. Rothschild, of recording this Tropic-Bird
under the name of P. ethereus, no writer previous to Mr. Dole appears to have
mentioned it as an inhabitant of the Sandwich Islands. The first-enamed remarked,
however, upon the great value that the red tail-feathers possessed in the eyes of the
natives, and thereby made it clear that P. rubricauda was the species which he intended.
It breeds in several places in the group, especially on Kauai and Niihau, and chooses
holes in almost inaccessible cliffs wherein to deposit its eggs, though in Laysan they
are laid in hollows scraped in the soil under bushes. When in the Sandwich Islands
I shot several specimens from the high rock-walls surrounding the caldera of Kilauea,
which are in most parts particularly steep. Mr. Perkins considers this species much
more uncommon in the group than P. ethereus.

Description.—Adult male and female. Satiny white, often tinged with pink; the
upper parts marked with blackish bars or patches, and shewing black marks near
the eyes. Bill red; feet yellowish, with black toes. The long median tail-feathers
dull red, with black shafts and very narrow webs.

Dimensions.—“ Total length about 36 inches, culmen from feathers on forehead
2°65-2°65, wing 12°3-13°4, tail 17—-18°d, tarsus 1:2” (Ogilvie Grant).

PHAETHON ATHEREUS.

Phaeton ethereus, Linn. Syst. Nat. ed. 12, p. 219 (1766).

? Phaéton (an candidus ?), Kittlitz, Mus. Senckenb. i. p. 123 (1834 ?).

Phaethon ethereus, Brandt, Mém. Acad. Sc. St. Pétersb. sér. 6, v. p. 257, tab. 11. (1839) ; Cassin,
U.S. Expl. Exped. p. 394 (1858); G. R. Gray, Cat. B. Trop. Is. p. 60 (1859) ; Dole, Proc.
Boston Soc. N. H. 1869, p. 808; id. Haw. Alman. 1879, p. 58; Wiglesworth, Aves Polyn.
p- 73 (1891); Grant, Cat. B. Br. Mus. xxvi. p. 457 (1898).

[The above citations refer chiefly to the Sandwich Islands and some other localities
in the Pacific Ocean. The list could easily be extended. |

LirtLe need be said of this well-known inhabitant of the tropics, which appears to be
common on all the Sandwich Islands. Mr. Dole records it in both of his lists, though
he furnishes no information as to where it was noticed, while Cassin does not give
it as occurring in the group in his account of the U.S. Exploring Expedition; but
Mr. Rothschild has kindly sent a note in which he says that it was obtained by
Palmer, and Mr. Perkins states that he met with it on the cliffs round Honolulu and
elsewhere, breeding not uncommonly on the rocky ledges. It may also be found on
one or more of the outlying islands to the north-west.

Description — Adult male and female. Similar to P. rubricauda, but with white
median tail-feathers.

Dimensions.— Total length about 40 inches, culmen from feathers on forehead
2°4-2°6, wing 11:5-13, tail about 26, tarsus 1:15-1:2” (Ogilvie Grant).

‘Reape or aconaenas

FW Frohawk delet lith.

OCHANODROMA CRYP 1

TOLAUCURA.

West Newman imp

OCEANODROMA CRYPTOLEUCURA.

, Dole, Proc. Bost. Soc. N. H. xii. p. 308 (1869) ; id. Hawaiian Alman. 1879,

? Thalassidroma
p- 55.
Cymochorea cryptoleucura, Ridgway, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. iv. p. 837 (1882); Baird, Brewer,

& Ridgway, Water-B. N. Am. p. 406 (1884).
Oceanodroma crypioleucura, Steyneger, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1887, p. 78.

Or this Petrel I was fortunate enough to procure examples from my friend Mr. Francis
Gay, procured on the Island of Niihau.

Dr. Stejneger, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1887, p. 78, thus refers to it:—‘‘Mr. R.
Ridgway in 1882 described this species as new, from two specimens collected by
Mr. Knudsen (Nos. 41949 and 41950). It is easily distinguished from all its allies
by having the upper tail-coverts white, the larger ones broadly tipped with black, and
by having the concealed bases of the tail-feathers, except middle pair, white.

“This is probably the unnamed ‘ 7halassidroma’ to which Mr. Dole refers (Proc.
Boston Soc. N. H. xii. 1869, p. 308, Extr. p. 15; and ‘Hawaiian Almanac,’ 1879,
p. 99).”

Mr. Ridgway’s description is as follows:—

“ Description.— Uniform fuliginous, the head and upper surface more slaty, the
greater wing-coverts and outer webs of tertials paler, inclining to dull ash-grey; remiges
and rectrices dull black, the latter (except middle pair) white at the base ; upper tail-
coverts white, the longer feathers broadly tipped with blackish (as in Procellaria
pelagica); anal region mixed with white, and white of the upper coverts extending
laterally to the sides of the crissum. ‘Tail only slightly forked or emarginated, the
outer feathers being only about :20 to -30 of an inch longer than the middle pair.
Bill, legs, and feet (including webs) deep black. Wing 5:80-6:30 inches; tail 3-0-3-15 ;
bill (measured in straight line from base of culmen to point of the maxilla) 60; tarsus
‘80-90 ; middle toe, with claw, ‘85-—90.”

Nothing certain is known respecting the range of this species.

BULWERIA ANJINHO,

Procellaria anjinho, Heineken, (Brewster’s) Edinb. Journ. Sc. n. ser. i. p. 231 (1829).

Procellaria bulweri, Jardine & Selby, Ill. Orn. ii. pl. 65; Jardine, Edinb. Journ. Nat. & Geogr.
Se. i. p. 245 (1830).

Thalassidroma bulweri, Gould, B. Eur. v. pl. 449 (1837).

Puffinus columbinus, Webb & Berthelot, Hist. Nat. Iles Canariennes, i. p. 44, pl. iv. fig. 2 (1841).

Bulweria bulweri, Bonaparte, Catal. Metod. Uccelli Eur. p. 81 (1842) ; Steyneger, Proc. U.S. Nat.
Mus. xii. p. 378 (1889) ; id. op. cit. xvi. p. 620 (1893); Rothschild, Avif. Laysan, p. 51
(1898) ; Salvin, Cat. B. Br. Mus. xxv. p. 420 (1896).

Bulweria columbina, C. L. Brehm, Naumannia, 1855, p. 296.

Procellaria macgillivrayi, Tristram, Ibis, 1881, p. 252 (nec G. R. Gray).

Gstrelata bulweri, Coues, Check List N. Am. B. 1882, p. 126.

[This list of citations could obviously be much extended. |

Tuover Mr. Rothschild’s collector Palmer found this species breeding commonly under
some old turtle-shells on French Frigate Islands, and also met with it on Laysan, the
only evidence of its occurrence in the Sandwich Islands is that furnished by Dr. Stejneger
in 1889, whose information is as follows :—

“T have but little doubt that the two birds received from Mr. Knudsen since the
rest of this paper was submitted to the printer really belong to this species. They
make a very unexpected addition to the Hawaiian fauna.

“« As far as coloration is concerned they agree minutely with B. bulweri, the greater
wing-coverts being lighter than the rest of the wing, in this respect differing from the
original description 1, and, so far as I know, the only one, of B. macgillivrayi. Noy
are the bills larger; on the contrary, they are somewhat slenderer; nor do the
dimensions or proportions differ, as the appended measurements show. ‘The only doubt
is caused by the difference in shape of the nasal tube, which in the single specimen of
undoubted B. bulweri at my command is swollen almost to the base, while in Knudsen’s
two specimens it is compressed from about the middle backwards. This difference
may be entirely unessential, however.

“The occurrence at the Hawaiian Islands of this species, which has hitherto been

+ «Tike 7. bulwerz, but with the bill rather larger; and it is without the sooty brown on the wings,’ Gray,
Cat. Birds Trop. Isl. Pac. Oc. p. 56 (1859). This diagnosis, with slight additions and measurements, is
reproduced in Finsch & Hartlaub, Beitr. Faun. Centralpolynes. p. 242 (1867).”

recorded only from the Eastern Atlantic, and as occasionally occurring in Greenland
and the Bermudas, is very interesting, especially as we might have expected to find
B. macgillivrayi there, and raises the question whether the latter, of which I think
only one specimen is known, may not simply be an abnormal individual of B. bulweri.

“ Measurements.

Description.— Adult male and female. Almost uniform sooty brown, rather lighter
below and on the greater wing-coverts ; bill black; feet yellow, with darker webs.

Dimensions.—“ Total length about 11 inches; wing 7:7; tail, central feathers 4:1,
lateral 3; culmen about 1:2; tarsus 1-05, middle toe 1-2” (Salvin).

TY W.Frchawk del. et lith West, Newman imp -

G@STRELATA PHAPOP YG

GOSTRELATA PHAOPYGIA.
UUAU.

? Procellaria alba, Dole, Proc. Bost. Soc. N. H. xii. p. 308 (1869) ; id. Hawaiian Alman. 1879, p. 55
(nec Gmelin).

Gstrelata pheopygia, Salvin, Trans. Zool. Soc. ix. p. 507, pl. 88. fig. 1 (1876) ; Ridgway, Manual
N.-A. Birds, p. 65 (1887).

CGistrelata sandwichensis, Ridgway, Water-B. N. Am. 11. p. 895 (1884).

Aistrelata sandwichensis, Ridgway, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1x. p. 95 (1886) ; id. op. cit. xi. p. 104
(1888) ; Stejneger, op. cit. x. p. 77 (1887).

In the ‘ Proceedings of the U.S. National Museum’ for 1887 Dr. Stejneger writes
as follows :—

“Tn the great work on, the. Water-Birds of North America Mr. R. Ridgway writes as
follows (ii. pp. 394-395):—‘ A specimen from the Sandwich Islands (No. 61259,
V. Knudsen coll.), labelled “ Puffinus. meridionalis,” differs from the above diagnosis
[of @. hesitata] in several particulars, and may possibly be distinct. The entire upper
parts, except forehead, are continuously uniform dusky, nearly black on the head, the
nape, the back, and scapulars more greyish brown; this dark colour even. covers
uniformly the entire side of the head and neck, except that portion of the, former
before the eye, and thence downward and backward across the malar region. The
feathers of the nape and side of the neck, however, are white immediately beneath the
surface, this colour showing conspicuously wherever the feathers may be disturbed.
There is, likewise, no exposed white on the upper tail-coverts or base of the tail; the
former are, however, very abruptly white beneath the surface, but the latter is white
only at the extreme base, and the outer rectrices have a considerable amount of white
on their inner webs. ‘The lower parts are almost entirely white, there being merely a
few plumbeous irregular bars on the flanks. The measurements are as follows:—
wing 11-80 inches (less than the average of @. hesitata as given by Dr. Coues); tail
9°75, its graduation 2°40; culmen 1°22; depth of bill at base 0-99; tarsus 1:40, middle
toe (without claw) 1:55. In view of the differences of coloration, much more graduated
tail, and smaller dimensions—and especially in view of its different habitat, no speci-
mens of @. hesitata having to our knowledge been reported from any part of the
Pacific Ocean—the specimen in question may be really distinct. Should such prove
to be the case, the name @. sandwichensis is proposed as a suitable designation.’ And
in a footnote he adds :—‘ In pattern of coloration this specimen agrees exactly with an
example of @. coofii, but has the back, scapulars, rump, and tail decidedly less ashy.’
After having had an opportunity to compare Knudsen’s bird with examples of true

) 2D

@. hesitata, and also with the type of Lawrence’s @. meridionalis, the same author
afterwards (Pr. U.S. Nat. Mus. ix. 1886, p. 96) pronounces the opinion that they are
entirely distinct from @. sandwichensis, but has ‘a suspicion that the latter is the same
as ©. pheopygia, Salv. (Trans. Zool. Soc. Lond. vol. ix. pt. ix. May 1876, p. 507, pl. 88.
fig. 1), from the Galapagos.’

“This point, however, can only be determined by direct comparison of the types, and
until then we prefer to retain the name which belongs strictly to the Hawaiian speci-
mens. Latham’s ‘ White-breasted Petrel’ (Gen. Syn. iii. 2, p. 400), ‘from Turtle and
Christmas Islands, upon which Gmelin based his Procellaria alba, scarcely belongs
here, as from the description of the former it seems to have the whole head and neck
blackish with a white patch on the throat (‘the head, neck, and upper parts of the
body dusky brown, nearly black; on the throat a whitish patch; breast, belly, and vent
white’). Ido not know Mr. Dole’s reasons for including P. alba in the list, unless it
be Bloxham’s very uncertain statement (Voy. ‘ Blonde,’ p. 252), and I think it most
probable that @. sandwichensis is the bird he intended by that name.”

Mr. Ridgway afterwards wrote (Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. xi. p. 104):—‘In volume ix.
of these ‘ Proceedings’ [1888], p. 96, in an additional note to an article on this bird,
I expressed a suspicion that it might be the same as @. phwopygia, Salv. (Trans. Zool.
Soc. Lond. vol. ix. pt. ix. May 1876, p. 507, pl. 88. fig. 1), and in my more recently
published ‘ Manual of North-American Birds’ (p. 65) relinquished any doubt to the
question by giving the Sandwich Island bird as @. pheopygia. In the meantime the
type had been sent to Mr. Salvin for comparison with the types of his species, and his
letter, dated December 11, 1887, confirms the views which I had adopted, as the
following quotation from his letter will show :—‘I have compared it [?. e. the type of
(i. sandwichensis| with the two types in the British Museum of @. pheopygia, and
done my best to make them different, but they are as like as any three specimens of
the same species of Petrel that I ever examined. The bill is a trifle small in all its
dimensions, and outer rectrices a little more freely mottled with white, but the

999

Galapagos birds vary just as much znter se.

I obtained a young bird—said to be of this species—in the down from a native,
whilst staying at Kilauea in the month of September 1887, and was told that a
considerable number had their nests in holes in the ground in the vicinity, more
particularly on the slopes of Mauna Loa. At Kilauea we used to hear at evening-time
the peculiarly harsh cry of a bird flying over our heads, and the natives told me it was
the Uuau. ‘The flesh is esteemed a great delicacy by the Hawaiians.

PF WiI'cchavwk del et lith.

PUFFINUS CUNEHATUS.

West, Newman inip.

PUFFINUS CUNEATUS.
UAU KANE.

Puffinus cuneatus, Salvin, Ibis, 1888, p. 353; Stejneger, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. Xi. p. 877 (1890).
Puffinus knudseni, Stejneger, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 1888, p. 93.

In ‘The Ibis’ for July 1888 Mr. Salvin described this bird from the Krusenstern
Islands (Marshall group) as Puffinus cuneatus, while in November of the same year
Dr. Stejneger redescribed it as P. knudseni from Kauai, Sandwich Islands ; the latter
author, however, on comparison of further specimens, readily admitted that the first
name took precedence.

Mr. Salvin writes as follows :—

“In general coloration this species resembles P. creatopus, Coues, but it may be
readily distinguished by its smaller darker bill, smaller feet, and especially by its longer
more cuneate tail, the latter character placing it along with P. chlororhynchus and
P. bulleri, described below, in Gloger’s supposed genus or section ‘ T’hiellus’ (see Coues,
Pr. Ac. Nat. Sci. Phil, 1864, p. 122) !.

“J have two specimens of this bird before me, both obtained in the spring of 1883
by Mr. H. J. Snow, of Yokohama 2.

“In several respects this bird conforms to Latham’s description of his White-breasted
Petrel *, said to inhabit Turtle and Christmas Islands; but there are differences which
make it undesirable to make another, and probably fruitless, attempt to identify this
name, which has already been applied to @strelata neglecta of the Kermadec Islands.
Turtle Island is probably Vatoa or Turtle I., one of the Fiji group; and Christmas I.
the island of that name south of the Sandwich Islands.”

Dr. Stejneger, after giving a diagnosis and discussing the bird’s affinities, says :—

“Mr. Knudsen writes me in regard to the present species, which according to his
label is called ‘Uau kane’ by the natives, that it was formerly found plentiful every

* “The name ‘ Thyellus’? was proposed by Gloger in Froriep’s ‘ Notizen,’ xvi. (1827) p. 279, simply as a
substitute for Pugfinus. Bonaparte (Consp. Av. ii. p. 200) altered the spelling, and restricted it to this section
of Puffinus, and in so doing he was followed by Coues.”

* «The Krusenstern Islands here referred to are apparently the small cluster of islands so named by
Kotzebue, which form part of the Marshall Group, and are situated in about lat. 10° 17' N., long. 190° W.
The islands extend over an area of 15 miles long by 5 wide. The native name of the largest is Ailuk. There
is a Krusenstern Rock lying to the westward of the Sandwich Islands; but this can hardly be the place
whence these Petrels were obtained, as the sea is described as only breaking in one spot.”

* « WHITE-BREASTED Prrrut, Lath. Gen. Syn. vi. p. 400.

Procellaria alba, Gm. Syst. Nat. i. p. 565; Lath. Ind. Orn. ii. p. 822.”

summer at the top of the mountains as high up as 5000 feet, where they had their
nests in long burrows, but that in the last ten years they have become rare, as the
foreign rats kill them in their nests.” .

If Dr. Finsch is correct as to the genus, the subjoined account (‘ Ibis,’ 1880, p. 81)
may also refer to this species; but only future investigations can determine this with
certainty. He says:—‘“I also got information of a very curious bird, which the natives
call ‘ U-au. According to the description it breeds in holes underground on the
mountains, resorting to its nesting-place only at night. Ido not doubt that the bird is
a species of Puffinus, as similar habits are known of allied species in the Fijis, Navigators’
Islands, Tahiti, &c. To obtain information of this species, which Mr. Dole enumerates
as ‘ Procellaria alba, Gm.,’ I made a day’s trip to a part of the Northern Haleakala
ranges [in Maui], where the birds were said to be breeding. Although I took the best
guide I could get, we found nothing but a few old holes under the ferns and an old
dried-up white egg. The species remains, therefore, still uncertain; but I have no
doubt that it is the same which Isaw soaring in evening-time on the rocky coast near
Lahama. The bird looked black, white below, and reminded me of Puffinus obscurus.”

Description (translated from that of Mr. Salvin).—Above sooty ; crown, lower back,
lesser wing-coverts, and remiges darker, feathers of the upper back bordered with sooty
colour of a pale tint, greater wing-coverts tinged with grey at the tips: beneath—
whitish in the middle part; sides of the throat and neck grey, breast and flanks also of
this colour, entire lower belly and vent darker ; under wing-coverts whitish, very slightly
marked with grey; tail wedge-shaped, black: beak dull lead-colour; feet yellow,
darker on the outer part. Total length 17:0 inches, of wing 11°8, of middle tail-
feathers 5°3, of lateral 3°65, of beak from gape 2°2, from nostrils 1:2, of exposed culmen
1:6, of tarsus 1°85, of middle toe with claw 2°32.

DIOMEDEA IMMUTABILIS.

Diomedea (an exulans?), Kittlitz, Mus. Senckenb. i. p. 120 (1834?) (nee Linn.).

Diomedea brachyura, Peale, U.S. Expl. Exped. pp. 290, 337 (1848) ; Cassin (partim), U.S. Expl.
Exped. p. 398 (1858) ; Dole, Haw. Alman. 1879, p. 57 (nee Temminck).

Diomedea melanophrys, Bean, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. v. pp. 170, 173 (1882)? (nec Boie, apud
Temminck).

Diomedea immutabilis, Rothschild, Bull. Br. Orn. Club, i. p. xlviii (1893) ; id. Ibis, 1893, p. 448,
and 1894, p. 548; id. Avif. Laysan, p. 57, pls. (1893); Salvin, Cat. B. Br. Mus. xxv.
p. 446.

As will be seen from the synonymy, Mr. Rothschild was the first author to distinguish
this species from Diomedea exulans and D. brachyura. We received specimens from
his collector Palmer, who found it in immense numbers on Laysan, and in fair quantity
on Lisiansky, while he observed a few individuals on French Frigate Shoals and near
Niihau. Mr. Dole had previously recorded it, under the name of D. brachyura, as
* common about the Hawaiian Islands,” and a specimen killed by Bailleu on Hawaii
is, according to Mr. Rothschild, in the Paris Museum. No evidence of its breeding in
the group is as yet forthcoming. Numerous specimens were collected by the United
States Exploring Expedition, and in the accounts of that voyage the bird was stated to
be “ particularly abundant at sea north of the Sandwich Islands.”

Description.—Adult male and female. “ Head, neck, lower rump, and entire under
surface pure white; space in front of the eye sooty black; wings and wing-coverts
blackish brown; interscapular region, back, and upper part of rump paler and more
smoky brown; tail black, fading into white at base; under wing-coverts mixed blackish
brown and white.”

“The first plumage of the young (which is dark in most Albatrosses) is similar to
that of the adult bird; the breast and entire underparts pure white.”

“The nestling is covered with brown down; its bill is blackish brown, and its iris
brown also.” (Lothschild.)

Dimensions.—* Total length about 32 inches, wing 18°6-19, bill 4, tarsus 3-2,
middle toe with claw 4:3” (Rothschild).

Oo ad a

Birds of the Sandwich Jslands

pl, 9

Plate L

qe
j

Vee

H. Gadow, del

Lith. Anst. Julius Kimkhardt,Letpzig.

A xe ;

Birds of the Sandwich Jslands. Plate IL,
Fig.218

Fig.32.

barbule -*-- -\-

= lb

ail

HGadow,del. Tih Anst Julius Klinkhardi Leipzig

« * cn oe

Birds of the Sandwich Jslands.

Fig.35.

Tjth. Anst. Julius Khinkhardt Les

REMARKS

ON THE

STRUCTURE OF CERTAIN HAWAIIAN BIRDS,

WITH REFERENCE TO THEIR SYSTEMATIC POSITION.

HANS GADOW, M.A., Puz.D.,

STRICKLAND CURATOR AND LECTURER ON THE ADVANCED MORPHOLOGY OF VERTEBRATES IN THE
UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE.

Mr. WILson has handed over to me for examination a considerable number of well-
preserved spirit-specimens of Hawaiian birds !, requesting me to ascertain their
systematic position and to give an account of the more important parts of the
structure of the species constituting this almost unique material. All these birds are
Oscines, truly acro- and polymyodean. I have not described their skeletons because
these are now preserved in the Cambridge Museum, and consequently will be accessible
at any future time, should they be considered worth the trouble of describing and
figuring. In the following pages I have restricted myself to the description of those
parts which are either more perishable than the bones, or which I found to be of
greater taxonomic value. In order to investigate the affinities of the birds in question,
it was necessary to compare them with many other forms, of which, however, the
selection was sadly restricted and determined by the scanty material at my disposal.

To complete this account, the stuffed specimens of Drepanis pacifica and of Cheto-
ptila angustipluma have likewise been examined.

* Pheornis obscura. Himatione sanguinea.
Chasiempis sandvicensis. . virens.
Loxioides bailleui. Loxops coccinea.
Psittacirostra psittacea. Oreomyza bairdi.
Acrulocereus braccatus Chrysomitridops ceruleirostris.
5 nobilis, Hemignathus procerus.
Vestiaria coccinea, ns olivaceus.

PHORNIS oBscURS. (PI. I. figs. 1-5.)

Bill with a tooth-like notch near the tip of the premaxilla, and with a corresponding
emargination near the tip of the mandible; the rest of the cutting-edge sharp and
unbroken. ‘The bill is considerably flattened, being much broader than it is high at
the base, with a prominent culmen. The nostri/s are oval and open, situated at the
anterior ventral corner of a large and soft coriaceous groove, nearer the tip of the bill
than the base. The neighbourhood of the nostrils is bare of feathers; the rest of
the coriaceous groove is covered with feathers, and there are a few upper rictal
bristles.

The bones of the palate exhibit distinctly Turdine features, and differ considerably
in their arrangement from that which exists either in Muscicapide (e. g. Muscicapa,
Petreca) or in Pachycephaline. ‘The vomer is forked anteriorly and posteriorly, and
is, as in the Thrushes, not accompanied laterally by septo-maxillary splints, which
are well developed in Flycatchers and in Pachycephaline. The palatine bones articulate
posteriorly with the pterygoids and are well separated from each other, so that the
sphenoid remains visible between them. The interpalatine spurs are long and almost
touch the long and uniformly slender maxillo-palatines, while the ends of the latter
are widely separated from the interpalatine spurs in Shrikes, Flycatchers, and Pachy-
cephaline, but not in Thrushes. Moreover, the slender distal halves of the maxillo-
palatines of Pheornis are scooped out ventrally for the reception of certain air-sacs,
while these bones in the Flycatchers are distally swollen to a considerable extent,
and in Pachycephala are triangular, broadest at the base.

Tongue thin, smooth, much shorter than the bill, elongated, slightly arrow-shaped,
and slightly bifurcated at the tip.

Pterylosis.—There are ten primary remiges, of which the tenth or terminal is
functional and well developed, being nearly half the size of the ninth, and two and a
half times larger than its covert. The tip of the wing is formed by the seventh, sixth,
and fifth quills. The number of secondaries is nine, that of the rectrices twelve, of
which the outer pairs are slightly shorter than the rest. ‘The feather-tracts are much
generalized (resembling, for instance, those of Psttéacirostra), but numerous hair-like
feathers are interspersed between the contour-feathers of all the tracts, and the spaces
between the dorsal and ventral cervical tracts are sprinkled with small downy
contour-feathers. The shape of the saddle differs much from that of the Pachy-
cephaline, but in the Muscicapide and Turdide this varies too much to permit of safe
comparisons.

The metatarsus is covered by three long and unbroken laminze—one in front, one on
the median, and one on the lateral side. ‘The possession of three long lamine is rather a
Turdine feature, while the metatarsus of the Pachycephaline, except in the subgenus
Pachycephalopsis, is entirely covered with transverse scales; the same transverse
scutellation exists still more markedly in the Muscicapide.

Alimentary canal.—The ceesophagus showed no trace of a crop. The stomach was

round, strongly muscular, lined internally with dark cuticle, and contained no insects
whatever, but only hard seeds and pulpy masses. This indicates that Phwornis lives
on stony fruit and soft berries, especially since the stones or hard kernels are
also found in the gut, and are consequently passed out through the vent, a habit
common among Thrushes. The whole gut is correspondingly wide, especially the
sacculated duodenum and the rectum, which again is characteristic of frugivorous
birds. ‘The ceca are narrow non-functional tubes 0°8 centim. long. The total length
of the gut is only 21 centim., the relative length only 3°5. ‘This shortness, again,
indicates soft and easily digestible food. ‘The intestina] convolutions are very simple,
as in most Oscines with short guts. ‘The right lobe of the liver is three times as
large as the left.

Summary.—Pheornis has no resemblance either to the Muscicapide or with the
Pachycephaline, as these groups are limited in the Catalogue of Birds in the British
Museum ; its supposed affinity with Hopsaléria can be disregarded, because that genus
is intermediate between the two groups. There remains the question of its being
related to the Prionopide, as suggested by Mr. Sharpe. Of the genera which he (Cat.
Birds Brit. Mus. vols. iii. and iv.) has made to constitute the Prionopide, only those of
Australian and Malayan origin can be taken into consideration for comparison. Of these
Grallina is out of the question; there remain consequently fectes, Collyriocincla, and
Pinarolestes. According to the key (vol. 11. pp. 270, 271), Pheornis would coincide
with Collyriocincla, a genus which Gray associated with the Pachycephaline, and of
which the questionable species “ sandwichensis” (Hand-list of Birds, no. 5832) is pro-
bably our Ph@ornis obscura. Unfortunately only skins and skeletons of Collyriocincla,
with none of the soft parts, could be examined owing to want of material. However,
Collyriocincla is not a Pachycephaline bird, and it also differs considerably from
Pheornis in its strong transverse scales on the front of the metatarsus, in shape of bill,
formation of the tip of the wing, and above all in the bones of the palate, which
bear no resemblance to those of that species. Moreover, the three Prionopine genera
in question agree with each other and differ from Phwornis in the much more basal,
round, and almost concealed nostrils. Lastly, according to Gould, Collyriocincla
‘feeds upon insects of various kinds, caterpillars and their larve,” while Phwornis is
essentially a vegetable eater, a frugivorous bird.

Which of the still-existing birds form the link between Turdide, Muscicapide, and
the ill-defined Prionopide we do not know, owing to the want of well-preserved spirit-
specimens. Ph@ornis agrees fully with none of these families, but it differs least from
the Turdidz. Its frugivorous habits are much in favour of its affinity to the Thrushes,
although many of these birds vary their diet with snails and other soft-bodied inverte-
brates. ‘There are many instances known in which birds that originally fed on vegetables
have changed into insect eaters; but the reverse, the change from essentially animal to
vegetable food, implies much more serious changes of the alimentary system. The
apparent scarcity of Hawaiian insects, or rather the extremely hidden life which many of
them seem to lead, has forced the more indigenous insectivorous birds, the Drepanidide,

to develop the most specialized features. Other insectivorous birds, especially those
which are much larger than most of the Drepanidide, would, as more recent arrivals, find
competition very difficult under the prevailing circumstances. However, the small
Chasiempis does manage to coexist with the Drepanidide. A berry-eating bird, such as
a generalized or rather primitive Thrush, would, on the other hand, find the field free,
and would therefore not be forced to become so intensely Turdine as the members of
the genera Geocichla, Turdus, and Merula are now. Lastly, if in the future far more
extensive and really exhaustive investigations should after all reveal the Prionopine
ancestry of Phwornis, we should have one more instance of the affinities of the
Hawaiian to the Australian fauna.

CHASIEMPIS SANDVICENSIS. (PI. I. figs. 6-10.)

Bill like that of Muscicapine birds, broadened and flattened towards the base,
with a distinct notch near the tip of the premaxilla.

Nostrils with round openings, situated near the middle of the bill and in front of a
coriaceous groove which is covered with feathers. Posterior margin of this groove soft,
anterior margin hard, without any: opercular flap, but partly concealed by feathers.
Long and strong upper rictal bristles are present.

Tongue flat, slightly bifid and broken up near the tip.

Pterylosis—Primary remiges ten in number, the tenth or distal feather being two
thirds the length of the ninth. Tip of wing formed by the seventh to fifth primaries,
the ninth being shorter than the rest. Secondaries nine in number. Tail square and
long, consisting of twelve feathers. ‘The spinal feather-tract forms a rhombic saddle,
in the middle of which is a faint indication of a featherless space. The posterior
continuation of the saddle is narrow, but broadens out again towards the oil-eland.
The pectoral tract has a distinct lateral hook.

The metatarsus is covered in front by about five scales, which are distinct in front
only, but fused with each other towards the sides. The lateral and the median sides of
the metatarsus are each protected by one long scute, and on the posterior or plantar
side the scutes are separated by soft skin and do not form prominent ridges.

Alimentary canal.—Cisophagus without crop. Stomach large and round, of moderate
strength ; it contained a large smooth caterpillar, together with the eggs, legs, and other
remains of moths. The eggs were probably not swallowed separately, but together with
the female insect. The gutis wide throughout; it is short, and stowed away in simple
typically Oscine convolutions; the middle loop is the longest and is slightly spirally
twisted ; the last loop, partly overlapped by the first or duodenal loop, is almost closed.
Two very small, non-functional cca are inserted 2°3 centim. from the anus. The
total length of the gut is 18 centim., the relative length about 4:5.

Summary.—Chasiempis is an insectivorous Oscine bird, which in some of its essential
points agrees with the Muscicapide, while it differs considerably from the Pachy-
cephaline, and therefore from the Laniide. I cannot find any resemblance between
Chasiempis and Miro, which have been placed near each other (Cat. Birds Brit. Mus.

vol. iv.). Of the last I have been able to examine specimens owing to the kindness of
Sir Walter Buller. Lastly, the supposed affinity of Chastempsis to Pheornis cannot
be supported, because of the different nostrils, metatarsal scales, spinal and pectoral
feather-tracts, food, and bones of the palate.

Loxtoipes BarLunur. (PI. I. figs. 11-16.)

Bill like that of typical Conirostres and clearly Fringilline, without notches.

Nostrils almost round, open, impervious; dorsal and posterior margins soft, not
forming a protecting flap or operculum; the ventral or outer margin almost entirely
formed by the horny sheath of the bill.

Tongue thick and fleshy, much shorter than the bill, very slightly protractile; tip
rounded off and ending in a neat horny scoop, which is formed by the lower horny
covering of the tongue projecting a little; the brim of this scoop is slightly frayed out,
as is the case in many Fringillide. Hach side of the tongue is accompanied by a
high longitudinal fold of soft tissue, which arises sidewards from the epiglottal region,
extends forwards, and ultimately meets its fellow from the other side below the free
end of the tongue, passing into the frenum lingue. Such guiding folds or projections
of the lingual floor are frequently met with in birds which eat uncrushed seeds, and
likewise in the Drepanidide.

Pterylosis—Spinal tract with an unbroken rhombic saddle, which is continued to the
oil-gland. Pectoral tracts uniformly broad, without distinct lateral corners. Primary
quills ten in number, the last of which is very slender and short, not functional,
completely hidden by the upper covert. The tip of the wing is formed by the eighth
and seventh primaries, the ninth being equal in length to the sixth, while the fifth is
still.shorter. The number of secondaries is nine, as in most Passerine birds. The
twelve tail-feathers are nearly equal in length, but the median are slightly shorter.

The metatarsus is covered in front by six transverse scales, which decrease in length
from the ankle-joint downwards. The median and the lateral side are each covered
by one long scute, which is followed near the toes by several small scales.

Alimentary canal.—The cesophagus forms a capacious elongated dilatation, without,
however, assuming the shape of a distinct crop. The stomach is square in shape and
strongly muscular: that of one specimen contained, besides two soft hairless cater-
pillars, several hard seeds and some large unhusked seeds of another kind of plant;
that of the second specimen contained small, very hard seeds, and small bits of rough
red lava, which, of course, had been swallowed to assist in the trituration of the hard
food. The gut is very narrow and long, and shows somewhat complicated convolutions,
there being present an extra, closed, and rather long loop (38, 4, in fig. 16), which is
stowed away dorsally from the usual central coil (5,6, 7,8). Both the absolute and
the relative lengths of the gut vary individually; the female, the smaller specimen,
possessing the longer gut :—

2 , absolute length of gut 49 centim., relative length 9.
dy ” ” 46 2? 8.

—

Such a considerable relative length of gut occurs also in Lowia and Coccothraustes,
and is even surpassed by Pinicola. About 2 centim. from the anus are two very small
rudimentary ceca. The proportion of the right to the left lobe of the liver is
Zeal

The palatine region of the skull exhibits the features usual in the Fringillide; the
various subfamilies and even genera of these birds show, however, so many considerable
differences from each other, that the examination of a given type cannot reveal any
binding characters. According to the late Professor W. K. Parker, who is the
authority “on the skull of the egithognathous birds,” the palatine bones are not
united with each other in the medio-ventral line in the Emberizine section of the
Fringillide (e. g. Hmberiza, Phrygilus, Plectrophanes lapponicus) nor in Icterus. On
the other hand, in the true Fringilline (e. g. Linaria, Estrilda, Coccothraustes) the
two palatine bones are broadened above the sphenoid bone into one continuous bony
plate, which being also fused with the posterior end of the vomer, forms a single
interpalatine plate. This is the case in Pstttactrostra and in Loxioides, the latter of
which much resembles Pyrrhula in the configuration of its palatine region; anteriorly
the jugal bones are quite fused with the palatines; the maxillo-palatines are hollow,
as in many Fringillide, and (as a special feature) posteriorly almost touch the
interpalatine spurs.

Summary.—Loxioides bailleut is a member of the Fringillide, and approaches the
genera Lowxia, Coccothraustes, and Pyrrhula.

PSITTACIROSTRA PSITTACEA. (PI. I. figs. 17-20.)

Bill like that of Loaxioides.

Nostrils oval or kidney-shaped, surrounded by soft coriaceous tissue, which is naked
and forms a small swollen flap, partly overhanging them from above. The internasal
septum is complete, although cartilaginous only, as in Lowxioides. ‘This character,
however, is of no importance owing to the variable condition of the septum in different
genera; in Coccothraustes, for instance, the septum is thick and completely ossified.
Considerable variations occur also in the lacrymal region, rendering futile in this
respect any attempt to compare Pstttacirostra with other birds which are not Fringilline.

Tongue shorter than the bill, very slightly protractile, rather thick, hard, and horny,
tapering out towards the tip, and while differing considerably from the tongue of
Loaioides, nevertheless truly Fringilline.

Pterylosis almost entirely like that of Loxioides. Primary remiges ten in number ;
the tenth or terminal quill is, however, very slender and short, and completely covered
by the upper covert. ‘The tip of the wing is formed by the eighth and seventh quills,
the ninth equals the sixth in length. The secondaries and the tail-feathers are like
those of Loaxiordes. |

Metatarsus covered in front by six or seven transverse scales, laterally and medially
with one long scute.

Alimentary canal.—The csophagus forms a very distinct pouch-like crop, which
rests on the right side between the two clavicles. Such a typical crop occurs in many
truly granivorous Fringillide—for instance, in Pyrrhula, Lowia, and Vidua, less
developed in Hringilla, Losioides (q. v.), Emberiza, also in Ampelis and Panurus.
The stomach is square, strongly muscular, internally Jined with a strong corrugated
brown cuticle; it contained seeds and particles of flowers. The whole gut is rather
wide, consequently shorter and more regularly convoluted than that of Lowxioides ; its
absolute length is 30°5 centin., its relative length 5°O, agreeing in this respect with
Fringilla celebs, Passer domesticus, and many other Passerine birds. The two ceca
are inserted about 2 centim. from the anus, and are comparatively long (0°8 centim.
and 1 centim. in length) and functional, which is a very exceptional feature among
Passeres. The right lobe of the liver is in bulk about double that of the left.

Summary.—There are no features in Psittactrostra which disagree with its being placed
among the Fringillide ; on the other hand, its nostrils, crop, and intestinal convolutions
show clearly that it well deserves generic distinction from Zowioides. Lastly, no
characters remove these birds from the Fringillide and connect them with either the
Diceide or the Meliphagide.

ACRULOCERCUS BRAccaTUS. (Pls. II. and III. figs. 21-35.)

Gill—The distal third of the edges of the upper and lower jaws is finely serrated, the
points of the indentations being very sharp and directed forwards. There is no notch
near the tip. .

Nostrils large, somewhat removed from the base of the bill, with a large coriaceous
upper operculum, and with a somewhat smaller lower one which is partly overlapped
by the upper. The nostrils are bare, not covered by feathers, but there are a few
soft rictal bristles.

Tongue as long as the bill, considerably protractile. The yellowish horny sheath of
the tongue constitutes its greater portion. The lateral margins of the horny sheath
are sharp and quite thin; they curve upwards and inwards, and, by approaching each
other in the dorsal middle line, form two nearly closed tubes, each of which breaks
up into two, and is frayed out on its lateral margin. The distal third of the tongue
presents, therefore, the aspect of a quadruple brush. The hyoid bones extend back-
wards and upwards round the occiput, and end at the level of the middle of the orbit.
The principal protractor muscle of the tongue is the M. genio-hyoideus. This consists
of two parts, each of which arises as a narrow band from the inner margin of the
middle of the mandible. This band passes backwards and splits into two. The
median portion attaches itself to the upper half of the cerato-branchial or “hyoid
horn,” by surrounding or enveloping this bone in a slightly spiral direction, while
only loosely fastened to it by connective tissue. The outer portion accompanies the
cerato-branchial throughout its length on the anterior or dorsal surface and is
attached to its tip. Both these portions, which form the genio-hyoid muscle, are
surrounded by a common slippery sheath which compels them to act exclusively in the

direction of the hyoid horn. ‘The muscle has its punctum fixum at its origin at the
mandible, and consequently by its contraction protrudes the tongue. ‘The right and
left horns of the tongue, each surrounded by its genio-hyoid muscle, may be compared
to a flexible rod surrounded by an elastic steel spiral, which is fastened to one end of
the rod; it will then be understood that the force with which, and the extent to
which, the tongue can be propelled depends directly upon the length of the hyoid
horns. ‘Thus we see that in Woodpeckers and in Humming-birds, which can protrude
their tongues very far, the hyoid horns are so long that they are carried quite round
the skull, and with their tips reach the neighbourhood of the nostrils. The retractors
of the tongue are the right and left stylo-hyoid muscles, each of which arises as a broad
band from the lateral and posterior surface of the occiput, a little in front of and
sidewards from the hyoid horn, crossing the two bands of the genio-hyoid of its side,
and being inserted on the sides of the base of the tongue, laterally and dorsally from
the base of the hyoid horn. These muscles, each having its punctum fixum at
the occiput, act as the chief retractors of the tongue. Various other muscles move
the tongue sidewards, lift it up towards the palate, or depress it in order to assist
in the act of swallowing food. Two such depressor muscles are figured in Nectarinia,
where they are seen to extend from the base of the tongue down the side of the
trachea.

Remiges.—There are nine cubital quills or secondaries and ten primaries. The
terminal distal or tenth quill is well developed, being nearly two thirds the length
of the ninth; its upper covert is only 1 centim. long. As is frequently the case in
birds in which the tenth primary is distinctly functional or of fair size, there is present
an extremely small eleventh primary quill, together with an equally tiny upper covert.
The tip of the wing is formed by the eighth to sixth primaries; the ninth equals the
fourth in length.

The rectrices are twelve in number and soft—the middle pair being the longest, the
outermost pair the shortest.

The spinal tract forms a distinct rhombic saddle, and is continued as an unbroken
tract down to the base of the oil-gland, where it is slightly broader than at the hinder
corner of the saddle. The feathers of the latter are fluffy. Between the contour-
feathers of the spinal tract are interspersed numerous filoplumes or hair-like feathers,
together with little black downs, some of which also occur on the apteria or bare
spaces, especially sidewards from the saddle.

The well-defined pectoral tracts exhibit nothing remarkable. The so-called pectoral
or axillary yellow tufts consist of about twelve very thin soft feathers on each side,
which are about 4 centim, in length, are black at the basal quarter, and arise in one
row trom the anterior margin of the wing-membrane near the shoulder. According
to this position they belong to the inferior marginal contour-feathers, but they are
modified into downs. Tach feather consists of one long and feeble shaft with numerous
almost equally long, but still feebler, rami or barbs. Each ramus, again, carries an
anterlor and a posterior series of radii or barbules. These barbules are at their basal

portion flattened out into thin blades, but further towards the tip they become extremely
thin and flexible. None of these barbules carry barbicels like those which in typical
contour-feathers are transformed into cilia and hamuli or hooklets, but these barbules
show at regular intervals a great number of peculiarly shaped and pointed nodules.
The absence of such hooks prevents the barbules from forming a coherent vane, and
renders the whole feather extremely soft and fluffy. The barbules of the more distal
or marginal parts of the long barbs are shorter and thicker, and their nodules are
less prominent.

The métatarsus is covered in front with five or six irregularly shaped transverse
scales, which have a tendency to fuse with each other. All these scales overlap the
lateral side of the metatarsus, and by complete fusion form one long continuous scute.
The median side is covered by one similar scute, which is separated from the front row
by a soft furrow. On the back of the metatarsus the median scales project as a
prominent but somewhat soft ridge, which is connected with the lateral sheathing by
soft skin.

Alimentary canal.—The esophagus has no crop. The stomach is comparatively
small, oval, and furnished with strong muscles: in the specimens examined it contained
Lepidopterous larvee, hard pupa-cases, and other remnants of insects. The gut is of
uniform width and soft; 1:5 centim. from the anus are two rudimentary ceca of
0-4 centim. in length. The total length of the gut from the stomach to the anus is
145 centim., its relative length only 3:5; in accordance with this very short relative
length, the intestinal convolutions are very simple, forming only three short alternating
loops, of which the second or middle loop shows no indication of a spiral twist. ‘The
proportions of the right and left lobes of the liver are 3: 2.

Summary.—Acrulocercus nobilis and A. braccatus belong to the group Cinnyrimorphe,
judging from the serrated bill, the strongly developed nasal operculum, the principal
features of the pterylosis (especially the functional tenth primary and the presence of
axillary tufts), the scutellation of the tarsus, and the simplicity of the intestinal canal.
They further belong to the family Meliphagide, owing to the quadruple brush-like
tongue; they approach the subfamilies Myzomeline and Meliphagine proper, and of
the latter the genera Meliphaga, Meliornis, Acanthorhynchus, and Acanthochera; in
other words, they are more nearly related to the Australian than to either the Malayan
or to the Pacific members of the group. <Acrulocercus differs from them all, however,
in its pattern of colour (bearing in this respect a striking resemblance to Drepanis
pacifica), although black, yellow, and white are favourite colours among the Melipha-
gine (e. g. Meliphaga, Meliornis, and above all Pogonornis). The long and much
graduated tail of Acrulocercus can scarcely be looked upon as an important deviation
from the generally square or only slightly rounded tail of the Meliphagine, since it
occurs also in the genus Acanthochera of South Australia. ‘The peculiarly pointed
tail-feathers of Acrulocercus occur again in Drepanis pacifica, and in the New Zealand
genus Pogonornis.

CHATOPTILA ANGUSTIPLUMA.

The following remarks refer to the stuffed specimen, which, owing to the liberality
of Mr. Wilson, now forms one of the treasures of the Cambridge Museum of Zoology.
Unfortunately the horny sheath of the tip of the bill, perhaps to the extent of
0-5 centim., is broken off. The mandibular sheath is, however, nearly intact. The
edges of the mandible are slightly overlapped by those of the premaxilla and appear
to be quite smooth and not at all serrated. The premaxillary edges seem likewise to
besmooth. Whether there was a notch near the tip, can no longer be made out. The
nostrils are basal, situated within a large and bare coriaceous groove, and have a large
upper operculum; they agree in every respect with those of other strong-billed
Meliphagine.

Pterylosis.—The tenth primary is 5 centim. long and slightly curved inwards. The
tip of the wing is formed by the seventh to fourth primaries; the eighth equals the
third in length, the ninth is, with the-exception of the tenth, the shortest of all. The
feathers of the lower back are fluffy,. those of the axillary region only slightly so. The
twelve rectrices form a long and much graduated tail; the single feathers are obliquely
‘pointed at their tips. Most of the feathers on the upper throat, near the base of the
nostrils—and even those of the forehead—end in hair-like bristles.

Metavarsus. covered in front with six to seven transverse scales,. of which those in the
middle are the longest; all these: front scales are partly fused with each other and
with the long scute which covers the lateral side. On the median side is one long
scute, with a few small scales near the toes. The latter closely resemble those of
Acanthochera, especially. in the length: of the hallux and its very strong and large
claw.

Chetoptila angustipluma:is certainly a member of the Meliphagide, and probably
belongs to: those Meliphaginze which possess: a multiple brush-tongue. In many of
these birds the fine-serration of the cutting-edges of the bill is replaced by larger and
irregular dents,. which are sometimes almost obsolete,.and are then frequently associated
with or rather supplanted by a tooth-like notch near the tip. of the premaxilla. Thisis,
for instance, the case in. several species. of Péilotis and in Acanthochera. With the
latter South Australian and Tasmanian genus. Chetoptila agrees in most of the parti-
culars mentioned above. ‘The pattern. and coloration of the plumage, with the light
striated marks. on the feathers, the shape of the tail, the feet, and even the hair-like
curved tips of the feathers of the upper throat, closely resemble those of dcanthochera
carunculata ; but there is no trace of those peculiar wattles which are so conspicuous
in many Meliphagine genera.

DREPANIS PACIFICA..

The following observations refer to the stuffed specimen of this now extinct bird,
which Mr. Wilson was fortunate enough to procure. The structure of its tongue,
the distribution of the feather-tracts, and the whole of its internal anatomical features

an!

remain therefore unknown, and can only be supposed to have resembled those of other
Drepanidide. The external features, except the coloration of the plumage, are entirely
like those of the other Drepanidide. The shape of the non-serrated bill, the opercu-
lated nostrils, their shape and size, agree in every detail with the corresponding parts
of Hemignathus procerus and Vestiaria. The tenth primary is occult; the tip of the
wing is formed by the eighth, seventh, and sixth primaries, the ninth equals the
fifth in length. Some of the marginal axillary feathers are fluffy and elongated. The
rich yellow feathers of the lower back are extremely fluffy and long. The twelve tail-
feathers have obliquely pointed tips, but the tail, when spread out, is slightly rounded.
The metatarsus is covered in front with a row of five or six transverse scales, which are
partly fused with each other; the lateral side is protected by one long scute, and
distally by several small scales, and the same applies to the median side. Whether
there was a prominent ridge on the posterior side of the metatarsus cannot be
determined with certainty. The second toe is the shortest, the middle one the
longest, the hallux the strongest. The claw of the hallux is by far the longest and
strongest.

There remains the question, whether the resemblance in shape and coloration of the
whole bird to Acrulocercus is accidental or a case of mimicry; and if it is mimicry,
which of the two birds is the original and which is the copy?’ The fundamental differ-
ence, at first sight almost imperceptible, between the serrated bill of the Meliphagine
Acrulocercus and the smooth bill of Drepanis adds to the interest of the case. Of
course the question cannot be settled conclusively, but the following arguments may
help to a solution.

Both birds are aberrantly coloured, differing from their respective relations. All the
Drepanidide, except D. pacifica, are either of a uniform dull green, or a beautiful red,
or red mottled with black, or, lastly, indifferently grey and brown like Oreomyza.
Vivid yellow, combined with black and varied by a few white patches, which is the
colour of Drepanis pacifica, appears abnormal in this family. D. pacifica differs
likewise from its allies in being by far the largest and strongest.

Acrulocercus, a truly Meliphagine bird, on the other hand exhibits colours which
occur also in many other Meliphagide, although none of these, except Pogonornis, are
chiefly black with yellow and white ornaments. Moreover, yellow tufts in the axillary
region are a favourite ornament among the Nectariniide, which are undoubtedly allied
to the Meliphagide. Lastly, there are three species of Acrulocercus, all greatly
resembling each other and distributed over most of the Hawaiian Islands, while there
was apparently only one black-and-yellow Drepanis.

These arguments seem to vouch for the probability of Acrulocercus being the original,
Drepanis pacifica the imitating form. However, it must not be forgotten that the
Meliphagide are, in the Hawaiian Islands, represented only by Acrulocercus and
Chetoptila, and that consequently the four species may be looked upon as strangers
and intruders, while the Drepanididee are present in considerable numbers as species

and genera, and may therefore be regarded as more indigenous.
H 2

Certainly the curious resemblance between the two forms proved equally fatal to
both, since both attracted their greatest enemy, Man, by their beautiful yellow plumes.

VESTIARIA coccINEA. (PI. III. figs. 36-39.)

Bill.—The sharp cutting-edges of the bill are smooth, without the slightest indica-
tion of any serration. The edges of the premaxillary sheath fit closely over those of
the mandible; the tip of the premaxilla projects a little, less than 5 millim., over
those of the mandibles.

Nostrils bare, basal, only the posterior corner bordered by short feathers; bristles
entirely absent. Nostrils shut by a complete upper operculum, which itself overlaps a
similar but smaller flap arising from the ventral margin of the nasal opening.

Tongue.—The sharp dorso-lateral margins of the horny sheath of the tongue are
raised upwards, and gradually meet each other in the middle line, without fusing with
each other, but transforming the dorsal surface of the tapering tongue into a single
semicanal. The distal halves of these raised margins are frayed out into numerous
horny bristles or lacinie, which become longer towards the tip of the tongue, cross each
other, or are even interlaced, and thus turn the end of the tongue into a brush. The
whole tongue is as long as the bill, and, when the latter is shut, completely fills
the space between the two mandibles. The tongue cannot be protruded far, because
the hyoid horns do not project above or beyond the level of the eye: they are
shorter than in Nectarinia, but resemble those of Acrulocercus.

Pterylosis—The spinal feather-tracts form a broad unbroken saddle, the sides of
which are not sharply marked, while it is continued as a wide band to the base of
the oil-gland. ‘The feathers of the saddle, especially those of its anterior and lateral
portions, are fluffy. The pectoral tracts resemble those of Hemignathus in their breadth
and lateral expansion. There are elongated, fluffy axillary feather-tufts, which,
however, are not conspicuously coloured. The tenth or most distal primary is very
slender and short, and is concealed by its larger covert. The tip of the wing is formed
by the eighth, seventh, and sixth quills, the ninth being equal to the fifth in length.
Of the nine secondary or cubital remiges, the ninth or most proximal is by far the
shortest, and in the male is entirely white, thus differing from the rest in colour as
well as in size. The twelve rectrices are all obliquely pointed and form a nearly
square tail, which resembles that of Lowops, and is slightly forked when closed,

Metatarsus covered in front with four or five transverse scales, which are partly
fused with each other. The lateral side is covered by one long scute, which is followed
by two or three smaller scales; the median side is protected by one long scute, which
forms posteriorly a sharp projecting ridge. Of the toes, the first, second, and fourth
are about equal in length, the second, which at its base is closely joined to the third,
is perhaps the shortest. The first or hallux is, however, the strongest, and carries the
thickest and longest claw.

Alimentary canal.—The cesophagus forms a distinct ventral crop, which is lodged

between the arms of the furcula; its width is nearly 1 centim., its length 1:5 centim. ;
while its walls are thin and smooth internally. The stomach is decidedly small, of oval,
almost globular shape, and rather weak: contents, chitinous remains of insects and a
smooth caterpillar in one specimen, smooth caterpillars and small spiders in another.
The gut is short, as in most strictly insectivorous birds. The duodenum is by far the
widest portion; the rest of the canal is much narrower, especially that portion which
forms the spiral. ‘The convolutions of the gut are peculiar and rather unlike those of
most other Passeres, owing to the irregular way in which the second principal or
middle of the three loops is twisted into a spiral. The ceca are inserted only
1 centim. from the anus, and are very small, quite rudimentary sacs without function.
Both the absolute and the relative length of the intestinal canal, from the stomach to
the anus, varied somewhat in the adult specimens examined :

V. coccinea 3, absolute length 14 centim., relative length 3:5.
V. coccinea 3, mill} 15 4 Ht AD,
H, virens, y 1S oy ey, 4 4-0),

The proportion of the right to the left lobe of the liver is 3 : 2.

Himatione sancuinga. (PI. III. figs. 40-41.)

Bill not serrated.

Nostrils basal, posterior lower corner partly concealed by short and somewhat bristly
feathers ; with a distinct dorsal operculum, which again overlaps a smaller lower flap
near the basal and posterior corner of the nasal opening.

Tongue almost exactly like that of Vestiaria coccinea.

Pterylosis.—Tenth primary very small and slender, but stiff, hidden by the stiffer and
longer upper covert. The tip of the wing is formed by the eighth and seventh
primaries, the ninth equals the sixth. Tail and feet like those of Vestiaria. The
feather-tracts also much resemble those of Vestiaria, and there are likewise present
axillary tufts, which, however, are not yellow or otherwise conspicuously coloured.

Alimentary canal.—The esophagus forms a very distinct ventral crop. The rest of
the canal and its convolutions closely resemble those of Vestiaria: but the stomach is
comparatively larger and stronger; in the specimens examined it was full of
comminuted parts of soft insect larve. Absolute length of gut 13 centim., relative
length 4. »

LOoXOPS COCCINEA.

Bill short, almost straight, conical and pointed, not serrated.

Nostrils basal, small, oval, open, with a dorsal coriaceous opercular flap, which
resembles that of Hemignathus, but is bulged out laterally and does not close the
nostril, which is partly concealed by short and bristly postnarial feathers.

Tongue short, in conformity with the bill, but ending in a frayed-out single brush,
which, like the whole organ, is formed exactly like that of the other Drepanidide.

The péterylosis presents the same features as in Hemignathus. The feathers of the
sides of the saddle are long and fluffy. The axillaries, or rather one row of the
marginal feathers near the shoulder, are elongated and somewhat fluffy. The tenth
primary is only 0°5 centim. long, and is concealed by its slightly larger and stiffer covert.
The tip of the wing is formed by the eighth and seventh quills, the ninth equals the
sixth in length. The tail is very Fringilline in appearance, the middle pair of the
soft rectrices being the shortest, the outer pair the longest.

The metatarsus is covered laterally by one scute and by four or five transverse
scales in its distal half; the front is protected by four or five scales, which are partly
fused with each other; the median side is covered by one long scute, which forms a
prominent ridge behind.

Alimentary canal.—The cesophagus formed no crop, but a distinctly marked long oval
dilatation, which was full of small soft insects. The stomach was small, oval, and
muscular, full of the remains of soft insects. The total length of the gut is 12 centim.,
its relative length 4:3. The convolutions were torn by shot.

OREOMYZA BAIRDI. (Pl. III. figs. 49-54.)

Bill short, slightly curved, not serrated, pointed. Mandible slightly overlapped by,
and a little shorter than, the premaxilla.

Nostrils resembling these of Himatione, Loxops, and Hemignathus. ‘They are pro-
tected, but only partly closed, by an upper operculum, and at the posterior ventral
corner by a smaller, internal flap like that of Vestiaria described and figured.

Tongue a little shorter than the bill, thin and horny, but at first sight apparently
different from that of the Drepanidide. However, the lateral horny margins are raised
up dorsally and frayed out. The distal fourth of the horny part of the tongue is
slightly split into a right and a left half, but far less than in Cwreba. This broader,
shorter, and less decidedly tubular tongue is in conformity with the slightly broader
bill.

Pterylosis like that of Loxops, but the feathers on the central portion of the saddle
and on its continuation towards the oil-gland are a little more scanty and weaker.
The axillaries are elongated and fluffy.

Metatarsus covered in front with five or six strongly marked scales, and laterally
with five or six scales which decrease in size towards the toes; the median side is
covered with one scute near the ankle-joint, distally with three small scales.

Alimentary canal.—The esophagus has, as in Lowxops, an oval dilatation, which con-
tained the same sort of soft yellow caterpillar speckled with brown as seems to be the
food of so many Hawaiian birds. The stomach was oval and comparatively large, but
not strong, 1 centim. broad and 1:5 long, and contained caterpillars. ‘The gut is long
for a bird which lives on soft larve, namely 19 centim., with a relative length of 5.
The convolutions of the gut much resemble those of other Drepanidide.

CHRYSOMITRIDOPS CAHRULEIROSTRIS.

This little bird agrees in most of its important features either with Lowops or with
Oreomyza.

Hemicnatuus procerus. (PI. III. figs. 42-46.)

Bill enormously elongated and curved, not serrated. The cutting margins of the
mandibles are sharply curved inwards and are therefore partly overlapped by those of
the premaxilla, which projects nearly 1 centim. beyond the tip of the mandibles.

Tongue as long as the mandible, forming nearly throughout its length an almost
complete tubular brush. Otherwise the tongue is formed exactly like that of the other
Drepanidide.

Pterylosis also like that of the other Drepanidide: The tenth primary is very slender
and 0-7 centim. long, like its covert. The tip of the wing is formed by the eighth,
seventh, and sixth primaries; but the ninth is slightly shorter than the sixth and
a little longer than the fifth. The tail is soft, nearly square, and short.

The scutellation of the metatarsus is intermediate between those of Oreomyza and
Acrulocercus, owing to the tendency of the four anterior scales to fuse with each
other and with the lateral row, which, however, is composed of one long proximal
scute and several very small distal scales. The median side is protected by one long
unbroken scute, which forms a rounded-off and not a prominent ridge.

Alimentary canal.—The esophagus is thin-walled and has an elongated but not
pouch-like dilatation, which internally is furnished with nearly twenty longitudinal
ridges, apparently permanent; it contained one smooth caterpillar. The stomach is
quadrangular and extremely muscular; it was crammed’ full of comminuted remains of
caterpillars and spiders. Digestion was assisted by several angular bits of lava. In
another specimen it contained, besides insects and. bits of lava, several peculiarly shaped
seeds, very hard and smooth. Whether these seeds were likewise swallowed in order
to help in the trituration of the food appears doubtful, because of their smooth surfaces.
The absolute length of the gut, which forms a typical central spiral, though with a
peculiarly twisted returning branch (marked 6, 7 in fig. 45), is 20-5 centim., giving the
relative length. of 4°5.

HEMIGNATHUS oLIvACcEUS: (PI. III. figs. 47, 48.)

This species differs from the long-billed form chiefly in the formation of its short
mandible. The tongue is consequently short and less tubular, being intermediate in
structure and appearance between those of Himatione and Vestiaria. The stomach
is, as in ZH. procerus, quadrangular and strong; it contained, however, only spiders
and a huge caterpillar, with no stones or other triturating matter. The convolutions
of the intestinal canal are like those of the other species; but the central spiral has
one twist more, owing to the greater length of the gut, the total length being as
much as 25°) centim., giving the relative length: of 6,

9=6 (1°9 i fo Sl arate a abs - 2 a eae } 4 ne
9=6 {1°98 ye Tp ae a, ab ne aa =) a ae \ oi
G<9>6 *9°L'e “VeIP aly aE rs we als a5
9=6 {2 ‘8 | Eee } oe be ii, ; eee be 4
9=6 118 ot eS F + : ss + st
G=6 ‘9°L‘8 ar arse” oF aF z =F ae
G6. JEG) i ate + é 1
e=9 (Fy sais a ne ana pon err ate ree a
pao ‘994 ce er | eer eo :
ed) Sat ei Spee el ee
9), * a a ea reat 4 ; i
v6 ‘92 °8 2 oe a oF ats = als
F=6 ‘9°L'8 ° ar ; + a a ; +
“Faroe may | a | gooey | papa | TEU fered) nog | mus | pres frevonamng
“Sura jo diy,
‘doag “]]19S0 NT WE ‘onsuoy, “Around YyUoy,

BIYSOTLOLIIST
SOPIOLXO'T

+ SnygevUsrTULe xT

leer meas {

ezhwoorg
sdoxoT

QuOlyeUL A

BLIVIYSO A

eoyrtoed stuvdorg

"+ epydoyayp

Ce ee

** sno100 OTRO

THE AFFINITIES OF THE DREPANIDIDZ.

The genera Drepanis, Vestiaria, Himatione, Loxops, Chrysomitridops, Oreomyza, and
Hemignathus resemble each other so much, and differ at the same time so considerably
from other birds, that they may well be distinguished as Drepanidide. There remains
the question to which other groups or families these Drepanidide are most nearly allied.
Certainly not to the Diceidz, because these can at once be distinguished, first by the
tongue, which ends in four equally-sized semitubular projections without the slightest
indication of laciniated or frayed-out margins, secondly by the distally forked spinal
saddle, both being characters which occur in no Cinnyrimorphe. The shape of the tongue
of Dicewm is unique, and the forked saddle bears the closest resemblance to that of the
Hirundinide. Nor are the Drepanidide allied to the Zosteropide, birds of which
the deeply forked and smooth tongues, the pterylosis, and various other characters make
it very doubtful whether they are rightly included among the Meliphagide.

If we assume that all the Oscines with tubular or with brush-shaped tongues are
comparatively more nearly allied to each other than to the rest of the Oscines, we can
arrange them as follows, using the condition of the edges of the bill and the length
of the tenth or terminal primary as further differentiating characters :—

( ( tongue bifid, each half frayed out
mediv-yentrallyey.. 0... ..--..--0 ate NEcTARINIIDA.

: |
Tenth primary functional, | a ey te

about half the length of 4 Benceduadmaples (on) analiaple,

iotni ne | frayed out latero-dorsally ...... MELIPHAGID#.
| bill smooth, but with a notch; tongue one semi-
| canal with dorso-laterally frayed edges...... Bee PRomMERops.
( bill serrated; tongue quadruple, not frayed out ... Dica#ipz.
, ; ( without a notch; tongue single,
Tenth primary obsolete ; [I ‘dorsally trayedt.o..2s-saeencsensss DREPANIDIDE.
bill smooth, <
| with a notch; tongue double, dor-
ie (Gleesalliys hayes ee ce pecrtett 2 Ca@REBID&.

It is to be observed that if split in the middle line the tongue of the Drepanidide
would assume the characters of that of the Coerebide, while the multiple brush-tongue
of many of the Meliphagide can be derived directly from the quadruple brush. It is
also probable that the absence or presence of serrated edges stands in correlation to
the structure of the tongue. The following arrangement may therefore be preferable :—

( ( if DREPANIDID.
| tenth primary obsolete...
bill smooth ; ¢ C@REBID#.
single or bifid ; < |
Tongue frayed out, J | tb es eee lornege sa see PromExoprs.
|
| bill serrated; _,, = see NEcCTARINIIDA.
quadruple or bill mostly % is ie. MELIPHAGIDA,
| multiple ; serrated ;
Tongue not frayed, quadruple ; bill serrated; tenth primary obsolete .......+4..+- Dica#ipa.

While the Diceidee will always assume a separate position, to whichever characters
we give preference, the Drepanidide can, on the other hand, be separated from the
Coerebide only by the notch in the premaxilla.

The whole assembly of birds with tubular or brush-shaped tongues appears rather
heterogeneous, but not so hopelessly divergent as the so-called Oscines novem-pennate,
which correspond with the Tanagroid Passeres of Wallace, and with the section
Fringilliformes of the Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum. ‘The families of
nine-quilled Passeres are 1 :—

1. Dicawrpm (excl. Drepanidide). 6. DREPANIDIDA.
2. HrrunpDINIDa&. 7. C@REBIDA.

3. AMPELIDA. 8. TANaGRIDA.
4... MniorintTipa. 9. IcrERIpaA.

5. Moracinuipa. 10. Farner.

To these should be added Zosteropide, on account of their terminal or tenth primary,
which is extremely short and sometimes even suppressed altogether; these birds
certainly are more deserving of being called nine-quilled than many Hirundinide and
Icteridee.

Now we see that if we attribute more taxonomic value to the tenth primary than to
the tongue, the Drepanidide are completely removed from the Cinnyrimorphe, with the
Meliphagine family of which they have undoubtedly many important features in
common, besides the structure of their tongues. I have already (p. 11) given some
of the principal reasons why the Diceide (exclusive of the Drepanidide) cannot be
nearly related to the Drepanidide, while on the other hand their associations with the
Hirundinide are strong. If we want to retain the section Fringilliformes, then the
Diceide, together with the Hirundinide, should form one, let us say, Hirundinine
subsection; while the third, fourth, and fifth families enumerated above are like-
wise widely different from the rest, to which the appellation Fringilliformes might
advantageously be restricted. Whether the Drepanidide are to be included in this
Fringilliform assembly or in that of the Meliphagide cannot be settled until we have
examined the taxonomic value of their characters with reference to the Cinnyri-
morphe, or rather Meliphagide, and to the Fringilliformes.

The formation of the tongue agrees with that of the Ccerebide (Fringilliformes)
and with that of the Australian Myzomeline genus Acanthorhynchus. ‘The possession
of such a latero-dorsally frayed-out semitubular tongue does not consequently settle
the question, and, if anything, indicates that the Drepanidide, through the Ccerebide,
form a link between Fringilliformes and Meliphagide, unless we assume that such
tongues have been developed independently in the groups in question. Such an
assumption is perfectly possible. On a former occasion? I have shown that the

* In a paper entitled “‘ Remarks on the Numbers and on the Phylogenetic Development of the Remiges of
Birds,” Proc. Zool. Soc. 1888, pp. 655-667, I have drawn attention to the variability in length of this tenth
primary, which is supposed to be absent, but nevertheless occasionally 3 centim. long, in the Fringilliformes.

* «On the Suctorial Apparatus of the Tenuirostres,” Proc. Zool, Soc, 1883, pp. 62-69, pl. xvi.

tubular and brush-like portions of such tongues are formed entirely by the elonga-
tion, enlargement, and splitting of the ventral half of the horny sheath, while the
dorsal half or covering does not partake of this formation, but tapers out and
eradually disappears where the body or fleshy portion of the tongue ends. Indica-
tions of an elongation, with a frayed-out margin, of the ventral sheath occur in the
tongues of many Fringillide, e. g. in Lowioides. Morphologically, we can derive a
brush-tongue from a Fringilline, but not from either a Sylviine, Laniine, or Turdine
tongue.

The smooth, not serrated, edges of the bill are a feature of the Coerebide, while
those Meliphagide which like them possess no serrated edges also differ in the formation
of their whole bill from others of their family. It is therefore not advisable to
compare the Drepanididee with the smooth-billed Meliphagide. The general shape of
the bill differs so greatly in the various Drepanidide, and is subject to such alterations
in the numerous Fringilliformes, that no valid conclusions can be drawn from it. We
know for certain that the bill is a most adaptive organ, and the arguments concerning
the tongue apply still more forcibly to the bill.

The nostrils, with their strongly developed opercula, seem to be decidedly Cinnyri-
morphous, and in the special description of the various Drepanidide this feature has
been laid stress upon in order to differentiate them from Loatoides and Psittacirostra,
which are Fringillide. But here again the Drepanidide are intermediate, their
nostrils possessing both the upper and the lower flap, although the upper one is
never so complete as in most Meliphagide. ‘The completeness of the operculum is
correlated to the length and shape of the bill and to the use of the latter: hence
the variability.

The condition of the primary quills of the Diceide strongly favours their Fringilli-
form affinity, net merely because of the obsolete nature of the tenth quill, but also
on account of the entire absence of an eleventh quill. An eleventh quill does not
seem to occur in the Fringilliformes, although some of them have the tenth quill
not more reduced than many Alaudide and Ploceide. In many species of the latter
two families, and even in some Icteride, the tenth primary is distinctly functional, and
comparatively of the same size as it is in many Meliphagide and Nectariniide; but
these latter two groups have an extra quill, the eleventh. Hence it is not so much the
mere size of the tenth quill as its non-association with an eleventh quill that gives
it its taxonomic value in the Drepanidide.

The rest of the pterylosis, the feather-tracts, affords us no help, because the Meli-
phagide and the Fringilliformes seem to differ less from each other in these respects
than do the Cinnyrimorphe among themselves, notably Arachnothera and Promerops.
However, the fluffy nature of the feathers of the back, flanks, and axillaries in the
Drepanididz reminds us of the Meliphagide and not of the Fringilliformes. The pattern
of colour affords no clue at all, because the red of Vestiaria and of Himatione, although
remarkable for its absence in all the Meliphagine, is a favourite colour of the Myzo-
melinz, and the Fringilliformes, like the Psittaci, exhibit all conceivabie colours.

12.

20)

The shape of the tail can scarcely be considered in earnest, although its Fringilliform
appearance in the Drepanididz is obvious.

The scutellation of the tarsus likewise permits of no safe generalization applicable
to families and not to genera only.

Concerning the alimentary canal, the possession of a distinct ventral crop, or at least
an obvious dilatation of the cesophagus, by the Drepanidide is unquestionably a Fringil-
liform character, because of all the Oscines only some Fringillide have hitherto been
known to possess a crop. ‘The crop of the apparently strictly-insectivorous Drepanidide
is therefore all the more remarkable, although the Trochilide have it likewise well-
developed.

The peculiar intestinal convolutions of the Drepanidide cannot unfortunately be
brought into comparison, owing to want of material in other groups, notably Corebide.
The latter are insectivorous, to judge from their tongues strictly so; many Fringillide
are granivorous or have a mixed diet: hence the resemblance between several of
the Drepanidide and Meliphagide is not decisive. The bones of the palate of the
Drepanidide, especially of Hemignathus, and in a less degree of Vestiaria, are most
peculiar. ‘The vomer is posteriorly completely fused with the palatines, and the
lanceolate space between the two halves of the basal or dorsal parts of the palatines
is closed by a transparent plate of bone, which covers, and rests upon, the sphenoid.
Such a truly interpalatine plate occurs in many Fringillide. The ventral palatine spurs
(Parker’s interpalatine spurs) are very high and slender, and posteriorly extended
to such an extent that they project far beyond the level of the articulation of the
pterygoids. ‘The latter articulate with the palatines, and not with the sphenoid at all,
by distinct cartilaginous feet, resembling in this respect again certain Fringillide,
e.g. Coccothraustes, although in the latter these feet are bony and liable to fuse with the
palatines. ‘The transpalatine or posterior lateral spurs are long and very slender. ‘The
maxillo-palatines are long and slender, passing ventrally over and past the anterior
fork of the vomer and touching with their tips the anterior interpalatine spur; they
rather resemble the same parts of Lowioides and of Coccothraustes: we must, however,
bear in mind how much these little bones vary in shape, size, and position even in
the various Fringillide, as a glance at the numerous illustrations in Parker’s work
on the Aeithognathous skull will show. The whole arrangement of the bones of the
palate of the Drepanidide is totally different from that of the Meliphagide and other
Cinnyrimorphe, and can only be compared with that which is indicated to a small
extent in some Fringillide (Coccothraustes, Cardinalis, Estrilda). The configuration
of these bones in the Drepanididee looks as if it were derived from Fringilline conditions
by reduction of the width (not length) of the palatine expansions, not vice versd. This
may well be the case considering the lesser strength of the masticatory muscles in the
Drepanidide in comparison with that of typical Conirostres, and considering that the
elongated bill of the Drepanidide is undoubtedly not a primary feature but a secondary
specialization. That Lowiotdes and Psittacirostra differ so much in the configuration of

their palatines from the Drepanidide is another weighty argument against their
affinity to that family.

Now to sum up: although these remarks are scanty, necessarily incomplete, and
consequently premature, on account of the want of anything like a sufficient amount of
suitable material, I consider that the Drepanidide form a separate family of the Fringil-
liformes rather than of Meliphagine birds or even of the Cinnyrimorphe, and that of the
Fringilliformes they are nearest allied to the Coerebide, 7. ¢. to the Neotropical and
Central-American families. Thence to the Fringillide is a long way, but we can
imagine the intermediate stages. Lowxioides and Psittacirostra I judge to be Fringillide,
while I consider that there is no direct connection between these two genera and the
Drepanidide. None of these forms can be included among the Dicwidx, which are
an essentially Old-World family.

If the numerous resemblances between the Drepanidide and the Meliphagide are
not all merely coincidental—and they cannot be explained away at all satisfactorily—
then the large group of the Cinnyrimorphe (through the Meliphagide and possibly
through the genus Zosterops, unless these birds connect the Nectariniidee in another
direction) and that of the Fringilliformes (through the Drepanidide and Ccerebide)
converge to form a still larger group. How many other families will ultimately be
found to gravitate towards the same centre must be left to him who may be favoured
with an exhaustive supply of spirit-specimens, and will not shrink from devoting much
time and labour to their examination. Whenever we endeavour to study seriously even
a few different Oscines, the attempt is apt to assume enormous dimensions. ‘The
examination of a small twig of the Passerine branch of the Avine tree shakes and
disturbs the whole branch, if not the whole top of the famous ideal tree. At any rate
we seem in our case to get a glimpse of one of the bigger ramifications of the Oscine
portion ; and although, at first sight, the idea of a Fringilli-Cinnyrimorphous branch
appears rather appalling, it is after all not more diversified than another branch, which
is composed of the Corvide, Lauiidee, and Muscicapide. A Raven and a Flycatcher
do not seem to have much in common, but with the help of the Austrocoraces and
other tropical forms the differences fade away and vanish.

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (Praves I.—III.).

Vigs. l-o. PHmorNIs oBSCURA.
1. Dorsal, 2. Lateral view of nostrils and bill. Nat. size.
3. Tongue, dorsal view. Nat. size.
4, Ventral view of the bones of the palate; enlarged. pt.=pterygoids ; mav.pl.=maxillo-
palatines ; a@.int.p/.=anterior or interpalatine spur or process.
5. Right-sided view of the intestinal convolutions, beginning with one near the pylorus and
ending with eight at the anus,

Figs

Fig.

Fig,

. 6-10. CHASIEMPIS SANDVICENSIS.

6. Dorsal view of the bill, nostrils, and feather-tracts. Nat. size.
7. Side view of bill and nostrils. Nat. size.
8. Dorsa] view of tongue. Nat. size.
9. Ventral view of bones of palate ; enlarged. v.=vomer; maz.pl.=left maxillo-palatine ;
tr.pl.=transpalatine portion of left palatine.
10. Right-sided view of the intestinal convolutions.

. 11-16. LoxiorpEs BAILLEDUI.

11. Side view of bill and nostrils. Nat. size.
12a. Dorsal view of the tongue, situated within the under jaw. Nat. size.
12 6. Dorsal view of the tongue proper. Nat. size.

13. Bones of the palate.

14. Scutellation of metatarsus, seen from the lateral side. Nat. size.

15. Dorsal feather-tracts. Nat. size.

16. Convolutions of the intestinal canal.

. 17-20. Psirracrnostra pstrracea. Nat. size.

. 21-35. ACRULOCERCUS BRACCATUS.

21a. Bill, nostrils, and principal muscles of the tongue, after removal of the skin. Nat. size.
For comparison, in order to understand the mechanism, see fig. 21, Nectarinia
splendida. g.hy.=geniohyoid muscle; st.hy.=stylohyoid muscle; f.=trachea.

22. Transverse section through the bill, across the nostrils, to show position of upper and
lower opercula (w.o. and /.0.) : ¢=tongue; m=mandible.

23,24. Dorsal and ventral views of pterylosis.

25. Transverse section through metatarsus, to show position of scales ; enlarged.

26, 27. Ventral and dorsal views of the tongue; enlarged.

28. Diagrammatic representation of mode of splitting and fraying out of the sheath of the
tongue.

29. Ventral view of the bones of the palate; enlarged.

30. One entire feather of the axillary tufts ; enlarged and diagrammatic.

31. One barb of the same feather, from its basal half; considerably magnified, to show
absence of hooklets.

32. The same, from the tip of the feather ; seen under the same power as fig. 31.

33. The tip of a barbule of the barb represented by fig. 82; strongly magnified.

34. The tip of a barbule of the more fluffy or basal barbs ; strongly magnified.

35. Diagram of the intestinal convolutions.

s. 86-39. VESTIARIA COCCINEA.

36. Side view of bill and nostrils. Nat. size.

37. Transverse section across the nostrils. Same as fig, 22.
38. Side view of the tongue; enlarged.

39. Intestimal convolutions.

40. HimMationr sANGUINEA. Dorsal view of the tongue ; enlarged.

41, HiMATIONE vIRENS. The intestinal convolutions, seen from the right side.

a8
Vigs.

Figs.

42-46. HEMIGNATHUS PROCERUS.

42. Right nostril and base of bill; enlarged.

43, Right view of tongue ; enlarged.

44, The dorsal or spinal feather-tract.

45. The intestinal convolutions.

46. Ventral view of the bones of the palate; enlarged. v.=vomer; fr.p/.=transpalatine
expansion of palatine; p.int.p/.= posterior interpalatine spur of palatine; pt. =pterygoid.

47, 48. HeMIGNAaTHUS OLIVACEUS.
47. The pectoral feather-tracts.
48. The intestinal convolutions.

49-54. OREOMYZA BAIRDI.

49, Side view of bill and nostril ; enlarged.

50. Dorsal view of tongue; enlarged.

51. Lateral view of left metatarsus.

52. The spinal feather-tract.

53. The intestinal convolutions in site, seen from the right side.
54. Diagram of the convolutions.

55. Dicxum prcroraLe. Dorsal feather-tracts, after Nitzsch.

56. Dicamum tricgonostiema. Dorsal view of the tongue; enlarged.

. 57,58. CarEBA LONGIROSTRIS.

57. Dorsal view of the tongue ; enlarged.
58. Ventral view of the tip of the same tongue; still more enlarged.

”
Be

FURTHER REMARKS

ON THE

RELATIONSHIPS OF THE DREPANIDID4.

HANS GADOW, M.A., Pu.D., F.R.S.

In my first paper on the anatomy of the Birds of the Sandwich Islands (‘ Aves
Hawaiienses,’ Pt. II. pp. 1-23, Pls. I-III.) 1 had come to the conclusion that the genera
Psittacirostra and Lowioides were Fringillide, and not to be included among the
Drepanidide. This view has never met with fayour from Mr. Perkins, who has
persistently and consistently maintained, first, that the two genera in question are not
“Finches”; secondly, that they belong to the same group as do the Drepanidide,
whatever the relationship of the latter may be. ‘The same applies to the more recently
discovered genera Chloridops, Rhodacanthis, and Psewdonestor. Mr. Perkins has arrived
at this notion from the study of the habits, the voice, and the peculiarly strong and
disagreeable scent of the birds.

I promised Mr. Perkins to reconsider the whole question on the strength of more
extensive anatomical material}, and I now have much pleasure in declaring that most
likely his view is the right one. By using the words “ most likely,” I do not want to
hedge, but once for all draw attention to the fact that such questions as the present
one cannot be proved, although they may be reasoned out.

1 The material submitted to anatomical examination is numerous enough (Drepanis, Viridonia, Palmeria,
Himatione, Lowops, Oreomyza, Pseudonestor, Psittacirostra, some of them in several specimens either complete
or in parts), but it is sadly deficient in so far that as regards Rhodacanthis and Chloridops there is only one
single tongue of the former! Of course this whole investigation is thereby rendered incomplete. hodacanthis
and Chloridops are both extreme forms. It seems reasonable to connect them with Lowiotdes, Psittacirostra,
and Pseudonestor. Nothing would be gained by trying to exclude the first two genera from the Drepanidide
after once the other three have been admitted. The same applies to Ciridops anna, of which hearsay report
tells that it has or had a split and somewhat frayed-out tongue.

Pal

2€

Although it is, asa rule, not an agreeable task to acknowledge one’s self in the
wrong, I have in this case derived a good deal of pleasure from my renewed and more
extensive investigations, since—if our conjoint conclusions are correct—they have
revealed one of the most remarkable instances of convergent analogies between what
are generally called Fringillide and some of the Drepanidide.

Nobody has as yet been able to diagnose any family of the Fringilliformes, Certainly
the Drepanidide, after the addition of the thick-billed genera, defy any real diagnosis,
except perhaps that they are nine-quilled Oscines, which are confined to the Sandwich
Islands. This is perhaps a step in advance.

I firmly believe that in time to come we shall more and more frequently have to
admit geographical distribution as a diagnostic character not only of species and genera
but even of larger groups.

I am inclined to accept the central portion of Dr. Sharpe’s scheme of nine-quilled
Passeres (cf. Cat. Birds, x. p. 2), but modify it slightly as follows :—

Coeerebidee

Tanagride.

Drepanidide. Fringillidee,

Which, translated into the apparently very exact, but really mystical and still all-in-the-
clouds parlance of the phylogenist, means that there was once an undefined stock of
generalized Coerebine and Tanagrine birds, whence have sprung as two independent
offshoots the Drepanidide and Fringillide. ‘The more numerous of these “families”
has specialized more in the direction of seed-eaters, while the other very small family
underwent the necessity of adapting itself to peculiar insular conditions, and either
specialized as insect-eaters (probing the insects out of cracks, not catching them on the
wing), or in a roundabout way became as much graminivorous and thick-billed as
many of the Fringillide and Tanagride.

In talking of these “families” we are apt to forget, or rather we never appreciate,
the solemn fact that, strictly speaking, all the Oscines together are of the rank of one
family only! The greatest differences between the so-called families of Oscines are in
reality of very small value; and when we are discussing, as in the present case, the
morphological difference between what should be termed subsections of subfamilies,
we have about arrived at the end of our tether, or rather perceptive insight. Of
course there are differences between them, larger and more stable than those between,
for instance, various species of Paroaria, which are “striking” enough, but we do not
know them! In fact we have to be grateful for small mercies.

We cannot, as said before, define either Drepanidide or Fringillide, Coerebide or
Tanagride—that means to say, we have no single character, nor a combination of
features, which apply to all the species of each family. This concerns the pterylosis,
namely distribution of feathers, fluffy nature of the feathers of the lower back, relative
length and shape of the primaries and of the tail, the pattern of colour; it applies

2
o

also to the feet, the shape of the bill, and the structure of the tongue, the modifica-
tions of the palatal framework, and to the intestinal tract inclusive of its convolutions.
The smell of the Drepanidide is different from anything else I know; but are we
prepared to admit this as a diagnostic character, until we know that it does not depend
upon the food, although Acrulocercus is devoid of that sort of scent ?

Additional Data concerning the Relationship of the thick-billed Hawaiian Birds.

In my former paper, p. 6, and fig. 18, I described the tongue of Psittacirostra as
“rather thick, hard, and horny, tapering out towards the tip, and while differing
considerably from the tongue of Lowiotdes, nevertheless truly Fringilline.” Several
well-preserved specimens of Psiétacirostra, brought home by Mr. Perkins, show a
different condition. The tongue is fleshy in its basal three-quarters, while the distal
quarter is thin and horny, slightly split in the middle, and with the thin lateral edges
turned up and inwards, forming a very imperfect half-tube, and slightly frayed out
distally, ¢. é. at the anterior free end. It is consequently far less “ Fringilline” than
the tongue of Loxiotdes. On the other hand it resembles, or approaches, that of
Pseudonestor, which is far less fleshy, more slender, more deeply split in the middle ;
the distal third of the horny sheath becomes gradually transparent towards the tip,
is very slightly frayed out towards the tip and on the lateral edges, but shows no
indication of curling up of the free margins.

The tongue of RKhodacanthis, of which Mr. Perkins has brought home one single
specimen but well preserved, is the most compact of all. Its upper surface is slightly
scooped out, while the whole under surface is covered with the usual thick and hard
horny sheath, the thin lateral edges of which curl over upon the dorso-lateral sides,
and are very slightly frayed out at the distal sixth only, where alone they form slightly
sharp edges of the tongue, the tip of which is scarcely split at all.

The shape and structure of the tongue is primarily referable not so much to the
nature of the food itself (if soft insects, as spiders, larve, or hard seeds) as to the way
in which these various kinds of food are to be procured. The long- and slender-billed
birds probe flowers, or cracks of bark or lava, for insects, which they then coax
and brush out with their slender and flexible tongue; the thick-billed birds break
open the pods or worm-eaten trees, and then scoop out or simply nip the insects
or seeds.

When arranged according to the tongue, Oreomyza and Psittacirostra assume a
somewhat central position, leading on the one side to Pseudonestor and ending with
Loxioides as an extreme; while on the other side Oreomyza leads to the more complete
tubular brush-tongue of Chrysomitridops, Loxops, Himatione, and Palmeria, to the
extreme as represented by Vestiaria, Drepanis, Viridonia, and Hemignathus.

A similar divergent development is traceable in the modifications of the operculum
and the nostrils. Aimatione, Loxops, and Oreomyza assume a central, more indifferent

2L2

position, whence the most perfectly operculated Palmeria, Vestiaria, Drepanis, and
Hemignathus can be traced. On the other hand, Psittacirostra has still a small but
distinct opercular flap, then follows Loxiotdes, and lastly Pseudonestor, with no operculum
whatever and with round nostrils embedded in soft surroundings. Rhodacanthis and
Chloridops make a side departure from the last two genera; there is no operculum,
but the nostrils are long-oval, embedded in soft surroundings; the soft portion bordering
the lower margin of the nostrils lies in a deeper level than the dorsal border of the
nostril, and seems to be the remnant of the inner lower flap which is so common
in many of the Drepanidide, see Part II., Pl. I1I. fig. 37. Anyhow there is no detailed
resemblance of the narial arrangement of other birds with any of the Fringillidx, while
Rhodacanthis and Chicridops ran surprisingly close to the Tanagrine Pitylus (not to
the Fringilline Pheucticus, Paroaria, or Chloris), and still greater is the resemblance
between Psittacirostra and Tanagra, e. g. bonariensis. An absolute distinction
between any of the thick-billed Hawaiian birds and the Fringillide seems to be
that in the latter the generally open and roundish nostril is blocked, so to speak,
from the inside by the anterior little concha naris, which projects into the fundus of
the nostril.

We have here remarkable cases of collateral or convergent development, as exhibited
by the numerous members of the Drepanidide. ‘The long- and slender-billed forms
have developed features which make them very similar to certain Meliphagide
(cf. Arachnothera and Hemignathus), and in the case of Drepanis pacifica and Acrulo-
cercus the resemblance has become startling. Equally near or puzzling has become the
approach to various Fringillide and Tanagride by the thick-billed Hawaiian birds.

The analogies with Fringillide extend even to some unexpected details of structure
as well as habits. Mr. Perkins says (‘ Aves Hawaiienses,’ Part VI.) that Pseudonestor
is “in its movements Parrot-like in the extreme, especially in the varied hanging
attitudes that it assumes, while the similarity is still further increased by the shape of
tiSea) ezxilco arena generally clinging to the under sides of the thin branches or twigs, the
head raised above the upper surface.” Does all this not remind us at once of Lowia
pityopsittacus %

Curiously enough, there exists another still more striking analogy between the
Crossbills and some Hawaiian birds, namely with Loxops incl. Chrysomitridops. As
already known to Cabanis, when he established the genus Zowops, the under jaws of
these little birds are not symmetrical—the distal half of the under jaw is twisted either
to the right or to the left. It is interesting to note that the amount of twisting varies
individually, right- and left-billed specimens occurring in equal numbers, and that it
is smallest in young birds. There is not the slightest doubt that this asymmetry is
acquired individually by their twisting open husks or seeds, or cracks of bark, in search
of their food.

It would be a case of great rashness to look upon the twisted bills of Lowops and
the pendulous attitudes of Pseudonestor as confirmatory indications of their Fringilline
affinities. Now it so happens that Loxops and Chrysomitridops combine with their

Finch- or rather Siskin-like appearance other characters which reveal these birds as
typical Drepanidide :—(1) The tongue, which, of the length of the bill, forms a typical
brush-tube; it is as typically developed as in the most intensified Drepanidide.
(2) The arrangement of the bones of the palate conforms with that of the more slender-
billed forms, namely, the maxillo-palatines are rather long and slender, the inter-
palatine spurs form a pair of narrow vertical plates, the transpalatines are very little
broadened, but the right and left halves are fused in the middle into one plate, together
with the vomer. (3) The nostrils have a small but distinct soft operculum, which,
however, does not close the narial opening, which is long-oval; the general configu-
ration closely resembles that of Oreomyza, while the differences from Fringillide, if
examined side by side, are obvious.
We have to consider the following hypotheses :—

J. All the Sandwich Island birds in question are Drepanidide. ‘The most central,
or least modified, are the small-sized genera Oreomyza, Loxops and Chryso-
mitridops, and Himatione. ‘Thence have sprung in two divergent lines—

1. The long- and slender-billed ultra-Drepanine forms with long tubular
brush-tongues: Hemignathus, Viridonia, Vestiaria, Drepanis.

2. The thick-billed Fringilloid genera with short, more fleshy, reduced
tongues: Psittacirostra, Pseudonestor, Loxiotdes, Rhodacanthis, Chio-
vidops.

II. The majority of the birds are Drepanidide, while the thick-billed forms without
tubular tongues are Fringillide. The relationship of these thick-billed genera
does, however, not lie with the palearctic Chloris, e. g. kawarahiba, nor with
any of the Coccothraustine, least so with the genus Geospiza from the Galapagos
Tslands. ‘The very thick-billed Fringillidee indicate a terminal, not an indifferent,
stage of development. Such forms as Geospiza, Lowxigilla, Coccothraustes, and
Pyrrhula ave undoubtedly instances of convergent analogies.

III. All the Drepanidide have started from Fringillide, some of which have
developed further in essentially Fringilloid lines, leading to Chloridops and
Rhodacanthis as extremes. We should have to assume that Lowops and
Chrysomitridops are least removed from the hypothetical starting-point; but it
so happens that these two genera are closely allied to Oreomyza, while by
their tongue, nostrils, and palatal arrangement they are far removed from
moderate, not exaggerated, true Fringillide, e. g. Chrysomitris. We should
further have to assume that, by the development of a more slender bill—in fact,
by departing from typical Fringilline features,—some of the birds in the Sandwich
Islands have produced the tubular brush-tongue, have weakened and lengthened
the palatal arrangement (although retaining the fused palatines), have elongated
the trans- and interpalatine portions, and last, but not least, have developed
operculated nostrils. Anatomically, at least, the development of the nasal

operculum of the typical Drepanidide from Fringillid conditions is absolutely
impossible.

IV. All the birds in question are related to each other as one group, Drepanidide ;
but out of them have sprung the Fringillide. Morphologically this assumption
is possible from a general point of view, but it does not at all work satisfactorily
in detail. First, we cannot assume that a family like the Fringillide has
spread from a volcanic group of oceanic islands all over the world, with the
very exception of the bulk of the Pacific islands and of the Australian region.
Secondly, Pseudonestor, Chloridops, Loxioides, and Rhodacanthis have by their
bills, reached a stage more exaggerated than that of most of the typical thick-
billed true Fringillide, while they differ from the geographically nearest rather
thick-billed Chlorts in the pattern of colour, general moulding of the beak, and,
above all, in the configuration of the narial region. It is equally futile, as said
before, to connect them with Coccothraustina.

Lastly, the remarks concerning Chrysomitridops and Lowops militate against this
assumption (No. IV.). .

Consequently there remains only assumption No. J., namely, that the thick-billed
birds of the Sandwich Islands are modified Drepanidide, which by convergence, by
adaptation to similar habits, have developed features which we are accustomed to
associate with typical Fringillide,

Although we have now disposed of the Fringillide, the whole question of the
affinities of the thick-billed genera cannot be considered as threshed out until we have
substituted the Tanagride for Fringillide in the four hypotheses examined above.

Terminal forms of the Tanagride are Orchesticus, Saltator, Tanagra. Comparison
between them and the Sandwich Island genera is rather favourable. The resemblance
in the whole narial configuration and the build of the billisstriking. ‘The stout-billed
Tanagride have, in fact, modified their bills and nostrils in exactly such a way as,
anatomically speaking, we expect these parts to be modified when starting from a
condition like that which is represented by Coerebidee and the slender and short-billed
Drepanidide. This is one of the very points which excludes any direct relationship
of the thick-billed islanders with Fringillidee.

In the general build and in the pattern of colour Lowvioides and Rhodacanthis
resemble certain Tanagride—say, for instance, Saliator, Orchesticus, and Pitylus—much
more than they do any of the Fringillide. The Tanagride seem to be devoid of a
pronounced crop, they possess only a slight dilatation; but the same applies also to
Himbernagra among the Fringillide, and thus this once cherished character is weakened.
On the other hand, the Tanagride differ strongly from the Sandwich Island birds in
the structure of the palate (especially their broad maxillo-palatine processes and the
partly separated palatines) and the tongue, which is fleshy, rather bifid, and ends in
two cone-shaped horny caps.

However, the Tanagride are in all probability related to the Czerebide, the latter

representing the lower, older stage, but having specialized in bill and tongue. In my
former paper I pointed to these same Ccerebide as the possible ancestral relations
of the typical Drepanidide. It is, I think, significant that I should now, in a round-
about way, again be led towards this same family of birds. It was my fault that I did
not take the Tanagride into our confidence; it would have been a small step only
from the Coerebide, but I was biased by the watchword ‘‘ Finches” or not Finches.

Let us now sum up. Concerning the Tanagride, they are neither the descendants
nor are they the direct ancestors of the thick-billed Sandwich Island birds, but they
come very near them. ‘The origin of the Drepanidide we do not know; in my former
paper I hinted at the Ceerebide. TI still fail to see any valid reasons against such a
descent: on the contrary, it seems now a little more probable.

The Sandwich Islands have received their characteristic bird population from the
south-east, as an offshoot of the Columbian fauna (Drepanidide sensu /atiore), and
from the south-west—Australian Meliphagide, namely, Acrulocercus and Chetoptila,
whose near relation, Leptornis, lives in the Fiji Islands; the Flycatcher (Chascempis
sandvicensis) has its nearest relation, Ch. dimidiata, in Rarotonga, and the Thrush-like
Pheornis points also towards the south-west.

2% 9

PeN IDE EX.

Acanthis, 98.

Acanthochera, 227, 228, 234.
carunculata, 228.
Acanthorhynchus, 227, 236.
Accipiter hawaii, xix, 180, 185.

ACCIPITRES, XXili.

Acridotheres tristis ?, xxv.

Acrocephalus familiaris, xxv.

Acrulocercus, xvii, Xvill, xxiii, 5, 16, 104, 106, 107,
229, 230, 233, 234, 245, 246, 249.

apicahs, Xxil, Xxiv, xxvil, 103, 104.

bishopi, xxil, xxiv, 104, 111.

braccatus, xxiv, 4, 99, 100, 101, 104, 219,
225, 227, 240.

nager, 105.

nobilis, xxiv, xxvii, 4, 5, 11, 87, 99, 100,
101, 103-105, 111, 171, 173, 219, 297.
Actitis incana, 158.

Aistrelata sandwichensis, 213.

ALAUDIDA, 237.

AMPELIDA, 236.
Ampelis, 225.

Anas aberti, 191.
acuta, 193.
boscas, 191.
—— boschas?, 191.
clypeata, 195.
Freycineti, 192.

—— laysanensis, xxv.

—— obscura, 191.

— sandvicensis, 191.

superciliosa, 191.

— — superciliosa, var., 191.

—— superciliosa, var. a, sandwichensis, 191.
—— wyvilliana, xvi, 191, 192.

Anous hawaunensis, 141, 143.

melanoyenys, 143.

—— niger, 141.

Anous stolidus, 141.
tenutrostris, 143.

Anser cygnoides, 187.

hauaiénsis, 187.
hawaiensis, 187.

hawariensis, 187.
hyperboreus, 188, 189.
sandvicensis, 187.

ANSERES, XXili.

Anthochera? angustipluma, 113.
Arachnothera, 237, 246.

Ardea ? cerulea, var. y, 199.
ewilis, 201.

grisea, 201.

—— nevia, 201.
nycticoraw, 201.
sacra, 199, 201.
—— (Herodias) sacra, 199.
Arpzipm, 199.

Arenaria interpres, 159.

Asio accipitrinus, xix, xxiii, 42, 133.
brachyotus, 133.
sandvicensis, 133.

sandwichensis, 134.

Attagen aquilus, 203.
AvsTROCORACES, 239.

Bernicla minima, xxv.

mMunroi, XXV.

nigricans, XXV.
sandvicensis, 187, 188, 191.
sandwichensis, 187.

Botaurus exrlis, 201.

Brachyotus galapagoensis, 133.

Branta (Leucopareia) sandwichensis,
US

Bulweria anjinho, 211.

bulweri, 211.

252 . INDEX.

Bulweria columbina, 211.

macgillivrayt, 211, 212,
Buteo, xviii.

pennsylvanicus, 182.

solitarius, 179, 181-183, 185.
(Onychates) solitarius, 179, 181.
Byrseus coccineus, 49.

Calidris arenaria, 153, 159.
Cardinalis, 238.
Carduelis coccinea, 49.

Carpodacus, xix, 77.

frontalis, Xxv.

Certhia, xiv, 4, 10, 68, 100.
coccinea, 9, 10.
obscura, 65, 67, 68.
pacifica, 3, 4, 99, 114.

sanguinea, 19,

vestiaria, 9.
virens, 29.
Chetoptila, xvii, xviii, xxiii, 15, 90, 118, 229, 234,
249,

angustipluma, xxii, xxiv, 113, 149, 219,
228.

Charadrius auratus orzentalis, 161.

dominicus fulvus, 161.

— fulvus, 161.

glaucopus, 161.

— “like C. hiaticula,’ xxv, 158.
pluvialis, 161.

taitensis, 161.

virguuanus, 161.

wanthocheilus, 161.

Chasiempis, XVill, Xxili, 125-128, 222, 249.
dimidiata, 249.

dolei, 131.

gayi, Xxil, xxiv, 127, 129, 131.
ibidis, 125, 126.

ridgwayi, 125, 126.

sandvicensis, 1x, xxiv, 21, 125, 126, 129, 131,
219, 222, 240, 249,
sandwichensis, 125, 129, 181.

sclatert, Xxli, xxiv, 126, 129, 131.
Chasiempsis, 223.

obscura, 121.

sandvicensis, 125.

sandwichensis, 125.

Chen hyperboreus, Xxv.
Chloridops, xvii, xxi, 84, 98, 127, 243, 246-248,
kona, Xvili, xxii, xxiv, 97.

Chloris, 246, 248.
hawarahiba, xviii, 247.

kittlitzi, xviil.

Chlorodrepanis, xxi, 395.
chloridoides, Xxi, XX1i, XXIV,

chloris, XXi, XXiv.

kalaana, XXi, XXll, XXiv.

stejnegeri, XXi, XXIl, XXiY.

virens, XX1, XX1V.

wilsoni, XXi, XXli, XXiv.

Chrysomitridops xxi, 42, 59, 235, 245-248.
ceruleirostris, XXii, Xxiv, xxvii, 33, 59, 219,
233.

Chrysomitris, 247,

Cinclus interpres, 159.
CrnnYRImMorpH@, 227, 235-239,
Circus cyaneus hudsonius, 185.
hudsonius, xix, 180, 185.
Ciridops, xix, XXi, xxli, 23, 243.

anna, xxiv, 23,

—— sp., 23.

Cnipolegus, sp.?, 125.

Coccothraustes, 224, 238, 247.
CoccotHRratstinm, 247, 248.

Careba, 232.

longtrostris, 241.
C@&REBIDH, XVili, 235-239, 244, 248, 249,
Collyriocinela, 221.
sandwichensis, 221,

ConrrostrEs, 238.
Corethrura obscura, 171.

sandwichensis, 175.
Coryipm, xxiv, 239.

Corvus, Xviil.

hawatiensis, 1, 21, 180.
ossifragus, 2.

tropicus, xxiv, 1.

—— (Physocorax) hawaviensis et tropicus, 1.
? Cracticus ater, 1.

Crew sandwichensis, 176-178,

Cymochorea eryptoleucura, 209.

Dafila acuta, 193.

caudacuta, 193.

Demiegretta sacra, 199.

Dicax, xviii, 33, 37, 38, 89, 90, 225, 235-
DSHS),

Diceum, 235.

pectorale, 241.

trigonostigma, 241. ¥ es

-INDEX,

Diomedea albatrus (chinensis), XXv.

brachyura, 217.

, an evulans?, 217.

immutabilis, 217.

melanophrys, 217.

nigripes, XXV.

DREPANIDID®E, XVii-xxli, xxiv, 15, 16, 59, 84, 222,
293, 229-239, 244-249.

Drepanis, xxi, xxii, +, 5, 7, 16, 20, 49, 56, 68, 90,

229, 235, 248, 245-247,

aurea, 49, 50, 55-57.

—— byronensis, 19.

coccinea, 9, 12, 67.

ellisiana, 68.

flava, 29, 30.

—— funered, XX, XXil, xxiv, 7.

obscura, 67.

olwvacea, 75.

pacifica, xxiv, 3-8, 50, 103, 104, 106, 107,
173, 219, 227-229, 234, 246.

rosea, 10, 11.

rufa, 49, 53.

sanguinea, 12, 19, 29.

vestiaria, 9.

—— (Hemignathus) ellisiana, 65-67.

—— (——) lucida, 73, 75.

—— (Humatione) sanguinea, 19, 27, 29, 43.
— (Vestiaria) coccinea, 10, 67.

Eimberiza, 224, 225.

ciris, X1X.

Fimbernagra, 248.
Entomiza, 113.
2 angustipluma, 113.

Hopsaliria sanduicensis, 125. -

(Chasiempis) maculata, 128.

? —— (Chasiempis) sandwichensis, 129.
—— (Chasiempsis) maculata, 128.
—— (Chasiempsis) obscura, 121.

? —— (Chasiempsis) sandwichensis, 129.
—— (Pheeornis) obscura, 121.
Estrilda, 224, 238.

Falco hudsonius, 185.
Fregata aquila, 203,
minor, 203.

Fringilla, xix, 225,

anna, Xix, 23.
chloris, 97.

coccinea, 49, 53.

Lo
Or
(5%)

Fringilla celebs, 225.

rufa, 49, 53.

Frineitm®, xvii, xviii, xxi, 223-225, 236-239,
243-248,

Frivcitiiroruss, 236, 287, 239, 244.

Fulica alae, 1638.

alai, 163, 164, 167.

atra, 163.

chloropus, 165, 167.

Gallinago ‘like G‘. scolopacina,” xxv, 158.
Gallinula chloropus, 165.

galeata, 165-167.

galeata sandvicensis, 165.
sandvicensis, 165-167, 169.

sp. ?, 165.

Gambetta fuliginosa, 151,

oceanica, 151.

Geocichla, 222.

Geospiza, 247.

Gracula longirostra, 105, 106.
nobilis, 105, 106.
Grallina, 221.

Gygis alba, 145,

candida, 145.

Haliplana fuliginosa, 137.

lunata, 139.

Hemignathus, xiv, xv, Xxi, xxii, 7, 16, 37, 68, 71,
75, 77, 79, 81, 90, 230-232, 234, 235, 238,
245-247.

affinis, 77, 79.

ellisianus, 65.

-—— hanapepe, 77, 79, 81.
lanatensis, xxii, xxiv, 71.

lichtensteint, xxii, xxiv, 65, 68, 73.

lucidus, 73-75, 82.

-—— obscurus, xxiv, 61, 63, 65-68, 71, 79.
olivaceus, 61, 75, 81, 82, 219, 233, 241.
procerus, Xxil, xxiv, 61, 219, 229, 233, 241.
stejneger?, 61, 68, 76.

wilson, T4, 77, 78.

Heteractitis, 152.

brevipes, 152.

incana, 152,

incanus, 151.

Heterorhynchus, xxi, xxiv, 37, 71, 75, 77.
affinis, Xxii, xxiv, 77.

hanapepe, XXil, xxiv, 123.
lucidus, xxii, xxiv, 387, 73.

254 INDEX.

Heterorhynchaus olivaceus, xxii, 74, 75.

wilsoni, XXil, XXIV.
Heteroscelus, 152.
brevipes, 151.

incanus, 151.

Himantopus brasiliensis, 155.

candidus, 155, 158. -

kandseni, 155.

kenudseni, xxii, 155-157.

meaicanus, 155, 156, 158.

—- mqricollis ?, 155, 156.

Himationé, xxi, xxii, 15, 16, 20, 21, 37, 42, 55,
79, 84, 232-235, 237, 248, 245, 247.
aurea, 5d.

chloridotdes, 28.

— chloris, xxii, 25, 27, 28, 30, 31, 33, 34, 44.
— dolei, 15.

— dol, xxii, 15.

—— ? flava, 29, 30, 33.

freethi, XXiV, XXv.

— kalaana, 28.

maculata, xxi, 34, 43. .

—— mana, xxi, 47.

— montana, xxi, 41, 45.

—— newton, xxi, 41.

parva, Xxi, xxii, 33, 34, 42, 46, 59, 81.
sanguinea, 1X, XX1, Xxiv, 12, 15, 16, 19-21,
29, 30, 383, 43, 219, 231, 240.

stenegert, 25, 31, 81.

virens, 1x, 21, 27, 29, 31, 33, 34, 48, 47, 50,
219, 231, 240.

wilson, 31.

Hirundininm, 236.
Hypolowias, 57.
aurea, 55, 56.
coccinea, 49.

Icrrripm, 236,
Icterus, 224.
Baltimore, 109.

Lana, 239.

Lantnm, 237.

Larus sp. indet., XXv.
Leptornis, 249.
Limiconm, xxiii,
Tinaria, 224.

? coccinea, 49, 53.
Lowia, 224, 225.
pityopsitiacus, 246.

Lowia psittacea, 85.

Lowigilla, 247.

Loawioides, xvii, xxi, 84, 89-91, 224, 225, 234, 237—
239, 243, 245-248.

bailleni, 89. é

bailleuwi, xxiv, 89, 97, 219, 223, 224, 240.
Lowops, xxi, xxii, 33, 87-39, 42, 53, 55, 56, 230,
232-235, 243, 245-248.

aurea, xxiv, 49, 55, 56.

cerulerrostris, 56.

coccinea, xxiv, 33, 87, 40, 49, 53, 56, 219,
231.

coccineus, 49.

flammea, xxi, 39.
ochracea, 55, 57.

— rosea, 10.

rufa, XXIV, 53.
wolstenholmei, 53.

—— (Chrysomitridops) cwruletrostris, 55.

Meliornis, 227.

Meliphaga, 113, 227, 234.

fasciculata, 105.

MELIPHAGIDM, xvii, xxiv, 15, 16, 35, 36, 104, 113,
DZS), DSI)

Menienacinm, 237.

Melithreptes vestiaria, 9.
Melithreptus, 68.
obscurus, 67.

—— pacificus, 3.
—— vestiarius, 9, 67.
—— virens, 29.
Mellisuga coccinea, 9.
Merops, 105.
fasciculatus, 105.

mger, 105.

sp.?, 9.

Merula, 222.

Micranous hawaviensis, 143.
Miro, 222.

Mytorrrip », 236.

Moho, 106, 118, 114.
angustipluma, 118.
apicalis, 103, 104.
atriceps, 113.
braccata, 99, 114.
niger, 105.

nobilis, 99, 108-105, 114.
Mohoa, 99, 118.
angustipluma, 118.

Mohoa apicalis, 100, 103.

braccata, 99, 100.

fasciculata, 99, 105.

nobilis, 100, 105.
Moracitrip», 236,

Muscicapa maculata, 126, 128, 129.
obscura, 121.

sanduicensis, 125.

sandvicensis, 125.
sandwichensis, 125, 126, 129.

Muscrcaripm, xix, xxiv, 220-224, 239.

Myzomela, 234.
? sanguinea, 19.

Myzometina, 237.

Nectarinia, xiv, 100, 226, 230.
byronensis, 19, 20.

coccinea, 9.
? flava, 29, 30.
? nger, 105.

sanguinea, 19.

NEcTARINTID®H, xvill, 235, 237.
Nestor meridionalis, 91, 108.
Numenius australis, 147, 149.
femoralis, 114, 147-149.
hudsonius, 148.

phcopus, 147, 148.
tahitiensis, 147, 148.
taitensis, 147.

Nycticorawv griseus, xxiii, 199, 201.

nycticorax, 201.
nycticorax nevius, 201.

Oceanodroma castro, Xxii.
cryptoleucura, 209.
Gistrelata bulweri, 211.
cookit, 2138.
hesitata, 213.
hypoleuca, Xxv.

meridionalis, 214.

neglecta, 215.

—— pheopygia, xxii, 218, 214.
sandwichensis, 213, 214.
Onychoprion fulaginosus, 137.
lunatus, 139.

Onychotes grubert, 179, 181-183.
solitarius, 179.

Orchesticus, 248.

. INDEX, 2595

Orcomyza bairdi, xili, Xxi, xxii, xxiv, 33, 37, 38,
41, 47, 219, 232, 241.

—— flammea, xxi, xxii, xxiv.

maculata, xxi, xxiv, 48.

mand, XX1, Xxil, xxiv, 41.

—— montana, Xxi, xxii, xxiv, 41.
—— newton, XxX, xxii, xxiv, 41.
—— wilsoni, 37.

—— (Rothschildia) parva, xxii.
Ortygometra cinerea, 176.
obscure, 171.

sandvicensis, 175.

? sandwichensis, 171, 175.
OsctvEs, 235, 238, 239, 244.
Otus brachyotus, 133.
brachyotus, var., 133.

galapagoensis, 133.

palustris, 133.

Pachycephala, 220.

PacHycEPHALINe[, 220, 221.
Pachyeephalopsis, 220.

Palmeria, xxi, xxii, 15, 16, 248, 245, 246.
dole, 15.

doliz, xxiv, 15.

—— mirabilis, 15.

Pandion solitarius, 179, 181.
—— (Polioactus) solitarius, 179.
Panurus, 225.

Paradoxornis, 90.

Paroaria, 244, 246. ;
Passer domesticus, xxv, 225.

PAssERES, XV, XV1i, XX-Xxiil, 231, 238, 244.
Pelecanus aquilus, 203.

Pennula ecaudata, 171, 175, 177.

miller, 171, 172.

— millsi, 171.

—— sandvicensis, 175.

-— sandwichensis, 171, 175, 176.

—— wilsoni, 175, 176-178.

Petrodroma sanguinea, 19.

Pheornis, xix, 117, 122, 220, 221, 228, 249.

lanaiensis, xxii, xxiv, 119.

—— myadestina, 117.

—— myiadestina, xxii, xxiv, 117, 119, 122-124,
—— oahensis, xili,

—— oahuensis, XX1V.

—— obscura, xiil, xxiv, xxvli, 86, 119, 121, 122,

Oreomyza, xxi, 36, 37, 42, 43, 46, 233-235, 243, 219-221, 239,

245, 247,

—— palmert, xxii, xxiv, 123, 124,

256 _ INDEX.

Phaethon cethereus, 205, 207.
phenicurus, 207.
rubricauda, 205, 207.
Phaeton cethereus, 205, 207.
, an candidus ?, 205.
phenicurus, 207.
rubricauda, 207.
Pheucticus, 246.

Philemon fasciculatus, 105.
Phrygitus, 224.

Phyllornis tonganensis, 29.

virens, 29.

Pinarolestes, 221.
Pinaroloxias, 37.

Pinicola, 224.

Pitylus, 246, 248.
Plectrophanes lapponicus, 224.

Plegadis guarauna, 197.
Procripm, 237.
Pluvialis fuluus, 161.
longipes, 161.
awanthochetlos, 161.
Pogonornis, 227,

—— cineta, 5.

Polioaetus solitarius, 179.
Porzana sandvicensis, 175.
Porzanula palmeri, xxv.
PrRronopipm, xyiil, 221.
Procellaria alba, 21, 213-216.
anjmho, 211.

bulweri, 211.

macgillivrayi, 211.

Promerops, 235.

Prosthemadera nove-zealandie, 91.

Pseudonestor, xxi, 83, 84, 243, 245-248.
vanthophrys, XXii, xxiv, 83.

Psirracr, 237.

Psittacina olivacea, 85.

Psittacirostra, xvii, xxii, 37, 38,84, 86, 87, 93, 220,
294, 225, 234, 237-239, 243, 245-247.

- iterocephala, 85.

psittaced, XX1V, xxvii, 59, 85, 219, 224, 240.

Psittacopis psittacea, 85.
Psittirostra, 86, 88-90.
icterocephala, 85.
psittacea, 85, 87, 88.
sandvicensis, 85.
Prlotis, 228, 234.
Ptiloturus fasciculatus, 105.
Puffinus, 215, 216.

Puffinus bulleri, 215.
chlororhynchus, 215.

columbinus, 211.

creatopus, 215.

cuneatus, xxii, 215.
—— knudseni, 215.
meridionalis, 213.

nativitatis, Xxv.
obscurus, 216.
Pyrrhula, 224, 225, 247.

Rattipz, xxiii, 172.

Ltallus acaudatus, 171.
ecaudatus, 106, 171, 172.
obscura, 177.

obscurus, 171, 177, 178.
sanduicensis, 175.

sandvichensis, 171, 175.
sandwichensis, 175, 176. —
Rectes, 221.

Rhipidura, xvii.

Lhodacanthis, xxi, 84, 93, 98, 243, 245-248.

flaviceps, xxii, xxiv, 94, 95.

palmert, Xxii, xxiv, 93, 95.

Ehynchaspis clypeata, 195.
Rothschildia, xxi.
parva, XX1, XXiV.

Saltator, 248.
Scolopax guarauna, 197,
incana, 151.

— pheopus?, 147,
solitaris, 151.
talitiensis, 147.
undulata, 151.
Sittacodes, 85.

Spatula clypeata, 195, 196.
Sterna alba, 145.
anestheta, 139.
bergit, XXv.

candida, 145.
fuliginosa, 137, 139.
lunata, 139.
oahuensis, 137.

owhyhaensis, 143.
2

panayana, 137.
stolida, 141.
(Onychoprion) serrata, 137.

Strepsilas iterpres, 159.
Strigiceps, 114.

Stri« brachyotus, 133.
? delicatula, 185.
sandwichensis, 133.

Strobilophaga psittacea, 85.
Stryx accipitrina, 133,
Sturnopastor, 16.

Sula cyanops, XXv.

leucogaster (suia), XXV.

piscator, XXV.
Sytviaz, 237,

Tachypetes aquila, 203.

aquilus, 203.

—— palmerstoni, 203.

? Tenioptera obscura, 117, 121.
Tanagra, 248.

bonariensis, 246.
Pawacripm, 236, 244, 248, 249.

Telespiza, XX1.

—— flavissima, xxii, XXIV, XXY.
Trnurrostrres, 236,
Thalassidroma bulwert, 211.
sp. ?, 209.

Thyellus, 215.

Totanus, 152.

brevipes, 151, 152.
fuligimosus, 151.
incanus, 151, 152.
oceanicus, 151.
pedestris, 151.
polynesie, 151.

cantans, XVill, XXli, XXIV, XXv.

INDEX, 207

LTotanus solitarius, 151,

undulatus, 151.

(Gambetta) incanus, 151.

Tringa arenaria, 153.

interpres, 159.
oahuensis, 159,

TrocHitipaz, 238.
TuRDIDm, xix, xxiv, 220, 221.
Turdus, 222.

sandwichensis, xiii, 121.

woahensis, Xill,

Turnagra, X1X.
Turtur chinensis, Xxv.
Tyrannula, 121.
obscura, 121.

ViGsnieryd, soa, xox, Wil, 20, By, Osh, 75, 22h Pail,

233-235, 237, 238, 245-247,
— akaroa, 67.
coccined, 1X, xxiv, 5, 9, 21, 66, 68, 86, 87, 107,
180, 219, 230, 231, 240.

evi, 9.

heterorhynchus, 75.

hoho, 3.

Vidua, 225.

Viridonia, xxi, xxii, 35, 48, 248, 245, 247.

maculata, 43.

sagittirostris, XXil, xxiv, 35,

Zapornia sandwichensis, 175.
ZostEROPIDm, 235, 236.
Zosterops, 239,

PRINTED BY TAYLOR AND FRANCIS, RED LION COURT, FLEET STREET,

Ta BOS ats at
ee aa

Hiew le

Fic. HIMATIONE SANGUINEA.

Fie. U1. HIMATIONE VIRENS.

oath

CHASIEMPIS SANDVICENSIS.

RS ARS CR Fa Ta Ts ESE TAF

THE BIRDS

OF THE

SANDWICH ISLANDS.

SCOTT B. WILSON, F.Z.S.

ASSISTED BY

A. H. EVANS, M.A. F.ZS.

CONTENTS.

PHAZORNIS OBSCURA. LOxoPs FLAMMEA.
ACRULOCERCUS BRACCATUS. | CHRYSOMITRIDOPS CASRULEIROSTRIS.
ACRULOCERCUS NOBILIS. LOXIOIDES BAILLEUI.

Loxops COCCINEA. VESTIARIA COCCINEA.

ee LONDON:

Se .

eX s R. H. PORTER, 18 PRINCES STREET, CAVENDISH SQUARE, W.
mS

1890.

PRINTHD BY TAYLOR AND VRANCIS, RED LION COURT, FLEET STRERT,

* Parr II. will contain an Illustrated Dissertation on the

STRUCTURE

OF SOME

BIRDS OF THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS

IN REFERENCE TO THEIR SYSTEMATIC POSITION.

: Dr. HANS GADOW, M.A, PuD.,

STRICKLAND CURATOR AND LECTURER ON THE ADVANCED MORPHOLOGY OF VERTEBRATES IN THE
UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE.

The Birds of the Sandwich Islands,

SUBSCRIBERS’ NAMES ALREADY RECEIVED.

ASHER & Co., Messrs. (3 copies.)

BAIN, Mr. J. (2 copies.)
BALSTON, R. J., Esq., F.Z.S.

BEALE, Lionel §., Prof., M.B., F.R.S.

CHAMBERLAIN, Walter, Esq.
CHASE, R. W., Esq.

CLARKE, W. Hagle, Esq., F.L.S.
CORY, C. B., Esq., F.Z.8.
CROWLEY, P., Esq., F.Z.S.

DIXON, Abraham, Esq.
DOGGETT, Mr. F.

DOWSON, Edward Morris, Esq.
DULAU & Co., Messrs.

ELLIOTT, Ernest A., Esq.

GAY, Francis, Esq.
GODMAN, F. Du Cane, Esq., F.R.S.
GREVEL & Co., Messrs, H.

HARCOURT, E. W., HEsq., M.P.
HARRISON, Mrs. W. F.
HARVARD College.

HOPE, T., Esq.

HORNE, Edward, Esq., J.P.

JAMES, H. Berkeley, Esq., F.Z.8.

KEMPEN, Prof. Ch. van.
KIRBERGER & Kesper, Messrs.
KNUDSEN, Mrs. V.

LEEKS, Edward B., Esq.

LILFORD, The Rt. Hon. Lord, F.Z.8,

LUCAS, F. W., Esq.

MACINTOSH, James, Hsq.

MANGER, W. T., Esq.
MILLAIS, J. G., Esq., F.Z.8.
MILNER, Edward, Esq.
MORTLOCK, W., Esq.

NEWTON, Sir Edward, M.A., K.C.M.G., F.L.S.
NEWTON, Prof., M.A., F.R.S.
NOBLE, W., Esq.

OXLEY, Mrs. EH.

PARKIR, Captain R. Townley.
PURVIS, Herbert, Hsq.

ROBINSON, Aubrey, Esq.

ROOKE, P. H., Esq.

ROTHSCHILD, The Hon. Walter, F.Z.S.
ROYAL College of Surgeons.

RUSSELL, 8. G. C., Esq.

SALVADORI, Count T.

SALVIN, Capt. F. H.

SALVIN, Osbert, Esq., M.A., F.R.S.
SCLATER, P. L., Esq., M.A., Ph.D., F.R.S.
SEEBOHM, H., Esq., F.Z.8.

SINCLAIR, Francis, Esq.
SMITH, Armstrong, Esq., F.R.G.S.
SOTHERAN & Co., Messrs. H.

SPENCER, Francis, Esq.

TRISTRAM, The Rey. Canon, D.D., F.R.S.
TURRILL, F., Esq.

WESLEY & Son, Messrs. (2 copies.)
WILSON, G. F., Esq., F.R.S,
WILSON, Herman G., Esq.

ZOOLOGICAL Society of London.

aS y \ :
iG; WO \ a
COTW papm IT] [SEPTEMBER 1891.

AVES HAWAIIENSES:

PGS

Ley Cs FC Zs

ey FS BLA CARLARANLALES
eee er ree ee se re we Sew eset Sere eres
: ik 7A Deyo i

THE BIRDS

OF THE

SANDWICH ISLANDS. |;

Ne NS |

oS,
re

=
i

(ine

ie} i
Wel He
We (ii
4

SO ee Ww PE SON, F258.) FRGS.,

i i

ASSISTED BY j y

A. H. EVANS, MA.. E.ZS. :
a ic
CONTENTS, a

Remarks on the Structure of certain Hawaiian Birds, with reference to their Systematic
Position. By Hans Gapow, M.A., Ph.D., Strickland Curator and Lecturer on (
the Advanced Morphology of Vertebrates in the University of Cambridge. its

PSITTACIROSTRA PSITTACHA. OREOMYZA BAIRDI.
PHAORNIS LANAIENSIS. CHA@TOPTILA ANGUSTIPLUMA.
PH#ORNIS MYIADESTINA. BUTEO SOLITARIUS.
‘DREPANIS PACIFICA. | CIRCUS HUDSONIUS.
HIMATIONE SANGUINEA. . ASIO ACCIPITRINUS.

LONDON:
R. H. PORTER, 18 PRINCES STREET, CAVENDISH SQUARE, W.

PRINTED BY TAYLOR AND FRANCIS, RED LION COURT, FLEET STREET,

a
Cae
if

9g
ry
Mo:

The Birds of the Sandwich Islands,

SUBSCRIBERS’ NAMES ALREADY RECEIVED.

RESIDENTS IN THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS.

H.R.H. THE PRINCESS VICTORIA KAIULANI.

BISHOP, Charles R., The Hon. (2 copies.)
CLEGHORN, A. 8., The Hon.

GAY, Francis, Esq.

HAWAIIAN News Co., The.
KNUDSEN, Mrs. V.

ROBINSON, Aubrey, Esq.

SINCLAIR, Francis, Esq.

SMITH, Armstrong, Esq., F.R.G.S.
SPENCER, Francis, Esq.
TURRILL, F., Esq.

VON TEMPSKY, Randal, Esq.

ARGYLL, His Grace the Duke of, K.G.
ASHER & Co., Messrs. (3 copies.)

BAIN, Mr. J.

BALSTON, R. J., Esq., F.Z.8.
BEALE, Lionel 8., Prof., M.B., F.R.S.
“BREWSTER, William, Esq.
BUCKLEY, T. E., Esq.

BURTON, Mr. H. T.

CAMPBELL, Lord Archibald.
CARPENTER, J. H., Esq.
CHAMBERLAIN, Walter, Esq.
CHASE, R. W., Esq.

CLARKE, W. Eagle, Esq., F.LS,
COBBETT, A., Esq.

COOPER, E. H., Colonel, F.Z.S.
CORY, C. B., Esq., F.Z.S.
CROWLEY, P., Esq., F.Z.8.

DEACON, W. S., Esq.

DIXON, Abraham, Esq.

DOGGETT, Mr. F.

DOWSETT, A., Esq.

DOWSON, Edward Morris, Esq.
DRESDEN, Royal Zoological Museum of.
DULAU & Co., Messrs. (4 copies.)

ELLIOTT, Ernest A., Esq.

FRIEDLANDER u. Sohn.
FROHAWK, F. W., Esq., F-E.S.

GAGE GARDINER, Mrs.
GODMAN, F. Du Cane, Esq., F.R.S.
GREVEL & Co., Messrs. H.

HARCOURT, E. W., Esq., M.P.
HARRISON, Mrs. W. F.
HARVARD College.

HARVIE BROWN, J. A., Esq.
HOFFNUNG, A., Esq.

HOPE, T., Esq.

HORNE, Edward, Esq., J.P.

JAMES, H. Berkeley, Esq., F.Z.8.

~KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH, & Co., Messrs.
KEMPEN, Prof. Ch. van.
KIRBERGER & KESPER, Messrs.

LEES, Edward B., Esq.

LILFORD, The Rt. Hon. Lord, F.Z.S.
LORENT, J. R., Esq.

LOTHIAN, The Marquess of, F.L.S.
LUCAS, F. W., Esq.

MACINTOSH, James, Esq.
MANGER, W. T., Esq.
—MEYER, A. B., M.D., C.M.ZS.

--MIDLAND Educational Co., The.

MILLAIS, J. G., Esq., F.Z.8.
MILNER, Edward, Esq.

NEWTON, Sir Edward, M.A., K.C.M.G., F.L.S.
NEWTON, Prof., M.A., F.R.S.
NOBLE, W., Esq.

OXLEY, Mrs. E.

PARKER, Captain R. Townley.
~PLUES, Miss.
PURVIS, Herbert, Esq.

ROOKH, P. H., Esq.

ROTHSCHILD, The Hon. Walter, F.Z.S.
ROYAL College of Surgeons.

~RUCKER, H., Esq.

RUSSELL, 8. G. C., Esq.

SALVADORI, Count T.

SALVIN, Capt. F. H.

SALVIN, Osbert, Esq., M.A., F.R.S.
SCLATER, P. L., Esq., M.A., Ph.D., F.B.S.
SEEBOHM, H., Esq., F.Z.S.

SOTHERAN & Co., Messrs. H.

TRISTRAM, The Rev. Canon, D.D., F.R.S.

WESLEY & Son, Messrs.
WILSON, Bernard, Esq.
WILSON, G.F., Esq.,F.R.S.,F.L.8.,F.0.8. (2 copies.)
WILSON, Herman G., Esq.

ZOOLOGICAL Society of London.

(2 copies.)

AVES HAWAIIENSES:

atl

THE BIRDS

OF THE

SANDWICH ISLANDS.

Cy Py Fy
on),
RDRLTALS

ES OS,
ioe
ei nis

am
ie

eres
FURY FE

i PROCS
wenseeze=

BL
ALS

ZRERTBLES

SRSA AAS

SCOTT B. WILSON, F.ZS, FRGS.,

ASSISTED BY

A. H. EVANS, M.A., F.ZS.

CONTENTS.

HEMIGNATHUS OBSCURUS. HIMATIONE STEJNEGERI.
‘ HEMIGNATHUS OLIVACEUS. CHARADRIUS FULVUS.

HEMIGNATHUS PROCERUS. STREPSILAS INTERPRES.

NUMENIUS TAHITIENSIS.
TOTANUS INCANUS.
CALIDRIS ARENARIA.

|
|
HEMIGNATHUS HANAPEPE. |
FLIMATIONE PARVA. |

HIMATIONE MONTANA.

LONDON:
R. H. PORTER, 18 PRINCES STREET, CAVENDISH SQUARE, W.

1892.
eels
cam
FOB CCAS

PRINTED BY TAYLOR AND FRANCIS, RED LION COURT, FLEET STREET.

The Birds of the Sandwich Islands.

SUBSCRIBERS’

NAMES ALREADY RECEIVED.

RESIDENTS IN THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS.

H.R.H. THE PRINCESS VICTORIA KAIULANTI.

BISHOP, Charles R., The Hon. (2 copies.)
CARTER, Mrs. Sybil A. (2 copies.)
CLEGHORN, A.8., The Hon.

GAY, Francis, Esq.
HAWAIIAN News Co., The.
KNUDSEN, Mrs. Y.

ARGYLI, His Grace the Duke of, K.G.
ASHER & Co., Messrs. (3 copies.)

BAIN, Mr. J.

BALSTON, R. J., Esq., F.Z.8.
BEALE, Lionel 8., Prof., M.B., F.R.S.
BREWSTER, William, Esq.
BUCKLEY, T. E., Esq.

BURTON, Mr. H. T.

CAMPBELL, Lord Archibald.
CARPENTER, J. H., Esq.
CARSON, John, Esq.
CHAMBERLAIN, Walter, Esq.
CHASE, R. W., Esq.

CLARKE, W. Eagle, Esq., F.L.S.
COBBETT, A., Esq.

COOPER, E. H., Colonel, F.Z.8.
CORY, C. B., Esq., F.L.S.
CROWLEY, P., Hsq., F.Z.S.

DAVIES, T. H., Esq.

DEACON, W. S., Esq.

DIXON, Abraham, Esq.
DOGGETT, Mr. F.

DOWSETT, A., Esq.

DOWSON, Edward Morris, Esq.
DULAU & Co., Messrs. (4 copies.)

ELLIOTT, Ernest A., Esq.

FRIEDLANDER u. Sohn. (8 copies.)
FROHAWEK, F. W., Esq., F.ES.

GAGE GARDINER, Mrs.
GODMAN, F. Du Cane, Hsq., F.R.S.
GREVEL & Co., Messrs. H.

HARCOURT, E. W., Esq., M.P.
HARRISON, Mrs. W. F.
HARVARD College.

HARVIE BROWN], J. A., Esq.
HOFFNUNG, A., Esq.

HOPE, T., Esq.

HORNE, Edward, Esq., J.P.

JAMES, H. Berkeley, Esq., F.Z.8.

ROBINSON, Aubrey, Esq.
SINCLAIR, Francis, Esq.

SMITH, Armstrong, Esq., F.R.G.S.
SPENCER, Francis, Esq.
TURRILL, F., Esq.

VON TEMPSKY, Randal, Esq.

KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH, & Co., Messrs.
KEMPEN, Prof. Ch. van.
KIRBERGER & KESPER, Messrs.

LEES, Edward B., Esq.

LILFORD, The Rt. Hon. Lord, F.Z.S.
LORENT, J. R., Esq.

LOTHIAN, The Marquess of, F.L.S.
LUCAS, F. W., Esq.

MACINTOSH, James, Esq.
MANGER, W. T., Esq.
MIDLAND Educational Co., The.
MILLAIS, J. G., Esq., F.Z.S.
MILNER, Edward, Esq.

NEWTON, Sir Edward, M.A., K.C.M.G., F.L.S.

NEWTON, Prof., M.A., F.R.S.
NOBLE, W.., Esq.

OXLEY, Mrs. E.

PARKER, Captain R. Townley.
PLUES, Miss.

PURVIS, Herbert, Esq.

ROOKE, P. H., Esq.

ROTHSCHILD, The Hon. Walter, F.Z.S. (2 copies.)

ROYAL College of Surgeons,
RUCKER, H., Esq.
RUSSELL, §. G. C., Esq.

SALVADORI, Count T.

SALVIN, Capt. F. H.

SALVIN, Osbert, Esq., M.A., F.R.S.
SCLATER, P. L., Esq., M.A., Ph.D., F.RB.S.
SEEBOHM, H., Esq., F.Z.8.

SOTHERAN & Co., Messrs. H.

TRISTRAM, The Rev. Canon, D.D., F.R.S.

WESLEY & Son, Messrs. (2 copies.)
WILSON, Bernard, Esq.

WILSON, G.F., Esq.,F.B.S.,F.LS.,F.C.S. (3 copies.)

WILSON, Herman G., Esq.
WILSON, Robert, Esq.

ZOOLOGICAL Society of London.

Ps
Bal

A FEW OPINIONS OF THE PRESS

OWN

‘THE BIRDS OF THE SANDWICH ISLANDS,

THE TBS:

‘We are much pleased to welcome the first part of Mr. Scott Wilson’s promised yolume on the ayifanna of the
Hawaiian Islands, and trust he will be able, with the assistance of Mr. Evans, to bring it to a satisfactory conclusion,
Tt will be very convenient to have the great advances which Mr. Wilson has undoubtedly made in our knowledge of
this most interesting subject incorporated with all that was previously known of it.

“My, Frohawk’s plates will give pleasure to all who study them,”

THE AUK,

“The progress of Ornithology of late years is well exemplified by the work before us. Twenty years ago a small
octavo pamphlet held all we knew about the birds of one of the most interesting and peculiar zoogeographical
provinces ; while to-day it requires a handsome quarto volume with numerous coloured plates to fully represent our
knowledge of the subject. Twenty years azo the number of species known. to inhabit the Hawaiian Islands was con-
sidered to be about forty by the best authority, Sclater (‘Ibis,’ 1871, p. 861). To-day the number is scarcely less than
seventy; and the most astonishing fact is that this increase of our knowledge of one of the most accessible and most
civilized archipelagoes in the Pacitic Ocean has taken place during the last five years. To Mr. Scott B. Wilson, who
spent eighteen months on the islands in order to study their ornithology, much credit is due for this increase, and it is
with great pleasure that we extend our welcome to the work which he is now publishing; and we wish especially to
call the attention of our American Ornithologists to it, as, from the situation of the Hawaiian Archipelago in relation to
our own continent, we ought to take more interest in its ayifauna than has been done hitherto.

“The work is uniform in appearance with most of the more ambitious ornithological monographs which have been
published in England of late years, and is issued in Five Parts, two of which have already been published. These two
Parts treat of eighteen species, and are accompanied by twenty Plates, some of them representing species now extinct or
nearly so. ‘The second Part contains a very valuable and interesting treatise by Dr. Hans Gadow, ‘On the Strueture
of certain Hawaiian Birds, with reference to their Systematic Position,’ to the illustration of which three of the Plates
are devoted, Many unexpected conclusions are the result of his investigation, and the omithological public is under
great obligations to Mr. Scott B. Wilson for not having spared any expense in order to have this side of the ornithology
of the group as well taken care of as that devoted to the outside of the birds alone. Tor details and information we
refer the reader to the book itself, and we advise all who can afford it to subscribe for it.

“ The author has had heavy expenses in order to bring it out, and the: work is well worth encouragement.—L. 8.”

THE FIELD.

“The avi-fauna of the Sandwich Islands has been but imperfectly investicated by the various naturalists and
exploring expeditions that have visited those islands, and, consequently, our knowledge of it has heen imperfect. The
‘ Challenger,’ in its historic voyage (which, however, was chiefly to explore the depths of the sea), stayed in Hawaiian
waters for some three weeks in 1875, but the collection of birds made by the officers included only one new species.
Some of the birds of these islands have been exterminated since the time of Capt. Cook, and others are likely to follow
in their course. Under these circumstances, Professor Newton induced Mr. 8. B. Wilson to visit the islands, and to
investigate their ornithology thoroughly. Mr, Wilson remained in the islands for nearly two years, and brought back
a much more complete collection than had been previonsly made. According to Professor Newton, Mr. Wilson has
done a great deal more than anyone before him; for he has not only brought back a considerable number of new species,
but, in addition, several specimens of birds that are now extinct. One of the most beautiful of the latter is the mamo,
whose rich yellow feathers were formerly used to decorate the state robas of the chiefs. Of this bsautifal bird not
half-a-dozen skins exist in the whole world; two are known at Vienna, and Mr. Wilson succeeded in obtaining two
other specimens from the collection of an ornithologist long resident in the islands. These are now the only ones
known in England. One Mr. Wilson has presented to. the Museum at Oambridge, and the other is in the possession of
Mx, Walter Rothschild. In the Iithnological collection of the British Museum is a cape formed entirely of the plumage
of the mamo. Its dimensions are 3 feet 6 inches wide at the lower margin. Such a cape must haye required the
plumage of some thousands of these birds.

“The inevitable extinction of many birds from the destruction of the forests in the tropical islands is deeply to be
regretted, and ornithologists are greatly indebted to Mr. Wilson for publishing the results of his investigations in the
very beautiful monograph under notice. It contains representations, admirably drawn and coloured by Frohawk, of
the species described, several of which have already been exterminated. The text accompanying these plates is most
interesting, not only from an ornithological, but from an ethnological point of yiew. ‘Two parts of the five of which
the volume is to consist have already been published, and the third, which will shortly appear, will contam an. account
of the wingless bird of Hawaii, which has now also become extinct.”

DAILY PACIFIC COMMERCIAL ADVERTISER.
(HONOLULU.,)

“The first two numbers of the ‘Aves Hawaiienses’ have reached Honolulu. It will be remembered that
Mr. Scott B, Wilson, I.Z.8., came out here fiye years ago and spent a couple of years making a thorouch investigation
into Hawaiian birds, and collecting specimens of all the varieties on the different islands, ‘The results of his labours
are now taking shape in ‘The Birds of the Sandwich [it should be Hawaiian] Islands,’ a truly magnificent work, to be
completed in Five Parts and published by R. H. Porter, 18 Princes Street, Cavendish Square, London, ‘The two first
numbers contain eighteen very handsome full-page coloured plates representing eazh species described, and the work,
when completed, will thus present a finished representation of each kind of bird known to these islands. Most persons:
will be surprised to learn that there are so many handsome birds found here,

“ The letterpress accompanying the plates gives, besides the scientitic name and classification, a concise description
of the bird and its habits, and other matter of a popular kind, which will make the baok inteliizible and valuable to the
general public as well as to those whose interests are specifically scientific. This work, while possesdne a general
scientific yalue, will naturally he of especial value to residents of this Inngdom,”

To be completed in 5 Parts, price 21s. each.

THE BIRDS

OF THE

SANDWICH ISLANDS.

SCOTT B. WILSON, FE.ZS., ERGS.,

ASSISTED BY

A. H. EVANS, M.A., F.ZS.

tes

CONTENTS.

Corvus TROPICUS. + DAFILA ACUTA.

’~ CHLORIDOPS KONA. ®SPATULA CLYPEATA.
CIRIDOPS ANNA. ~ GALLINULA SANDVICENSIS.

» HimavionE aurpa. - | , FULICA ALA.
HIMATIONE MANA. HIIMANTOPUS KNUDSENI.
BERNICLA SANDVICENSIS. ~ OCEANODROMA CRYPTOLEUCURA.
ANAS WYVILLIANA, ' PUFFINUS CUNEATUS.

LONDON:
R. H. PORTER, 18 PRINCES STREET, CAVENDISH SQUARE, W.

PBA A
AS <i NO)

EM AINGCY ew
ell .

PRINTED BY TAYLOR AND FRANCIS, RED LION COURT, FLEET STREET.

The Birds of the Sandwich Islands.

SUBSCRIBERS’

NAMES ALREADY RECEIVED,

RESIDENTS IN THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS.

H.R.H. THE PRINCESS VICTORIA KAIULANI.

BISHOP, Charles R., The Hon. (2 copies.)
CARTER, Mrs. Sybil A. (2 copies.)
CLEGHORN, A. 8., The Hon.

GAY, Francis, Esq.

HAWAITAN News Co., The.
KNUDSEN, Mrs. Y.

ARGYLL, His Grace the Duke of, K.G.
ASHER & Co., Messrs. (8 copies.)

. BAIN, Mr. J.
BALSTON, R. J., Esq., F.Z.S.
BEALE, Lionel 8., Prof., M.B.; F.R:S.
BICKERTON, Mr. R. T.
BREWSTER, William, Esq.
BROWN, J., Esq.

BUCKLEY, T. E., Esq.

BURTON, Mr. H. T.

CAMPBELL, Lord Archibald.
CARPENTER, J. H., Esq.
CARSON, John, Esq.
CHAMBERLAIN, Walter, Esq.
CHASE, R. W., Esq.

CLARKE, W. Eagle, Esq., F.L.S.
COBBRTT, A., Esq.

COOPER, H. H., Colonel, F.Z.8.
CORY, C. B., Esq., F.L.S.
CROWLEY, P., Esq., F.Z.8.

DAVIES, T. H., Esq.

DEACON, W.5., Esq.

DIXON, Abraham, Esq.
DOGGETT, Mr. F.

DOWSETT, A., Esq.

DOWSON, Edward Morris, Esq.
DRESSER, H. E., Esq.

DULAU & Co., Messrs. (4 copies.)

EDINBURGH Museum of Science and Art.
ELLIOTT, Ernest A., sq.

FRIEDLANDER u. Sohn. (3 copies.)
FROHAWK, F. W., Esq., FES.

GAGE GARDINER, Mrs.
GODMAN, F. Du Cane, Esq., F.R.S.
GREVEL & Co., Messrs. H.

HARCOURT, E. W., HEsq., M.P.
HARRISON, Mrs, W. F.
HARVARD College.

HARVIE BROWN, J. A., Esq.
HOFFNUNG, A., Esq.

HOPE, T., Esq.

HORNE, Edward, Esq., J.P.

JAMES, H. Berkeley, Esq., F.Z.8. (the late).
JENTINK, Dr. F. A.

ROBINSON, Aubrey, Esq.
SINCLAIR, Francis, Esq.

SMITH, Armstrong, Esq., F.R.G.S.
SPENCER, Francis, Esq.
TURRILL, F., Esq.
VAN TEMPSKY, Randal, Esq.

KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH, & Co., Messrs.
KEMPEN, Prof. Ch. van.
KIRBERGER & KESPER, Messrs.

LEES, Edward B., Esq.
LEVERKUHN, Herr Paul.
LILFORD, The Rt. Hon. Lord, F.Z.8.
LORENT, J. B., Esq.

LOTHIAN, The Marquess of, F.L.S.
LUCAS, F. W., Esq.

MACINTOSH, James, Esq.
MANGER, W. T., Esq.
MIDLAND Educational Co., The.
MILLAIS, J. G., Esq., F.Z.8.
MILNER, Edward, Esq.

NEWTON, Sir Edward, M.A., K.0.M.G., F.LS.
NEWTON, Prof., M.A., F.B.S.
NOBLE, W., Esq.

OGILVIE, Menteith. Esq.
OXLEY, Mrs. E.

PARKER, Captain R. Townley.
PLUKS, Miss.
PURVIS, Herbert, Esq.

REGEL, Dr. E.

ROOKE, P. H., Esq.

ROTHSCHILD, The Hon. Walter, F.Z.8. (2 copies.)
ROYAL College of Surgeons.

RUCKER, H., Esq.

RUSSELL, 8. G. C., Esq.

SALVADORI, Count T.

SALVIN, Capt. F. H.

SALYVIN, Osbert, Esq., M.A., F.R.S.
SCLATER, P. L., Esq., M.A., Ph.D., F.R.S.
SEEBOHM, H., Esq., F.Z.8._ -

SHARPH, Dr. R. Bowdler.

SMITH, Armstrong, Hsq., F.R.G.S.
SOTHERAN & Co., Messrs. H.
STEJNEGER, Dr. L.

TRISTRAM, The Rev. Canon, D.D., F.R.S.
TULK, J. A., Esq.

WESLEY & Son, Messrs. (2 copies.)

WILSON, Bernard, Ksq.

WILSON, G. F., Esq.,F.R.S., F.L.8.,F.C.8. (3 copies. )
WILSON, Herman G., Esq.

WILSON, Robert, Esq.

ZOOLOGICAL Society of London.

rat
ra un

“sy
Rondel

oa ea
Pence may 1!

age ge H

hed eh i

A FEW OPINIONS OF THE PRESS

‘THE BIRDS OF THE SANDWICH ISLANDS,

TELE Baus.

“We are much pleased to welcome the first part of Mr. Scott Wilson’s promised yolume on the avifauna of the
Hawaiian Islands, and trust he will be able, with the assistance of Mr, Evans, to bring it to a satisfactory conclusion,
Tt will be very convenient to have the great advances which Mr. Wilson has undoubtedly made in our knowledge of
this most interesting subject incorporated with all that was previously known of it.

“Mr, Frohawk’s plates will give pleasure to all who study them.”

THE AUK.

“The progress of Ornithology of late years is well exemplified by the work before us. Twenty years ago a small
octavo pamphlet held all we knew about the birds of one of the most interesting and peculiar zoogeographical
rovinces ; while to-day it requires a handsome quarto volume with numerous coloured plates to fully represent our
nowledge of the subject. ‘Twenty years ago the number of species known to inhabit the Hawaiian Islands was con-
sidered to be about forty by the best authority, Sclater (‘Tbis,’ 1871, p. 361). To-day the number is scarcely less than
seventy; and the most astonishing fact is that this increase of our knowledge of one of the most accessible and most
civilized archipelagoes in the Pacific Ocean has taken place during the last five years. To Mr. Scott B. Wilson, who
spent eighteen months on the islands in order to study their ornithology, much credit is due for this increase, and it is
with great pleasure that we extend our welcome to the work which he is now publishing; and we wish especially to
call the attention of our American Ornithologists to it, as, from the situation of the Hawaiian Archipelago in relation to
our own continent, we ought to take more interest in its avifauna than has been done hitherto,

“The work is uniform in appearance with most of the more ambitious ornithological monographs which have been
published in England of late years, and is issued in Five Parts, two of which have already been published, These two
Parts treat of eighteen species, and are accompanied by twenty Plates, some of them representing: species now extinct or
nearly so. The second Part contains a very valuable and interesting treatise by Dr. Hans Gadow, ‘On the Structure
of certain Hawaiian Birds, with reference to their Systematic Position,’ to the illustration of which three of the Plates
are devoted. Many unexpected conclusions are the result of his investigation, and the ornithological public is under
great obligations to Mr. Scott B. Wilson for not haying spared any expense in order to have this side of the ornithology
of the group as well taken care of as that devoted to the outside of the birds alone. For details and information we
refer the reader to the book itself, and we advise all who can afford it to subscribe for it.

“The author has had heavy expenses in order to bring it out, and the work is well worth encouragement.—L. S.”

Tite PUELD,

“The avi-fauna of the Sandwich Islands has been but imperfectly investigated by the yarious naturalists and
exploring expeditions that have visited those islands, and, consequently, our knowledge of it has been imperfect. The
‘Challenger,’ in its historic voyage (which, however, was chiefly to explore the depths of the sea), stayed in Hawaiian
waters for some three weeks in 1875, but the collection of birds made by the officers included only one new species.
Some of the birds of these islands have been exterminated since the time of Capt. Cook, and others are likely to follow
in their course. Under these circumstances, Professor Newton induced Mr. 8. B, Wilson to visit the islands, and to
investigate their ornithology thoroughly. Mr, Wilson remained in the islands for nearly two years, and brought back
a much more complete collection than had been previously made. According to Professor Newton, Mr. Wilson has
done a great deal more than anyone before him ; for he has not only brought back a considerable number of new species,
but, in addition, several specimens of birds that are now extinct. One of the most beautiful of the latter is the mamo,
whose rich yellow feathers were formerly used to decorate the state robes of the chiefs. Of this beautiful bird not
half-a-dozen skins exist in the whole world; two are known at Vienna, and Mr. Wilsun succeeded in obtaining two
other specimens from the collection of an ornithologist long resident in the islands, These are now the only ones
known in England, One Mr. Wilson has presented to the Museum at Cambridge, and the other is in the possession of
Mr. Walter Rothschild. In the Ethnological collection of the British Museum is a cape formed entirely of the plumage
of the mamo. Its dimensions are 3 feet 6 inches wide at the lower margin, Such acape must haye required the
plumage of some thousands of these birds.

“The inevitable extinction of many birds from the destruction of the forests in the tropical islands is deeply to be
regretted, and ornithologists are greatly indebted to Mr, Wilson for publishing the results of his investigations in the
very beautiful monograph under notice. It contains representations, admirably drawn and coloured by Frohawk, of
the species described, several of which have already been exterminated. The text accompanying these plates is most
interesting, not only from an ornithological, but from an ethnological point of view. ‘Two parts of the five of which
the volume is to consist have already been published, and the third, which will shortly appear, will contain an account
of the wingless bird of Hawaii, which has now also become extinct.”

DAILY PACIFIC COMMERCIAL ADVERTISER.
(HONOLULU.)

“The first two numbers of the ‘Aves Hawaiienses’ haye reached Honolulu. It will be remembered that
Mr, Scott B, Wilson, F.Z.8., came out here five years ago and spent a couple of years making a thorough investigation
into Hawaiian birds, and collecting specimens of all the yarieties on the different islands. ‘he results of his labours
are now taking shape in ‘The Birds of the Sandwich [it should be Hawaiian] Islands,’ a truly magnificent work, to be
completed in Five Parts and published by R. H. Porter, 18 Princes Street, Uavendish Square, London, ‘The two first
numbers contain eighteen yery handsome full-page coloured plates representing each species described, and the work,
when completed, will thus present a finished representation of each kind of bird known to these islands. Most persons
will be surprised to learn that there are so many handsome birds found here.

“ The letterpress accompanying the plates gives, besides the scientific name and classification, a concise description
of the bird and its habits, and other matter of a popular kind, which will make the book intelligible and yaluable to the
general public as well as to those whose interests are specifically scientitic. ‘This work, while possessing a general
scientific value, will naturally be of especial value to residents of this kingdom.”

AVES

HAWAITIENSES:

THE BIRDS

OF THE

| SANDWICH ISLANDS.

SIE BEE GE SS a

Ge Ce Oe Ce CO Oe Oe

Say

se ee See ee

GLEE

: SCOTT B. WILSON, FZS, FRGS.
Sie . Fi ie ig
| Che ASSISTED BY 4 a
He

GPSae

ke | A. HH. EVAN S, M. A., FE.ZS. U
he ey Wl
ap al
He Weel
le :
a CONTENTS, Nall
os 1 eh
* PALMERIA DOLII. ACRULOCERCUS BISHOPI. | i
HEMIGNATHUS LICHTENSTEINI. ’ ACRULOCERCUS APICALIS. i j
HEmianatius LUCIDUS. CEStRELATA PHAROPYGIA. wD
Cae
RHODACANTHIS PALMERI. | PENNULA ECAUDATA. a |
DREPANIS FUNEREA. NUMENIUS TAHITIENSIS. (Plate only.) Weal

LONDON:
R. H. PORTER, 18 PRINCES STREET, CAVENDISH SQUARE, W.

J 1894.
COON.
Soh === = Soe See ae eae,
Gee Fe eee eee eee

PRINTED BY TAYLOR AND FRANCIS, RED LION COURT, FLEET STREET.

N.B.—Owing to the recent discoveries of Mr. Perkins and of Mr. Rothschild’s collectors, the number
of existing Sandwich Island birds proves to be so much larger than was formerly supposed that the
- issue of a sixth Part is unavoidable.

The Birds of the Sandwich Islands.

SUBSCRIBERS’ NAMES ALREADY RECEIVED.

RESIDENTS IN THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS.

H.R.H. THE PRINCESS VICTORIA KAIULANI.
BISHOP, Charles R., The Hon. (2 copies.) ROBINSON, Aubrey, Esq.

CARTER, Mrs. Sybil A. (2 copies.) - SINCLAIR, Francis, Esq.

CLEGHORN, A.8., The Hon. SMITH, Armstrong, Esq., F.R.G.S.

GAY, Francis, Esq. SPENCER, Francis, Esq.

HAWAIIAN News Co., The. TURRILL, F., Esq.

KNUDSEN, Mrs. V. VAN TEMPSKY, Randal, Esq.
ARGYLL, His Grace the Duke of, K.G. KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH, & Co., Messrs. (2 copies.)
ASHER & Co., Messrs. (8 copies.) KEMPEN, Prof. Ch. van.

_ KIRBERGER & KESPER, Messrs.
BAIN, Mr. J.
BALSTON, R. J., Esq., F.Z.8. LEES, Edward B., Esq.
BEALE, Lionel §., Prof., M.B., F.R.S. LEVERKUHN, Herr Paul.
BICKERTON, Mr. R. T. LILFORD, The Rt. Hon. Lord, E.ZS8.
BREWSTER, William, Esq. LORENT, J. B., Esq.
BROWN, J., Esq. LOTHIAN, The Marquess of, F.L.S.
BUCKLEY, T. E., Esq. LUCAS, F. W., Esq.

BURTON, Mr. H. T. MACINTOSH, James, Esq.

MANGER, W. T., Esq.
MIDLAND Educational Co., The.
MILLAIS, J. G., Esq., F.Z.S.
MILNER, Edward, Esq.

CAMPBELL, Lord Archibald.
CARPENTER, J. H., Esq.
CARSON, John, Esq.
CHAMBERLAIN, Walter, Esq.

CHASE, R. W., Esq. NEWTON, Sir Edward, M.A., K.C.M.G., F.LS.
CLARKE, W. Eagle, Esq., F.LS. NEWTON, Prof., M.A., EBS.

COBBETT, A., Esq. NOBLE, W., Esq.

oe a a tne aces OGILVIE, Menteith, Esq.

CROMPTON, Sidney, Esq. OXLEY, Mrs. E.

CROWLEY, P., Esq., F.Z.8. PARKER, Captain R. Townley.

PLUES, Miss
DAVIES, T. H., Esq. C ; }
DEACON, W. 8. Ts. PURVIS, Herbert, Esq.
DIXON, Abraham, Esq. REGEL, Dr. E.
DOGGETT, Mr. F. ROBB, Mrs.
DOWSETT, A., Esq. ROOKEH, P. H., Esq.
DOWSON, Edward Morris, Esq. ROTHSCHILD, The Hon. Walter, F.Z.8. (2 copies.)
DRESSER, H. E., Esq. ROYAL College of Surgeons.
DULAU & Co., Messrs. (4 copies.) RUCKER, H., Esq.

; RUSSELL, 8. G. C., Esq.
EDINBURGH Museum of Science and Art.

ELLIOTT, Ernest A., Esq. SALVADORI, Count T.
“ SALVIN, Capt. F. H.
FRIEDLANDER u. Sohn. (8 copies.) SALVIN, Osbert, Esq., M.A., F.R.S.
FROHAWK, F. W., Esq., F.E.S. SCLATER, P. L., Esq., M.A., Ph.D., F.R.S.
SEEBOHM, H., Esq., F.Z.8.
GAGE GARDINER, Mrs. SHARPE, Dr. R. Bowdler.
GODMAN, F. Du Cane, Esq., F.R.S. SMITH, Armstrong, Esq., F.R.G.S.
GREVEL & Co., Messrs. H. SOLTHERAN & Co., Messrs. H.
STECHERT, Mr. G. E.
HARRISON, Mrs. W. F.
HARVARD College. TRISTRAM, The Rey. Canon, D.D., F.R.S.
HARVIE BROWN, J. A., Esq. TULK, J. A., Esq.
HOFFNUNG, A., Esq.
HOPE, T., Esq. WESLEY & Son, Messrs. (2 copies.)
HORNE, Edward, Esq., J.P. | WILSON, Bernard, Esq.
, WILSON, G. F., Esq.,F.R.S.,F.L.S.,F.C.8. (8 copies.)
INDIAN Museum, Calcutta. WILSON, Herman G., Esq.

WILSON, Robert, Hsq.
JAMES, H. Berkeley, Esq., F.Z.S. (the late). /
JENTINK, Dr. F. A. ZOOLOGICAL Society of London.

b \ rm

A FEW OPINIONS OF THE PRESS

‘THE BIRDS OF THE SANDWICH ISLANDS’

THE IBIS.

“We are much pleased to welcome the first part of Mr. Scott Wilson’s promised yolume on the ayifauna of ‘the
Hawaiian Islands, and trust he will be able, with the assistance of Mr, Evans, to bring it to a satisfactory conclusion.
Tt will be very convenient to haye the great advances which My, Wilson has undoubtedly made in our knowledge of
this most interesting subject incorporated with all that was previously known of it.

“Mr, Frohawk’s plates will give pleasure to all who study them.”

THE AUK.

“The progress of Ornithology of late years is well exemplified by the work before us. Twenty years ago a small
octayo pamphlet held all we knew about the birds of one of the most interesting and peculiar zoogeographical
provinces ; while to-day it requires a handsome quarto volume with numerous coloured plates to fully represent our
knowledge of the subject. Twenty years ago the number of species known to inhabit the Hawaiian Islands was con-
sidered to be about forty by the best authority, Sclater (‘ Ibis,’ 1871, p. 861), To-day the number is scarcely less than
seventy; and the most astonishing fact is that this increase of our knowledge of one of the most accessible and most
civilized archipelagoes in the Pacific Ocean has taken place during the last five years. To Mr. Scott B. Wilson, who
spent eighteen months on the islands in order to study their ornithology, much credit is due for this increase, and it is
with great pleasure that we extend our welcome to the work which he is now publishing ; and we wish especially to
call the attention of our American Ornithologists to it, as, from the situation of the Hawaiian Archipelago in relation to
our own continent, we ought to take more interest in its avifauna than has been done hitherto,

“The work is uniform in appearance with most of the more ambitious ornithological monographs which haye been
published in England of late years, and ig issued in Five Parts, two of which have already been published. These two
Parts treat of eighteen species, and are accompanied by twenty Plates, some of them représenting species now extinct or
nearly so, The second Part contains a very valuable and interesting treatise by Dr. Hans Gadow, ‘On the Structure
of certain Hawaiian Birds, with reference to their Systematic Position, to the illustration of which three of the Plates
are devoted. Many unexpected conclusions are the result of his inyestigation, and the ornithological public is under
great obligations to Mr. Scott B. Wilson for not having spared any expense in order to have this side of the ornithology
of the group as well taken care of as that devoted to the outside of the birds alone. For details and information we
refer the reader to the book itself, and we advise all who can afford it to subscribe for it.

“The author has had heavy expenses in order to bring it out, and the work is well worth encouragement.—L., 8.”

TECH Fale bE:

“The avi-fauna of the Sandwich Islands has been but imperfectly investigated by the various naturalists and
exploring expeditions that have visited those islands, and, consequently, our knowledge of it has been imperfect. The
‘Challenger,’ in its historic voyage (which, however, was chiefly to explore the depths of the sea), stayed in Hawaiian
waters for some three weeks in 1875, but the collection of birds made by the officers included only one new species.
Some of the birds of these islands have been exterminated since the time of Capt. Cook, and others are likely to follow
in their course. Under these circumstances, Professor Newton induced Mr. 8. B. Wilson to visit the islands, and to
investigate their ornithology thoroughly. Mr. Wilson remained in the islands for nearly two years, and brought back
2 much more complete collection than had been previously made. According to Professor Newton, Mr. Wilson has
done a great deal more than anyone before him ; for he has not only brought back a considerable number of new species,
but, in addition, several specimens of birds that are now extinct. One of the most beautiful of the latter is the mamo,
whose rich yellow feathers were formerly used to decorate the state robes of the chiefs. Of this beautiful bird not
half-a-dozen slins exist in the whole world; two are known at Vienna, and Mr, Wilson succeeded in obtaining two
other specimens from the collection of an ornithologist long resident in the islands. These are now the only ones
known in Jingland. One Mr, Wilson has presented to the Museum at Cambridge, and the other is in the possession of
Mr. Walter Rothschild. In the Ethnological collection of the British Museum is a cape formed entirely of the plumage
of the mamo, Its dimensions are 3 foet 6 inches wide at the lower margin. Such a cape must haye required the
plumage of some thousands of these birds. as

‘The inevitable extinction of many birds from the destruction of the forests in the tropical islands is deeply to be
regretted, and ornithologists are greatly indebted to Mr. Wilson for publishing the results of his investigations in the
very beautiful monograph under notice. It contains representations, admirably drawn and coloured by Frohawk, of
the species described, several of which have already been exterminated. he text accompanying these plates is most
interesting, not only from an ornithological, but from an ethnological point of view. Two parts of the five of which
the volume is to consist have already been published, and the third, which will shortly appear, will contain an account
of the wingless bird of Hawaii, which has now also become extinct.”

DAILY PACIFIC COMMERCIAL ADVERTISER.
(HLONOLULU.)

“The first two numbers of the ‘Aves Hawaiienses’ have reached Honolulu. It will be remembered that
Mr, Scott B. Wilson, I.Z.8., came out here fiye years ago and spent a couple of years making a thorough investigation
into Hawaiian birds, and collecting specimens ot all the varieties on the ditfevent islands, ‘Ihe results of his labours
ave now taking shape in ‘‘I'he Birds of the Sandwich [it should be Hawaiian] Islands,’ a truly mayniticent work, to be
completed in Hive Parts and published by kK. H. Porter, 18 Princes Street, Cavendish Square, London, ‘lhe two first
numbers contain eighteen very handsome full-page coloured plates representing each species described, and the work,
when completed, will thus present a finished representation of each kind of bird known to these islands. Most persons
will be surprised to learn that there are so many handsome birds found here.

* ‘I'he letterpress accompanying the plates gives, besides the scientitic name and classification, a concise description
of the bird and its liabits, and otter matter of a popular kind, which will make the book intebigible and valuable vw the
general public as well as to those whose interests ure specitically scientine. his work, wile possessine a general
scientific yalue, will naturally be of especial value to residents of this kinedom,”

Price 21s.

THE BIRDS

SANDWICH ISLANDS.

BY
SCOTT B. WILSON, FEZS., FRGS.,

ASSISTED BY

A. H. EVANS, M.A., F.ZS.

CONTENTS.

PHAORNIS PALMERI. HIEMIGNATHUS AFFINIS.
CHASIEMPIS SANDVICENSIS. HIMATIONE NEWTONI.
CHASIEMPIS SCLATERI. FLIMATIONE WILSONI.
CHASIEMPIS GAYI. HIMATIONE VIRENS.

LOXOPS AUREA. HIMATIONE CHLORIS.
LOoxops RUFA. FuLica auat. (Plate only.)

PSEUDONESTOR XANTHOPHRYS.

LONDON:
R. H. PORTER, 7 PRINCES STREET, CAVENDISH SQUARE, W.

PRINTED BY TAYLOR AND FRANCIS, RED LION COURT, FLEET STREET.

ya
bi

aed

iia

aol

ne
ue
Beanie

A FEW OPINIONS OF THE PRESS’

‘THE BIRDS OF THE SANDWICH ISLANDS,’

Teron ay Beles:

“We are much pleased to welcome the first part of Mr. Scott Wilson’s promised volume on the avifauna of the
Hawaiian Islands, and trust he will be able, with the assistance of Mr. Evans, to bring it to a satisfactory conclusion.
It will be very convenient to have the great advances which Mr. Wilson has undoubtedly made in our Imowledge of
this most interesting subject incorporated with all that was previously known of it,

“Mr, Frohawk’s plates will give pleasure to all who study them.”

THE AUK.

“The progress of Ornithology of late years is well exemplified by the work before us. Twenty years ago a small
octavo pamphlet held all we Imew about the birds of one of the most interesting and peculiar zoogeographical
rovinces ; while to-day it requires a handsome quarto volume with numerous coloured plates to fully represent our
nowledge of the subject. ‘Twenty years ago the number of species Inown to inhabit the Hawaiian Islands was con-
sidered to be about forty by the best authority, Sclater (‘Thbis,’ 1871, p. 861), ‘To-day the number is scarcely less than
seventy; and the most astonishing fact is that this increase of our knowledge of one of the most accessible and most
civilized archipelagoes in the Pacifie Ocean has taken place during the last five years. To Mr. Scott B. Wilson, who
spent eighteen months on the islands in order to study their ornithology, much credit is due for this increase, and it is
with great pleasure that we extend our welcome to the work which he is now publishing; and we wish especially to
call the attention of our American Ornithologists to it, as, from the situation of the Hawaiian Archipelago in relation to
our own continent, we ought to tale more interest in its avifauna than has been done hitherto.

“The work is uniform in appearance with most of the more ambitious ornithological monographs which have been
ublished in England of late years, and is issued in Five Parts, two of which have already been published. These two
arts treat of eighteen species, and are accompanied by twenty Plates, some of them representing species now extinct or

nearly so. ‘The second Part contains a very valuable and interesting treatise by Dr. Hans Gadow, ‘On the Structure
of certain Hawaiian Birds, with reference to their Systematic Position, to the illustration of which three of the Plates
are devoted. Many unexpected conclusions are the result of his investigation, and the ornithological public is under
great obligations to Mr. Scott B. Wilson for not having spared any expense in order to have this side of the ornithology
of the group as well taken care of as that devoted to the outside of the birds alone. For details and information we
refer the reader to the book itself, and we advise all who can afford it to subscribe for it.

“The author has had heavy expenses in order to bring it out, and the work is well worth encouragement.—L. 8.”

PEE, ESSESD;

“The avi-fauna of the Sandwich Islands has been but imperfectly investigated by the various naturalists and
exploring expeditions that have visited those islands, and, consequently, our knowledge of it has been imperfect. The
‘Challenger,’ in its historic voyage (which, however, was chiefly to explore the depths of the sea), stayed in Hawaiian
waters for some three weeks in 1875, but the collection of birds made by the officers included only one new species.
Some of the birds of these islands have been exterminated since the time of Capt. Cook, and others are likely to follow
in their course. Under these circumstances, Professor Newton induced Mr. 8. B. Wilson to visit the islands, and to
investigate their ornithology thoroughly. Mr. Wilson remained in the islands for nearly two years, and brought back
a much more complete collection than had been previously made. According to Professor Newton, Mr. Wilson has
done a great deal more than anyone before him; for he has not only brought back a considerable number of new species,
but, in addition, several specimens of birds that are now extinct. One of the most beautiful of the latter is the mamo,
whose rich yellow feathers were formerly used to decorate the state robes of the chiefs. Of this beautiful bird not
half-a-dozen skins exist in the whole world; two are known at Vienna, and Mr. Wilsun succeeded in obtaining two
other speciniens from the collection of an omithologist long resident im the islands, -These are now the only ones
known in England, One My. Wilson has presented to the Museum at Cambridge, and the other is in the possession of
Mr. Walter Rothschild. In the Ethnological collection of the British Museum is a cape formed entirely of the plumage
of the mamo,. Its dimensions are 3 feet 6 inches wide at the lower margin, Such acape must haye required the
plumage of some thousands of these birds.

“The inevitable extinction of many birds from the destruction of the forests in the tropical islands is deeply to be
regretted, and ornithologists are greatly indebted to Mr, Wilson for publishing the results of his investigations in the
very beautiful monograph under notice. It contains representations, admirably drawn and coloured by Frohawk, of
the species described, several of which have already been exterminated. The text accompanying these plates is most
interesting, not only from an ornithological, but from an ethnological point of view. Two parts of the five of which
the volume is to consist have already been published, and the third, which will shortly appear, will contain an account
of the wingless bird of Hawaii, which has now also become extinct,”

DAILY PACIFIC COMMERCIAL ADVERTISER.
(HONOLULU.)

“The first two numbers of the ‘Aves Hawaiienses’ have reached Honolulu. It will be remembered that
Mr. Scott B, Wilson, F.Z.S., came out here five years ago and spent a couple of years making a thorough investigation
into Hawaiian birds, and collecting specimens of all the varieties on the different islands. ‘The results of his labours
are now taking shape in ‘The Birds of the Sandwich [it should be Hawaiian] Islands,’ a truly magnificent work, to be
completed in Five Parts and published by It. H. Porter, 18 Princes Street, Cavendish Square, London, ‘The two first
numbers contain eighteen very handsome full-page coloured plates representing each species described, and the work,
when completed, will thus present a finished representation of each kind of bird known to these islands. Most persons
will be surprised to learn that there are so many handsome birds found here.

“ The letterpress accompanying the plates gives, besides the scientific name and classification, a concise description
of the bird and its habits, and other matter of a popular kind, which will make the book intelligible and yaluable to the
general public as well as to those whose interests are specifically scientific. This work, while possessing a general
scientific value, will naturally he of especial value to residents of this kingdom.”

Price 21s. net.

POL ees
Po PART VIL.

AVES HAWAIILENSES:

THE BIRDS is

SANDWICH ISLANDS.

BY
SCOTT B. WILSON, FZS, FRGS.
ASSISTED BY

A. H. EVANS, M.A., F.ZS.

aan

CONTENTS,

Title. HIMATIONE SANGUINEA.

EPlate-onty:) ARDEA SACRA,
Dedication. HIMATIONE VIRENS. ; y:

NyctTIicoRax GRISEUS.

Preface. ;
Introduction.
Hrrata and Addenda.

(ESTRELATA PHHOPYGIA. (Plate only.)
HIMANTOPUS KNUDSENI. (Plate only.)
Map.

VESTIARIA COCCINEA. (Plate only.)
CHASIEMPIS SANDVICENSIS. (Plate only.)

Kggs of H1IMATIONE, sp.
Eges of CHASIEMPTS, sp. §
“ Further Remarks,” &c.
RHODACANTHIS FLAVICEPS.
HEMIGNATHUS LANAIENSIS.
VIRIDONIA SAGITTIROSTRIS.
HIMATIONE MACULATA,
PHAETHON RUBRICAUDA. ~
PHAETHON ZTHEREUS.
PREGATA AQUILA.

(Plate only.)

PLEGADIS GUARAUNA.
PENNULA SANDVICENSIS.
PENNULA WILSONT.
STERNA FULIGINOSA.
SPERNA LUNATA,

GYGIS ALBA.

ANOUS STOLIDUS.

ANOUS HAWAIIENSIS.
DIoMEDEA IMMUTABILIS.
BULWERIA ANJINHO.

NOTE. hee
The Table of Contents, List of Plates, and Index, to complete work, ipa

will be issued shortly. oe
———e
LONDON: eH

RES
R. H. PORTER, 7 PRINCES STREET, CAVENDISH SQUARE, W. =O:

’ eA
1899.

PRINTED BY TAYLOR AND FRANCIS, RED LION COURT, FLEET STRERT.

peace a
dean eit

A pe a 0) hs

ies aK,

Pat

“ &D
Ree
yen

WYZEW'S Se — — —

AN
oy
Gora Ore

OOOO PART VIII]

eas ie
ie AVES HAWAILENSES: e
lame: tle
Ie : Ae Gs)

THE BIRDS

OF THE

SANDWICH ISLANDS.

SCOTT B. WILSON, FAS, FRGS.,

An AE i a SE

ASSISTED BY

A. H. EVANS, M.A. F.ZS.

CONTENTS,
Table of Contents, List of Plates, and Index.

LONDON:
Rin thle PORTER, 7 PRINCES STREET, CAVENDISH SQUARE, W.
1899.

PRINTED BY TAYLOR AND FRANCIS, RED LION COURT, FLEET STREET.

hu rd

dace PC

mat
pl

‘ z | aie | . i’ In Preparation Boal Ato. pete Subscribers, £4 4s. Re
[))) )) AVEG HAWAIIENSES: 4
Pee oa BEDS
ee ; OF THE |
SANDWICH ISLANDS.
| BY
SCOTT B. WILSON, E.ZS.
ILLUSTRATED WITH ABOUT 40 COLOURED PLATES.

¥ | | aN | TERONNED ON

RB. H. PORTER, 18 PRINCES STREET, CAVENDISH SQUARE, W.

1890.

PROS is:

Tue Author was induced to visit the Sandwich Islands in the belief that he would be
able to throw some light on the Geographical Distribution of the species which con-
stitute the very peculiar Avifauna of this Archipelago. In the course of the eighteen
months that he passed on the beautiful islands which compose it, he was so fortunate
as to find that his success had been beyond his most sanguine expectation, and that he
was not only in a position to solve several problems which had hitherto puzzled
ornithologists, but that he had added largely to the list of the indigenous species—of
which all the land-birds and several of the water-birds are absolutely peculiar to the

Hawaiian group.

Another consideration which prompted the Author was the opinion expressed by
many competent judges that several of the native species of birds were in process of
extirpation, through the destruction of the forests and the introduction of foreign rivals—
if, indeed, this process had not in some instances been completed. His subsequent
investigations have shown that this opinion was only too well-founded, and that a few
species had certainly become extinct, while the fate of a good many more is to all
appearance decided. Most fortunately there existed in Honolulu an ornithological
collection begun many years ago, and from that he was enabled to acquire specimens
of several species which by all report have not been seen alive for more than a quarter

of a century.

Though the Sandwich Islands were discovered in January, 1778, by Captain Coox,
who, it will be remembered, met his death on one of them in the following year, and
specimens of about a dozen species of their birds were soon after described by Latham
in his ‘ General Synopsis, examples of even the most common species have always been
rare in collections, and there are now some important Museums which seem not to
possess a single specimen from the Hawaiian group. Moreover, the descriptions and
figures of those which have since been published have been scattered throughout many
works, most of them not easy of access, whether in the accounts of Voyages performed
by private adventurers or by the ships of various Governments—as, for instance, that of
the French frigate Venus, the Vincennes and the Peacock of the United States’ Exploring
Expedition, and of H.M.SS. Blonde and Challenger—or, again, in the publications of
various learned Societies.

In 1869, a most laudable and in some respects successful attempt to compile a
List of the Birds of the Hawaiian Islands was made by Mr. Sanford B. Dole—now

(@eitione)

His Honour, Mr. Justice Dole—in the ‘ Proceedings’ of the Boston Society of Natural
History; but, owing to the want of opportunity of comparing specimens and consulting
original descriptions, this otherwise useful list contains several errors, while considered
at its best it is little more than a catalogue. Some years after its appearance,
Mr. Sclater, who had long taken an interest in the Avifauna of the Sandwich Islands,
endeavoured to compile from it an improved list, but, for want of sufficient materials,
combined with the fact that the habitat of some of the originally described species was
unknown or overlooked, this list, accurate at the time, is now misleading, while the
Author believes that his own investigations have added nearly a dozen new species to
it. Mr. Sclater, however, made more evident than it had before appeared the great
peculiarity of the Hawaiian Avifauna, and all that has been done since tends to prove
that the peculiarity is even greater than he had thought. Comparisons of this kind are
not easily made, but the peculiarity would really seem to be in its way as great as that
of Madagascar or New Zealand; while as an expiring population it must be regarded
as of equal interest with that of the latter country.

The beauty of many of the birds of the Sandwich Islands has long been known,
from the marvellous helmets and robes of feather-work, some of which are still
0 be seen, though too often moth-eaten and disfigured, in various Museums. To form

onsequence of this that one of the finest species—Drepanis pacifica—has become
Of this beautiful bird a single specimen, brought back by the Author, and
ow in the Museum of the University of Cambridge, seems to be the only one now in
at Britain; while the number of examples on the continent of Kurope must be very
ed. This, moreover, is by no means a singular instance. The Author succeeded in

‘The plates will be executed by Mr. Frouawk and carefully coloured by hand. The
Subscription price will be £4 4s. for the complete work.

Intending Subscribers will please send their names direct to the Publisher,
R. H. PORTER,
18 Princes Street, Cavendish Square, London, W.

See

Specimen Page.|

ACRULOCERCUS NOBILIS,

O-O.

“ Yellow-tufted Bee-eater,” Latham, Gen. Synops. i. p. 683 (1782); Suppl. p. 120 (1787); Suppl. 2,
p- 149 (1802).
?“ Moh6,” Ellis, Narrat. Voy. Cook & Clerke, ii. p. 156 (1782).
? “ Hoohoo,” King, Voy. Pacif. Ocean, iii. p. 119, partim (1784).
Gracula nobilis, Merrem, Beytr. besond. Gesch. Vogel, Heft i. p. 8, pl. ii. (1784).
» longirostra, var. 8, Gmelin, Syst. Nat. 1. p. 398 (1788).
Merops niger, Gmelin, tom. cit. p. 465 (1788).
» fasciculatus, Latham, Ind. Orn. i. p. 275 (1790).
“Le Moho,” Sonnini, Hist. Nat. Buffon, Ois. xviii..p. 286 (1802).
Philemon fasciculatus, Vieillot, Encycl. Méthod. Ornithol. p. 618 (1828).
? Nectarina [sic] niger, Bloxam, Voy. ‘ Blonde,’ p. 249 (1826).
Meliphaga fasciculata, Temminck & Laugier, Rec. d’Ois. Livr. 79, Pl. Col. 471 (1829).
“Philédon moho, Merops fasciculatus, Lath.” ; Lesson, Tr. d’Orn. p. 302 (1831); Compl. Bui
in. p. 49 (1837).
Acrulocercus niger, Cabanis, Arch. f. Naturgesch. xiii. p. 327 (1847); Sundevall, Tentam. { 5
(1872). ~
Moho niger, G. R. Gray, Gen. B. i. p. 96 (1847) ; Bonaparte, Consp. Av. i. p. 394 (1850).
Ptioturus fasciculatus, Peale, U.S. Expl. Exped., Birds, p. 148 (1848).
Mohoa fasciculata, Reichenbach, Handb. sp. Orn. p. 3388, partim (1853), tab. 614. fig. 4098.
», nobilis, Cassin, Proc. Acad. N.S. Philad. 1855, p. 489; Sclater, Ibis, 1871, pp. 358, 36
Proc. Zool. Soc. 1878, p. 847; Von Pelzeln, Journ. f. Orn. 1872, p. 25. .
Moho nobilis, Cassin, U.S. Expl. Exped., Mamm. & Orn. p. 170 (1858); G. R. Gray, Cat. B.

Acrulocercus nobilis, Scott Wilson, Ibis, 1890, p. 177.

Tuts, the Royal Bird of modern times, is perhaps the best known of any species to
both the natives and foreign residents in the islands. It is doubtful whether in ancient
days it was from the yellow feathers that grow beneath its wings, or from the still
more beautiful yellow upper tail-coverts of the now extinct Drepanis pacifica, that
the state robes of kings and chiefs were wrought. It was the privilege of those
classes alone to wear them; and it cannot be denied that they formed a becoming
apparel, as magnificent and beautiful as anything that the triumphs of civilized art can
now produce. ‘The fine statue of King Kamehameha I., which stands in front of the
Government House in Honolulu, represents the great conqueror who first consolidated

44 gas7 VU

Seay

Hat

fe ie

F ies:
Ai |
ny,

ep)
Fh tifa!
Pal, ue

Ce ited Sit

ie eee ts

po) 55556

ip hn SASS So DAEs

Ors es Ake

SS aa Bale sh.

BES ten

_ Se iuncunyy

Poa seine aa Reon aie Peay Sie

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Aves Hawaiienses : the birds of the Sandwich Islands"

See other formats