Chapter 2

01.Fregilupus varius. From the plate in the "Volume Centenaire," Mus. Hist. Naturelle, Paris.02. 1.Foudia bruante. From the figure in Daubenton's work.02.2.Necropsar rodericanus. Made up from description.02.3.Necropsar leguati. From the type specimen in Liverpool.03. 1.Geospiza magnirostris. From the type specimen in London.03.2.Geospiza strenua. Head. From specimen at Tring.03.3.Nesoenas mayeri. From specimen in the British Museum.03.4.Chaunoproctus ferreorostris♂ ♀. From the pair in the British Museum.04. 1.Hemignathus ellisianus. After a drawing from the type in the Berlin Museum.04.2.Heterorhynchus lucidus. From a specimen in the Paris Museum.04.3.Psittirostra psittacea deppei. From the type in the Tring Museum.04.4.Ciridops anna. From a specimen in the Tring Museum.4a.1.Moho apicalis. From specimen in the Tring Museum.4a.2.Chaetoptila angustipluma. From specimen in the Tring Museum.05. 1.Miro traversi. From skin in the Tring Museum.05.2.Traversia lyalli♂ and ♀. From the type specimens in the Tring Museum.05.3.Bowdleria rufescens. From a skin in the Tring Museum.5a.Siphonorhis americanus. From skin in the British Museum.06. 1.Nestor norfolcensis. From the plate in the Bulletin of the Liverpool Museum.06.2. Head ofNestor productus. From a specimen in the Tring Museum.07.Lophopsittacus mauritianus. From ancient drawing and description.08.Necropsittacus borbonicus. From a description.09.Mascarinus mascarinus. From the drawing in the Volume commémoratif, Centenaire Mus. Paris.10.Ara tricolor. From specimen in the Liverpool Museum.11.Ara gossei. From Gosse's description.12.Ara erythrocephala. From Gosse's description.13.Anadorhynchus purpurascens. From description.14.Ara martinicus. From description.15.Ara erythrura. From description.16.Conurus labati. From description.17.Amazona violaceus. From description.18.Amazona martinicana. From description.19.Palaeornis exsul. From the plate in the "Ibis."20.Palaeornis wardi. From the plate in the "Ibis."21.Hemiphaga spadicea. From the specimen in the Tring Museum.22.Alectroenas nitidissima. From the plate in the Volume commémoratif du Centenaire, Mus. Paris.23.Pezophaps solitaria. Made up from descriptions and ancient drawings.24.Didus cucullatus. From drawings.24a.Didus cucullatus. See explanation, page172.24b.Didus cucullatus. See explanation, page172.24c.Didus cucullatus. See explanation, page172.25.Didus solitarius. From a picture supposed to be taken from a living specimen in Amsterdam, but beak and wing restored.25a.Didus solitarius. After Dubois' description.25b.1, 2, 3.Pezophaps solitarius. Reproduction of ancient figures, see page177.25b.4, 5, 7, 8.Didus solitarius. Reproduction of ancient figures, see page177.26. 1.Hypotaenidia pacifica. From Forster's unpublished drawing in the British Museum.26.2.Pennula sandwichensis. From the unique specimen in the Leyden Museum.26.3.Pennula millsi. From skin in the Tring Museum.27.Nesolimnas dieffenbachi. From the unique specimen in the British Museum.28. 1.Cabalus modestus. From skin in the Tring Museum.28.2.Coturnix novaezealandiae. From skin in the Tring Museum.29.Aphanapteryx bonasia. From ancient drawing.30.Erythromachus leguati. Made up from ancient outline figure and description.31.Leguatia gigantea. Made up from ancient figures and descriptions.32.Apterornis coerulescens. From description.33.Notornis alba. From the plate in "Ibis," 1873.34.Notornis hochstetteri. From the plate in the Zeitschr. f.d. ges. Ornithologie.35. 1.Aechmorhynchus cancellatus. From the plate in Seebohm's "Charadriidae."35.2.Prosobonia leucoptera. After the unpublished drawings in the British Museum, but the artist has not shown the white patch on the shoulder.36.Camptolaimus labradorius. From the two specimens in the Tring Museum.37.Aestrelata caribbaea. From the type specimen in the Dublin Museum.38.Alca impennis. From the stuffed specimen in the Tring Museum.39.Carbo perspicillatus. From a specimen in the British Museum.40.Dromaius peroni. From the type of the species in the Paris Museum.41.Megalapteryx huttoni. Restored from osteological remains and feathers.42.Dinornis ingens. Restoration from skeleton and some feathers.

01.Fregilupus varius. From the plate in the "Volume Centenaire," Mus. Hist. Naturelle, Paris.

02. 1.Foudia bruante. From the figure in Daubenton's work.

02.2.Necropsar rodericanus. Made up from description.

02.3.Necropsar leguati. From the type specimen in Liverpool.

03. 1.Geospiza magnirostris. From the type specimen in London.

03.2.Geospiza strenua. Head. From specimen at Tring.

03.3.Nesoenas mayeri. From specimen in the British Museum.

03.4.Chaunoproctus ferreorostris♂ ♀. From the pair in the British Museum.

04. 1.Hemignathus ellisianus. After a drawing from the type in the Berlin Museum.

04.2.Heterorhynchus lucidus. From a specimen in the Paris Museum.

04.3.Psittirostra psittacea deppei. From the type in the Tring Museum.

04.4.Ciridops anna. From a specimen in the Tring Museum.

4a.1.Moho apicalis. From specimen in the Tring Museum.

4a.2.Chaetoptila angustipluma. From specimen in the Tring Museum.

05. 1.Miro traversi. From skin in the Tring Museum.

05.2.Traversia lyalli♂ and ♀. From the type specimens in the Tring Museum.

05.3.Bowdleria rufescens. From a skin in the Tring Museum.

5a.Siphonorhis americanus. From skin in the British Museum.

06. 1.Nestor norfolcensis. From the plate in the Bulletin of the Liverpool Museum.

06.2. Head ofNestor productus. From a specimen in the Tring Museum.

07.Lophopsittacus mauritianus. From ancient drawing and description.

08.Necropsittacus borbonicus. From a description.

09.Mascarinus mascarinus. From the drawing in the Volume commémoratif, Centenaire Mus. Paris.

10.Ara tricolor. From specimen in the Liverpool Museum.

11.Ara gossei. From Gosse's description.

12.Ara erythrocephala. From Gosse's description.

13.Anadorhynchus purpurascens. From description.

14.Ara martinicus. From description.

15.Ara erythrura. From description.

16.Conurus labati. From description.

17.Amazona violaceus. From description.

18.Amazona martinicana. From description.

19.Palaeornis exsul. From the plate in the "Ibis."

20.Palaeornis wardi. From the plate in the "Ibis."

21.Hemiphaga spadicea. From the specimen in the Tring Museum.

22.Alectroenas nitidissima. From the plate in the Volume commémoratif du Centenaire, Mus. Paris.

23.Pezophaps solitaria. Made up from descriptions and ancient drawings.

24.Didus cucullatus. From drawings.

24a.Didus cucullatus. See explanation, page172.

24b.Didus cucullatus. See explanation, page172.

24c.Didus cucullatus. See explanation, page172.

25.Didus solitarius. From a picture supposed to be taken from a living specimen in Amsterdam, but beak and wing restored.

25a.Didus solitarius. After Dubois' description.

25b.1, 2, 3.Pezophaps solitarius. Reproduction of ancient figures, see page177.

25b.4, 5, 7, 8.Didus solitarius. Reproduction of ancient figures, see page177.

26. 1.Hypotaenidia pacifica. From Forster's unpublished drawing in the British Museum.

26.2.Pennula sandwichensis. From the unique specimen in the Leyden Museum.

26.3.Pennula millsi. From skin in the Tring Museum.

27.Nesolimnas dieffenbachi. From the unique specimen in the British Museum.

28. 1.Cabalus modestus. From skin in the Tring Museum.

28.2.Coturnix novaezealandiae. From skin in the Tring Museum.

29.Aphanapteryx bonasia. From ancient drawing.

30.Erythromachus leguati. Made up from ancient outline figure and description.

31.Leguatia gigantea. Made up from ancient figures and descriptions.

32.Apterornis coerulescens. From description.

33.Notornis alba. From the plate in "Ibis," 1873.

34.Notornis hochstetteri. From the plate in the Zeitschr. f.d. ges. Ornithologie.

35. 1.Aechmorhynchus cancellatus. From the plate in Seebohm's "Charadriidae."

35.2.Prosobonia leucoptera. After the unpublished drawings in the British Museum, but the artist has not shown the white patch on the shoulder.

36.Camptolaimus labradorius. From the two specimens in the Tring Museum.

37.Aestrelata caribbaea. From the type specimen in the Dublin Museum.

38.Alca impennis. From the stuffed specimen in the Tring Museum.

39.Carbo perspicillatus. From a specimen in the British Museum.

40.Dromaius peroni. From the type of the species in the Paris Museum.

41.Megalapteryx huttoni. Restored from osteological remains and feathers.

42.Dinornis ingens. Restoration from skeleton and some feathers.

Thisgenus is founded on cranial characters: Basipterygoid processes of parasphenoid present but rudimentary. The vomer broad, flat, and three-pointed in front. Maxillaries anchylosed to the premaxillaries, the latter anchylosed to the expanded ossified base of the nasal septum. The ossified mesethmoid stretches backward and is lodged in the concavity of the upper surface of the vomer, so that it presents a form intermediate between the complete aegithognathous forms, such asCorvus, and the compound aegithognathous forms, such asGymnorhina, in which desmognathism was superadded by "anchylosis of the inner edge of the maxillaries with a highly ossified alinasal wall and nasal septum" (Parker).

Corvus moriorumForbes, Nature XLVI p. 252 (1892).Palaeocorax moriorumForbes, Bull. B.O.C. I p. XXI (1892).

Corvus moriorumForbes, Nature XLVI p. 252 (1892).

Palaeocorax moriorumForbes, Bull. B.O.C. I p. XXI (1892).

Dr. Forbessays this bird is of about half the size again of aCorvus cornix. The principal characters are cranial, and the same as those of the genus.

Habitat: Chatham Islands, and possibly the Middle Island, New Zealand.

Many skulls and bones in the Tring Museum.

Palaeocorax antipodumForbes, Ibis 1893, p. 544.

Thisis said to be distinguished fromP. moriorumby its considerably smaller size. Habitat: North Island, New Zealand.

Hugecrest, bill long and curved. One species, extinct.

Huppes ou Callendres, Voyages du Sieur D.B. (Dubois) aux Iles Dauphine ou Madagascar, et Bourbon ou Mascarenne, etc., p. 172 (1674—Bourbon).Huppe du Cap de Bonne EspéranceDaubenton, Pl. Enl. 697.Huppe noire et blanche du Cap de Bonne EspéranceMontbeillard, Hist. Nat. Ois. VI, p. 463 (1779).Madagascar HoopoeLatham, Gen. Syn. B. II pt. I, p. 690 (1783).Upupa variaBoddaert, Tabl. Pl. Enl. p. 43 (1783—ex Daubenton).Upupa capensisGmelin, Syst. Nat. I, p. 466 (1788—ex Montbeillard).La Huppe griseAudebert et Vieillot, Ois. Dor., "Promerops" p. 15 pl. III (1802).Le Mérops huppéLevaillant, Hist. Nat. Promérops, etc., p. 43, pl. 18 (1806).Upupa madagascariensisShaw, Gen. Zool. VIII, pt. I, p. 140 (1812).Coracia cristataVieillot, Nouv. Dict. d'Hist. Nat. VIII, p. 3 (1817).Pastor upupaWagler, Syst. Avium, Pastor, sp. 13 (1827).Fregilupus borbonicusVinson, Bull. Soc. d'Acclimat 1868, p. 627.Fregilupus variusHartlaub, Vög. Madagasc. p. 203 (1877); Sharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XIII p. 194 (1890); Milne-Edwards & Oustalet, Centenaire Mus. Hist. Nat., p. 205, pl. II (1893).

Huppes ou Callendres, Voyages du Sieur D.B. (Dubois) aux Iles Dauphine ou Madagascar, et Bourbon ou Mascarenne, etc., p. 172 (1674—Bourbon).

Huppe du Cap de Bonne EspéranceDaubenton, Pl. Enl. 697.

Huppe noire et blanche du Cap de Bonne EspéranceMontbeillard, Hist. Nat. Ois. VI, p. 463 (1779).

Madagascar HoopoeLatham, Gen. Syn. B. II pt. I, p. 690 (1783).

Upupa variaBoddaert, Tabl. Pl. Enl. p. 43 (1783—ex Daubenton).

Upupa capensisGmelin, Syst. Nat. I, p. 466 (1788—ex Montbeillard).

La Huppe griseAudebert et Vieillot, Ois. Dor., "Promerops" p. 15 pl. III (1802).

Le Mérops huppéLevaillant, Hist. Nat. Promérops, etc., p. 43, pl. 18 (1806).

Upupa madagascariensisShaw, Gen. Zool. VIII, pt. I, p. 140 (1812).

Coracia cristataVieillot, Nouv. Dict. d'Hist. Nat. VIII, p. 3 (1817).

Pastor upupaWagler, Syst. Avium, Pastor, sp. 13 (1827).

Fregilupus borbonicusVinson, Bull. Soc. d'Acclimat 1868, p. 627.

Fregilupus variusHartlaub, Vög. Madagasc. p. 203 (1877); Sharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XIII p. 194 (1890); Milne-Edwards & Oustalet, Centenaire Mus. Hist. Nat., p. 205, pl. II (1893).

Aslong ago as 1674 a note about the "Huppe" exists, by "Le Sieur D.B.,"i.e., Dubois. He says, when describing the birds of Réunion (translated): "Hoopoes or 'Callendres,' having a white tuft on the head, the rest of the plumage white and grey, the bill and the feet like a bird of prey; they are a little larger than the young pigeons; this is another good game (i.e., to eat) when it is fat."

This description has generally been accepted as referring to theFregilupus, though that of the bill and feet is then due to an error of the author, forFregilupushas the bill and feet of a member of theSturnidaeor family of Starlings.

Good descriptions and representations of the "Huppe" have been given in many places (see literature), but whether they were taken from males or females is generally not known. The sexes seem to be alike in colour, but the female is smaller, and has a shorter and straighter bill than the male. At least, this is the conclusion of Dr. Hartert, who saw the four examples in the museum at Troyes. As far as he could see through the glass all fourseemed to be adult birds, but two were larger with longer and more curved bills, two smaller and with shorter and straighter beaks, so that they are evidently two pairs.

This bird seems to have become extirpated about the middle of the last century. The late Monsieur Pollen wrote in 1868 (translated): "This species has become so rare that one did not hear them mentioned for a dozen years. It has been destroyed in all the littoral districts, and even in the mountains near the coast. Trustworthy persons, however, have assured us that they must still exist in the forests of the interior, near St. Joseph. The old creoles told me that, in their youth, these birds were still common, and that they were so stupid that one could kill them with sticks. They call this bird the "Hoopoe." It is, therefore, not wrong what a distinguished inhabitant of Réunion, Mr. A. Legras, wrote about this bird with the following words: "The Hoopoe has become so rare that we have hardly seen a dozen in our wanderings to discover birds; we were even grieved to search for it in vain in our museum."

We are certain thatFregilupusexisted still on Réunion in 1835, as Monsieur Desjardins, living on Mauritius, wrote in a manuscript formerly belonging to the late Professor Milne-Edwards: "My friend, Marcelin Sauzier, has sent me four alive from Bourbon in May, 1835. They eat everything. Two have escaped some months afterwards, and it might well happen that they will stock our forests."

It seems, indeed, that specimens were killed in 1837 on Mauritius, where they did not originally exist. Verreaux shot an example in Réunion in 1832.

The names "La Huppe du Cap" and "Upupa madagascariensis" arose out of the mistaken notions that this bird lived in South Africa or Madagascar, but we know now that its real home was Réunion or Bourbon.

WE ARE AWARE OF THE FOLLOWING SPECIMENS PRESERVED IN COLLECTIONS.2 stuffed ones, one in good, one in bad condition, and two in spirits, in the Paris Museum.4 stuffed in Troyes.1 stuffed, from the Riocour collection, in the British Museum.1 in the Florence Museum.1 in Turin.1 in Pisa.1, rather poor and old, in Leyden.1 in Stockholm.1 in the Museum at Port Louis, on the island of Mauritius.1 in the collection of the late Baron de Selys Longchamps.1 in Genoa.

WE ARE AWARE OF THE FOLLOWING SPECIMENS PRESERVED IN COLLECTIONS.

2 stuffed ones, one in good, one in bad condition, and two in spirits, in the Paris Museum.

4 stuffed in Troyes.

1 stuffed, from the Riocour collection, in the British Museum.

1 in the Florence Museum.

1 in Turin.

1 in Pisa.

1, rather poor and old, in Leyden.

1 in Stockholm.

1 in the Museum at Port Louis, on the island of Mauritius.

1 in the collection of the late Baron de Selys Longchamps.

1 in Genoa.

Theauthors state that this genus was very closely allied toFregilupus, and, besides some minor differences, give as the principal difference the shorter and less curved bill.

Necropsar rodericanusGünther & Newton, Phil. Trans. vol. 168, p. 427, pl. XLII, figs. A-G (1879).

Theoriginal description given by the anonymous author of the "Relation de l'Ile Rodrigue" is asfollows:—"These birds are a little larger than a blackbird, and have white plumage, part of the wings and the tail black, the beak and the legs yellow, and make a wonderful warbling." Our author also says they inhabited the Islet au Mât, and fed on seabirds' eggs and dead turtle.

The bird evidently became extinct on Rodriguez before 1730, and lingered a little longer on the outlying islets. Only known from bones, mostly collected by the Rev. H. H. Slater, and the above description.

Habitat: Rodriguez and neighbouring islets.

There is one tibia in the Tring Museum.

The figure is coloured according to the description, while the shape of the bird is evident from its bones and relation.

Necropsar leguatiForbes, Bull. Liverp. Mus. I, p. 34, pl.SturnidaeI (1897-1898).

Dr. Forbes'description is asfollows:—"General colour white everywhere, except on the outer webs of distal half of the primaries and secondaries and the outer webs of the newly moulted and both webs of the unmoulted rectrices, which are marked with lighter or darker ferruginous."

Dr. Forbes then gives an exhaustive description of the structure, to which I refer my readers, and the followingmeasurements:—

I should have been inclined to consider this bird an albinistic specimen of the bird described in "Relation de l'Ile Rodrigue," but for the fact that the tibia ofNecropsar rodericanusis 52-59 mm. in length, while this is only 46 mm. in length, while the metatarsus measures 31.5 mm. as opposed to 36-41 mm. inN. rodericanus. I cannot accept the theory that this is the Islet au Mât bird, and therefore different fromN. rodericanus, as the islet is too close to Rodriguez to have had a different starling. I therefore believe this bird to have been an albinistic specimen of the Mauritius species ofNecropsar, for there can be little doubt that it is albinistic, as the ferruginous colour is much stronger on one wing than on the other; and I conclude that the colour in the wings and tail in normal specimens was black like the Rodriguez bird, and thatN. leguatiwas a close ally ofN. rodericanus, from which it differed principally in its much smaller size.

Habitat doubtful.—The type specimen bears Lord Derby's Museum number, 1792, and a label of Verreaux giving Madagascar as the habitat, which is certainly erroneous.

Bruant de l'isle de BourbonDaubenton, Pl. Enl. 321.Le Mordoré, Montbeillard, Hist. Nat. Ois., Quarto Edition IV., p. 366 (1778—Bourbon).Fringilla bruanteP.L.S. Müll., Natursyst., Suppl. p. 164, No. 51 (1776—ex Daubenton Pl. enl).Emberiza fuscofulvaBoddaert, Table Pl. Enl. p. 20 (1783—based on Pl. Enl. 321 and Montbeillard's "Morderé").Emberiza borbonicaGmelin, Syst. Nat. I p. 886 (1788—ex Daubenton and Montbeillard).Foudia bruanteNewton, Trans. Norf. and Norw. Nat. Soc. IV., pp. 543 and 548 (1889).Nesacanthis fusco-fulvusSharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XIII p. 484 (1890).

Bruant de l'isle de BourbonDaubenton, Pl. Enl. 321.

Le Mordoré, Montbeillard, Hist. Nat. Ois., Quarto Edition IV., p. 366 (1778—Bourbon).

Fringilla bruanteP.L.S. Müll., Natursyst., Suppl. p. 164, No. 51 (1776—ex Daubenton Pl. enl).

Emberiza fuscofulvaBoddaert, Table Pl. Enl. p. 20 (1783—based on Pl. Enl. 321 and Montbeillard's "Morderé").

Emberiza borbonicaGmelin, Syst. Nat. I p. 886 (1788—ex Daubenton and Montbeillard).

Foudia bruanteNewton, Trans. Norf. and Norw. Nat. Soc. IV., pp. 543 and 548 (1889).

Nesacanthis fusco-fulvusSharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XIII p. 484 (1890).

Weknow absolutely nothing about this bird, except Daubenton's figure and the description by Montbeillard. In the plate the whole body, including the back, is uniform red, about the same red as in other species ofFoudia, while the wings and tail are dark brown with yellowish-brown borders. In the description the body plumage is described as rufous ("morderé") and the wings, wing-coverts and tail as more or less bright rufous ("d'un mordoré plus ou moins clair"). The size is said to be about that of a Bunting, but the tail shorter and the wings longer.

According to Dr. Sharpe (Cat. B. XIII, p. 484) "it has generally been considered identical withFoudia madagascariensis," but the latter has the back marked with longitudinal black spots, while both the figure and description ofF. bruanterepresent a uniform red upperside; moreover the locality of the latter is expressly stated, and as we know other forms ofFoudiafrom the Seychelles, Mauritius, Comoros, Aldabra and Madagascar, we have no reason to doubt the statement. We are not aware of any specimen existing of this doubtless extinct bird, though it would be worth while to search the Paris Museum for this treasure.

Habitat: Réunion or Bourbon.

Chaunoproctus Bonaparte, Consp. Av. I p. 526 (1850).

ThegenusChaunoproctuscontains only one species, which is characterized by its enormous bill, the depth of the mandible being greater than the distance between the nasal apertures. The cutting-edge of the maxilla is nearly straight, and there is no tooth in the posterior half of the maxilla. The total length is about seven to eight inches. The adult male has red in the plumage, the female is brown, above and below.

Dr. Hartert (Vögel pal. Fauna I, p. 115) is of opinion that this bird is connected withCarpodacusand allies, and not with the Greenfinches and Hawfinches, among which it is placed in the Catalogue of Birds in the British Museum.

Coccothraustes ferreorostris(sic) Vigors, Zool. Journ. IV p. 354 (1828); id. in Beechey's Voy. Blossom, p. 22, pl. 8 (1839).Fringilla papaKittlitz, Mém. Acad. Imp. Sc. Petersbourg I p. 239, pl. 15 (1830); id. Kupfertaf. Vög. p. 24, pl. 32, 2 (1832).Chaunoproctus papaBonaparte, Consp. I p. 526 (1850); Bp. and Schlegel, Monogr. Loxiens p. 32 pls. 37, 38 (1850).Chaunoproctus ferreirostrisSharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XII p. 31 (1888).

Coccothraustes ferreorostris(sic) Vigors, Zool. Journ. IV p. 354 (1828); id. in Beechey's Voy. Blossom, p. 22, pl. 8 (1839).

Fringilla papaKittlitz, Mém. Acad. Imp. Sc. Petersbourg I p. 239, pl. 15 (1830); id. Kupfertaf. Vög. p. 24, pl. 32, 2 (1832).

Chaunoproctus papaBonaparte, Consp. I p. 526 (1850); Bp. and Schlegel, Monogr. Loxiens p. 32 pls. 37, 38 (1850).

Chaunoproctus ferreirostrisSharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XII p. 31 (1888).

Vigors'original description, translated from the Latin, is as follows: "Dark brown; head, breast and upper part of abdomen scarlet. Bill very strong, feet plumbeous. Length of body 8½, bill ⅞, at gape 13⁄16, height ⅞; wings from the carpus to the third quill 4½; tail 3, tarsus ⅞ inches."

In the "Catalogue of Birds," XII, p. 31, both sexes are carefully described.

It appears that only one pair, now in the British Museum, was obtained during Captain Beechey's voyage. Curiously enough, Vigors suggested that the brilliantly coloured adult male might be the young, the female the adult bird, "as is the case in the Pine-Grosbeak" (Sic!).

Kittlitz, who visited the largest of the Bonin Islands in May, 1828, obtained a number of specimens, of which some are in St. Petersburg, two in Frankfurt-a.-M., one or two in Leyden, and, I believe, in Paris.These seem to be all the specimens known in European museums. Mr. Seebohm's collector, the late Holst, failed to obtain it, and Mr. Alan Owston's men, who several times went to the Bonin group to obtain it, and who were promised good prices for specimens, did not get one. I am therefore convinced that for some unknown reason this bird became extinct, though there is still the possibility that the recent collectors did not collect on the main island of the group, which alone was visited by Kittlitz.

Kittlitz tells us that he found it in the woods along the coast, but not numerous. That it keeps concealed, is very phlegmatic, and is so little shy that one is obliged to go back for some distance, before shooting, if one wishes to preserve the specimen. Kittlitz saw it but seldom on high trees, mostly on the ground. Its frequently heard note is a very fine piping sound. In the crop and stomach small fruit and buds of one kind of tree were found.

Habitat: The largest of the Bonin Islands, south of Japan.

Geospiza magnirostrisGould, Proc. Zool. Soc. London 1837, p. 5 (Galapagos Islands); Rothschild & Hartert, Nov. Zool. 1899 p. 154, 1902 p. 388; Sharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XII, pp. 6, 7 (Fig.); Ridgway, B. North and Middle America I, p. 495 (1901).

Asexplained in Nov. Zool. 1899, p. 154, it is uncertain where Darwin obtained the type specimens of Gould'sG. magnirostris, as "Unfortunately, most of the specimens of the finch-tribe were mingled together," as Darwin tells us in his "Journal of Researches" (New Edition 1890, p. 420), and he had only "strong reasons to suspect that some of the species of the sub-groupGeospizaare confined to separate islands." We are, however, convinced that the types ofG. magnirostriscan only have come from Charles Island, where it is, probably, the representative ofG. strenua strenua. It seems, however, thatG. magnirostrisexists no longer, for all subsequent collectors have failed to obtain specimens, unless an immature specimen in the U. S. Nat. Mus., from Charles Island (No. 115,905), is a youngmagnirostris(cf. Nov. Zool. 1902, p. 388).

The dimensions of the three black specimens in the British Museum are as follows: Culmen 26.5, 27, 27; height of bill at base 23.5-24; wing 91, 91, 95; tarsus 25 mm. These measurements—a culmen of over 26.5 and a wing of 91 mm. combined—do not occur among our large series ofstrenua, and therefore it is hardly possible thatG. magnirostrisis composed of huge examples ofstrenuaonly.

As Charles Island has been inhabited for many years it is not at all unlikely that a bird became extinct on that place. On plate3is figuredG. magnirostrisand a head ofG. strenuafor comparison.

Geospiza dentirostrisGould, Proc. Zool. Soc. London 1837, p. 6; Rothschild & Hartert, Nov. Zool. 1899 p. 163, 1902 p. 396.

Thiscurious form differs fromG. fortis fortis(Charles Island!) in its bill, which is bowed in towards the end of the upper mandible, and slightly "toothed" on its cutting edge. The one specimen in the British Museum certainly came from Charles Island, and we may, therefore, conclude that the other also came from there, and there is certainly no reason to think that it came from Chatham Island. As the skins in the British Museum slightly differ from each other, there is some reason to suspect that they are both aberrations ofG. fortis fortis. Otherwise it must have become extinct, as, in spite of special attention being paid to it, none of the recent collectors met withG. dentirostris.

Muscicapa nigra Sparrmann, Mus. Carlson. I, pl. 23 and text (1786—Society Islands).Pomarea nigraSharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. IV, p. 434 (1879—Full synonymy, description, etc., Society Islands, Marquesas group).

Muscicapa nigra Sparrmann, Mus. Carlson. I, pl. 23 and text (1786—Society Islands).

Pomarea nigraSharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. IV, p. 434 (1879—Full synonymy, description, etc., Society Islands, Marquesas group).

Inthe list of birds now fully extinct, in the Proceedings of the Fourth Intern. Orn. Congress, I enumeratedPomarea nigra, on the strength of E. L. Layard's statement, P.Z.S. 1876, p. 501, who says: "This bird has undoubtedly become extinct. Large sums have been offered by Messrs. Godeffroy's collectors for the acquisition of a single specimen, but in vain! The very old natives say they remember the bird and call it "Moho."

I, however, overlooked the fact that this note of Layard's referred to the Friendly Islands only, and that this bird has afterwards been obtained in numbers on the Marquesas group. It would, nevertheless, be very interesting to compare specimens from the various islands, viz.: the Society group, Marquesas and Tongatabu, to see if they are perfectly similar.

Miro traversiBuller, B. New Zealand, Ed. I p. 123 (1873—Chatham Islands).Petroeca traversiHutton, Ibis 1872, p. 245.Myiomoira traversiFinsch, Journ.-f.-Orn. 1874, p. 189.Miro traversiSharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. IV p. 236 (1879).Miro traversi(partim) Buller, Suppl. B. N. Zealand II p. 125? pl. XII (October, 1906).

Miro traversiBuller, B. New Zealand, Ed. I p. 123 (1873—Chatham Islands).

Petroeca traversiHutton, Ibis 1872, p. 245.

Myiomoira traversiFinsch, Journ.-f.-Orn. 1874, p. 189.

Miro traversiSharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. IV p. 236 (1879).

Miro traversi(partim) Buller, Suppl. B. N. Zealand II p. 125? pl. XII (October, 1906).

Thelate Sir Walter Buller described, in 1873,Miro traversias follows: "Adult male. The whole of the plumage black, the base of the feathers dark plumbeous; wing-feathers and their coverts tinged with brown, the former greyish on their inner surface; tail-feathers black, very slightly tinged with brown. Irides dark brown; bill black; tarsi and toes blackish brown, the soles of the feet dull yellow. Total length 6 inches; wing, from flexure, 3.4; tail 2.6; bill 0.5, tarsus 1.1; middle toe and claw 0.1, hind toe and claw 0.8 inch."

"Female. Slightly smaller than the male, and without the brown tinge on the wings and tail."

It may be added thatMiro traversiis not pure black, but of a somewhat brownish slaty black.

Miro traversiis only known from the Chatham Islands, where it was formerly very common, but, according to a letter from the late W. Hawkins, the cats, which have been introduced to destroy rats and rabbits, have exterminated it. It seems to have disappeared from Warekauri, the main island of the Chatham group, long ago, for H. O. Forbes (Ibis 1893, p. 524) and Henry Palmer found it, in 1890 and 1892, only on the outlying islets of Mangare and Little Mangare.

The bird from the Snares is quite different, being deep glossy black and having a shorter and narrower first primary. I named itM. dannefaerdi. It is to be feared that a similar fate will one day befall it as has, apparently, already befallen its congener from the Chatham Islands.

Sir Walter Buller (Suppl. B.N.Z. II, p. 125) has confoundedM. traversianddannefaerdi, and the figure he gave on his plate looks so black, that I do not doubt it represents rather the latter than the former. Of courseM. dannefaerdialone occurs on the Snares, and Buller'straversifrom the Snares were all dannefaerdi. Dr. Finsch's statement (Ibis 1888, p. 308) that Reischek's specimen from the Snares "agreed in every respect with specimens from the Chatham Islands" is entirely wrong, for, even ifone prefers unscientifically to lump allied forms, one cannot say that aMirofrom the Chathams agrees in every respect with one from the Snares. Buller's doubts about the distinctness of the latter might easily have been removed, if he had taken the trouble to compare them, for it does not require any genius to see the differences. I admit that with my present views on geographical forms I would regard the twoMiroas sub-species, and call themM. traversi traversiandM. traversi dannefaerdi, but most ornithologists would still consider them to be "good species."

I may add that Buller, l.c., p. 125, has not quoted my description correctly, for in his rendering are several disturbing misprints, and in the fourth line from the bottom occurs a "not" which ought not to be there, and which makes the sentence incomprehensible. Also the name itself is spelt incorrectly.

I have a series from Mangare and Little Mangare, taken by Henry Palmer in 1890. The egg seems to be unknown.

Habitat: Chatham Islands.

Turdus terrestrisKittlitz, Mém. Acad. Sc. Pétersburg I p. 245, pl. 17 (1830—Boninsima).Geocichla terrestrisBonaparte, Consp. Av. I, p. 268 (1850); Seebohm, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. V, p. 183 (1881); Hartert, Kat. Vogels. Senckenb, p. 6 (1891); Sharpe, Monograph Turdidae, I p. 107, pl. 33 (1902).Cichlopasser terrestrisBonaparte, C.R. XXXVIII, p. 6 (1854).

Turdus terrestrisKittlitz, Mém. Acad. Sc. Pétersburg I p. 245, pl. 17 (1830—Boninsima).

Geocichla terrestrisBonaparte, Consp. Av. I, p. 268 (1850); Seebohm, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. V, p. 183 (1881); Hartert, Kat. Vogels. Senckenb, p. 6 (1891); Sharpe, Monograph Turdidae, I p. 107, pl. 33 (1902).

Cichlopasser terrestrisBonaparte, C.R. XXXVIII, p. 6 (1854).

Thefollowing is Dr. Sharpe's description from a specimen in the Leyden Museum: "General colour of the upper parts olive-brown, shading into chestnut-brown on the rump, upper tail-coverts, and tail; the inside web of each feather much darker, approaching black on the back; lores dark brown; eye-stripe very obscure; lesser wing-coverts brown, darkest on the inside web; median coverts dark brown, with large olive-brown tips; greater coverts nearly black, broadly tipped, and narrowly margined towards the base with olive-brown; primary coverts black, with a broad olive-brown patch on the outer webs; tertials dark brown on the inner web, and olive-brown on the outer web; secondaries brown, margined with olive-brown on the outer webs; primaries brown, with the basal half of the outer webs, and a spot where the emargination begins, olive-brown; tail-feathers chestnut-brown; ear-coverts brown; underparts olive-brown, shading into white on the chin, throat, and centre of belly; under tail-coverts dark brown, with irregular diamond-shaped white tips; axillaries brown; under wing-coverts brown. Geocichline markings on inner webs of quills dirty white. Wing 3.8 inches, tail 2.6, culmen 0.85, tarsus 1.07, bastard primary 0.8."

The only person who ever collected this short-tailed Ground-Thrush was Kittlitz, who obtained four specimens, one of which is in St. Petersburg, one in Frankfurt, one in Vienna, and one in Leyden. Neither Holst, nor Alan Owston's Japanese collectors obtained specimens, though their special attention was called to it. Therefore, unless these recent collectors left unvisited the most important island of the group, we must suppose that it became extinct.

Habitat: Bonin Islands, south-east of Japan.

Phaeornis oahensisWilson & Evans, Aves Hawaiienses, Introd. p. XIII (1899—Based onTurdus sandwichensisvar. Bloxam, Voy. "Blonde" App. p. 250 (1826—Oahu) andTurdus woahensisBloxam M.S.)

Nothingis known about this evidently extinct bird, which formerly existed on the island of Oahu, except Bloxam's short description, which is asfollows:—"Length 7½ inches; upper parts olive-brown, extremities of the feathers much lighter colour; tail and wings brown; bill bristled at the base."

The corresponding description ofPhaeornis obscurain Bloxam's M.S. notesis:—"Length 8 inches; belly light ash; back, tail and wings an ash-brown; bill slender, ¾-in. long, bristled at the base. A beautiful songster."

It is thus evident that Bloxam considered both forms to be distinct, and Messrs. Wilson and Evans were perfectly justified in naming the extinct Oahu form.

We are not aware of any specimens being preserved in any Museum, though Bloxam obtained a skin. Messrs. Wilson and Evans (l.c.)write:—"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 calledPhaeornis oahensis, is now forthcoming."

Sphenoeacus rufescensBuller, Ibis 1869, p. 38.Megalurus rufescensGray Hand-l. B. I, p. 206. No. 2913. (1869.)

Sphenoeacus rufescensBuller, Ibis 1869, p. 38.

Megalurus rufescensGray Hand-l. B. I, p. 206. No. 2913. (1869.)

Buller'soriginal description is as follows: "Upper parts, sides, and tail dark rufous brown, brightest on the crown and hind-neck; the feathers of the shoulders and sides centred with black. Quills dusky black, margined with rufous brown. Streak over the eye, throat, breast and abdomen pale fawn colour; sides of the head and ear-coverts marked with black. Bill light brown with the ridge black, feet dark brown." Buller's type probably had been preserved in spirit, as the colouration of fresh specimens is very different to his description. The general colour above and on the flanks chestnut rufous, most feathers with darker or black centres; chin, throat, breast and abdomen pure white; crissum and under tail-coverts whity buff or buffy brown. Wing 2.6 inches, tail 3.9 inches, culmen 0.65 inch.

Habitat: Chatham Islands.

Cats, rats and weasels have exterminated this fine species, which is now quite extinct. Messrs. Travers and Dannefaerd have supplied the specimens in most colonial museums, while Henry Palmer collected the 14 at Tring. A few in Liverpool and two in the British Museum are all known to me in Europe, in addition to those at Tring.

See description below. Only one species known.

Traversia lyalliRothschild, Bull. B.O.C. IV p. X (December 29th, 1894); Nov. Zool. 1895, p. 81.Xenicus insularisBuller, Ibis 1895, p. 236, pl.Traversia insularisBuller, Suppl. B.N.Z. II p. 109, pl. X (1906).

Traversia lyalliRothschild, Bull. B.O.C. IV p. X (December 29th, 1894); Nov. Zool. 1895, p. 81.

Xenicus insularisBuller, Ibis 1895, p. 236, pl.

Traversia insularisBuller, Suppl. B.N.Z. II p. 109, pl. X (1906).

In1894 I described this remarkable little bird as follows: "Traversia, gen. nov.Xenicidarum. Differs in several important points both fromXenicusandAcanthidositta. Bill much larger and stouter, very little shorter, if at all, than the tarsus; the latter about as long as middle toe without claw, or the hind toe and claw, while inXenicusandAcanthidosittait is about twice as long as the hind toe. The principal difference, however, is the weakness of the wing, which suggests flightlessness, as does also the very soft and loose character of the entire plumage, and the very Ralline aspect of the bird. There are only ten tail-feathers, and the scutellation of the tarsus is like that ofXenicus. These two points determine its position in theXenicidaeat once (cf. Sclater, Cat. B. XIV, p. 450).

"The type is:Traversia lyalli, sp. nov.

"Male. Above dark brownish olive-yellow, each feather with a brownish-black border. A narrow distinct yellow superciliary line. Wings and tail umber-brown, the inner webs darker; wing-coverts like back. Chin, throat, and breast chrome-yellow, each feather slightly edged with greyish brown. Flanks, abdomen, and vent pale brown, centre of feathers paler.

"Female. Upper surface umber-brown, each feather bordered with very dark brown; wings and tail similar. Under surface buffy grey, the feathers edged with pale brown. Total length about 4 inches, culmen 0.6, wing 1.8 to 1.9, tail 0.8, but much concealed, tarens 0.75, middle toe 0.65, hind toe without claw 0.5.

"Habitat: Stephens Island, New Zealand. Discovered by Mr. Dr. Lyall, lighthouse-keeper, and sent to me by Mr. Henry H. Travers."

I received nine specimens of this new bird, and was not aware that any others had been taken at that time. As I was unable to attend the December meeting, 1894, of the British Ornithologists Club, I asked Dr. Hartert to exhibit the birds in my name. When he had done so and had read the description, the Chairman, Dr. P. L. Sclater, said that the bird had also been received for illustration and description in the Ibis, from Sir Walter Buller, and he asked Dr. Hartert if I would not withdraw my description. Dr. Hartert said that this was unfortunate, but he had no authority to withdraw my description, and he and Dr. Sharpe thought that the proceedings of the meeting should be printed without consideration of any manuscripts which might refer to the same bird. No doubt this was hard luck on Sir Walter Buller, but it would have been equally hard luck for me if he had forestalled me with the new bird. He had only one specimen, I had nine, of both sexes, and I had paid a high price for them, as types of a new bird. My type is in Tring, and, as everybody knows, available for study by any competent ornithologist, while Buller's type was not in any museum, and it was uncertain to whom he would sell it afterwards. I suppose it is now in the Carnegie Museum, Pittsburgh, to which Buller's third collection, 625 specimens, was sold for a thousand pounds, as Buller himself tells us in his Supplement II, p. 167, under the heading ofGlaucopis wilsoni! On the same page Sir Walter Buller also tells us that his "second collection" was sold to me, but he makes a mistake about the price, as I certainly did not pay a thousand pounds for it.

I mentioned these unimportant details, because Buller rather bitterly and severely complained about my describing the Stephens' Island Wren, on p. 111 of his supplement. I may only add that of course my name, being published in December, 1894, has the priority over his, which was not published before April, 1895.

The history ofTraversia lyalliis perhaps the most extraordinary of any bird known. All the specimens I am aware of, viz., the eight now in my collection, the type of "Xenicus insularis" in Buller's former collection, one in the late Canon Tristram's collection, one in the British Museum (ex Tring), and two or more offered some years ago by Mr. Travers, were brought in by the lighthouse-keeper's cat. Evidently this feline discoverer has at the same time been the exterminator ofTraversia lyalli, and many may have been digested by that unique cat, as in letters received from Mr. Travers Ihave been told that no more specimens could be obtained, and Buller (l.c.) says: "Very diligent search has been made on Stephen Island for further specimens of the Island Wren, but without success, and there is too much reason to fear that this species has almost immediately after its discovery become extinct."

Habitat: Stephen Island, a small, partly wooded islet, about a square mile in extent, in Cook Strait. It is almost impossible that this bird has only existed on Stephen Island. It must have been overlooked on d'Urville Island or the "mainland," where it probably became extinct—through rats and cats, and similar pests—long ago.

Yellow-tufted Bee-eater(non Latham!), Dixon, Voyage round the World, p. 357, plate (1789).Moho apicalisGould, Proc. Zool. Soc. London 1860, p. 381 (? Hawaii).Acrulocercus apicalisWilson & Evans, Av. Hawaii, pt. V text and plate (1894).Moho apicalisRothschild, Avif. Laysan, etc., p. 223 and plate (1900).

Yellow-tufted Bee-eater(non Latham!), Dixon, Voyage round the World, p. 357, plate (1789).

Moho apicalisGould, Proc. Zool. Soc. London 1860, p. 381 (? Hawaii).

Acrulocercus apicalisWilson & Evans, Av. Hawaii, pt. V text and plate (1894).

Moho apicalisRothschild, Avif. Laysan, etc., p. 223 and plate (1900).

Thisrarest species of the Mohos formerly inhabited the island of Oahu, where specimens were obtained in 1837, near Enero, by Herr Deppe. The localities of the specimens figured by Dixon and that of the type of Gould are uncertain, but they must have been obtained on Oahu. Since 1837 we have no further traces ofMoho apicalis.

The only specimens known are those in Berlin, collected by Deppe, two in the British Museum, and one in my Museum at Tring. The latter, which I obtained in exchange from the British Museum, is the one brought home from the Sandwich Islands by Capt. Lord Byron. There is no specimen ofMoho apicalisin the Vienna Museum.

Habitat: Oahu.

ChaetoptilaSclater, Ibis 1871 p. 358.

Dr. Sclaterjustly proposed a new generic term for the "Entomyza" or "Moho"angustiplumaof former authors. This bird belongs doubtless to the family ofMeliphagidaeor Honey-eaters, and the genus is sufficiently distinct from all others. There are no fleshy wattles anywhere. The tail is long and strongly graduated; all the rectrices are obliquely pointed at their tips. The plumage of the body is very soft, that of the head, throat and chest almost fluffy; the feathers of the chin, throat and forehead end in hair-like bristles.

We know only one species.

Entomiza angustiplumaPeale, U.S. Expl. Exp., Birds p. 147 pl. XL fig. 2 (1848—Hawaii).Mohoa angustiplumaCassin, Proc. Acad. Philad. 1855 p. 440.Moho angustiplumaCassin, U.S. Expl. Exp., Mamm. & Orn. p. 148 pl. XI fig. 1 (1858—Hawaii).Wilson & Evans, Aves. Hawai. pt. II and plate (1891—Hawaii).Rothschild, Avif. Laysan, etc., p. 215 and plate (1900).

Entomiza angustiplumaPeale, U.S. Expl. Exp., Birds p. 147 pl. XL fig. 2 (1848—Hawaii).

Mohoa angustiplumaCassin, Proc. Acad. Philad. 1855 p. 440.

Moho angustiplumaCassin, U.S. Expl. Exp., Mamm. & Orn. p. 148 pl. XI fig. 1 (1858—Hawaii).

Wilson & Evans, Aves. Hawai. pt. II and plate (1891—Hawaii).

Rothschild, Avif. Laysan, etc., p. 215 and plate (1900).

Thisremarkable bird, belonging to the familyMeliphagidae, used to inhabit the island of Hawaii in the Sandwich Archipelago. It has been said by Mr. Dole to inhabit Molokai, but this is evidently an error. At present nobody on the island of Hawaii has any recollection of its presence, and its former native name is unknown—the name "Kiowea" erroneously quoted by Mr. Dole being that ofNumenius tahitiensis. The bird is extinct, though we do not know the reason why it disappeared.

THE ONLY SPECIMENS WE KNOW OF ARE THEFOLLOWING:—1. The type in the Museum at Washington, U.S.A.2. One in the Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum in Honolulu.3. One in the Museum of the University at Cambridge, obtained in exchange from Honolulu by Mr. Scott Wilson.4. One in my Museum at Tring, obtained in exchange from the Honolulu Museum.

THE ONLY SPECIMENS WE KNOW OF ARE THEFOLLOWING:—

1. The type in the Museum at Washington, U.S.A.

2. One in the Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum in Honolulu.

3. One in the Museum of the University at Cambridge, obtained in exchange from Honolulu by Mr. Scott Wilson.

4. One in my Museum at Tring, obtained in exchange from the Honolulu Museum.

The type was obtained by Peale, the three others by the late Mr. Mills on the island of Hawaii.

Strigiceps leucopogonLesson, Echo du Monde Savant 1840 (?); Rev. Zool. 1840, p. 266; Suppl. aux œuvres compl. de Buffon, Descr. de Mammif. & Ois, récemm. découverts, p. 277 (1847—Nouvelle Hollande); Hartlaub, Beitrag Gesch ausgest Vögel, in Abhandl. Naturw. Ver. Bremen, 2te Ausgabe, als M.S. gedr., p. 40 (1896).

Nobodyhas hitherto identified the curious bird described by Lesson, l.c., under the above name. From the generic characters he gives it is evident that it was a bird with a long, curved bill, lanceolate feathers on the head and throat, and long, strongly graduated tail, doubtless belonging to theMeliphagidae. The description of the colouration is asfollows:—

"Back, wings and tail bright greenish-olive; quills brown inside; shafts of the rectrices canary-yellow from below, glossy brown-red from above; top of head and neck chestnut, each feather being narrow and streaked with white, then with fawn-colour on the top; the feathers of the throat are elongated and fringed out on their edges, very narrow and lanceolate, grey at base, white at the tips; cheeks, sides of neck and chest ferruginous, some white streaks on the feathers of the chest and in the middle of the throat; flanks and belly clear rufous, passing into canary-yellow on the under tail-coverts. Tail from below greenish-yellow; tarsi horn-colour, bill above brownish, below yellowish with brown tip. Length about eight french inches and a half (0.23 centimètres)." (Translated.)

This bird was said to have come from Australia. I have made enquiries, but the type seems to have disappeared. There is something in the description reminding us ofChaetoptila angustipluma. Unless the description is faulty, this bird came probably not from Australia, but from one of the Pacific Islands. It has not been observed since, and is possibly extinct.

DrepanisTemminck, Man. d'Orn. Ed. II, I p. LXXXVI (1820—"Espèces:Certhia pacifica—obscura—vestiariaet probablementfalcata, que je n'ai pas vu.") Type by elimination:Drepanis pacifica.

ThenameDrepanisis now restricted to the practically extinct "Mamo" of the natives of the Sandwich Islands.Drepanis pacificahas a very striking black and yellow colouration; the somewhat loose-webbed under tail-coverts cover about three-quarters of the tail. The bill is long, curved, non-serrated, the upper mandible a few millimetres longer than the lower jaw. Nostrils large, covered by an operculum. First primary rudimentary, hidden by its covert. There is a silky, soft and fluffy axillary patch of feathers. The tail is slightly rounded. The metatarsus is covered with large, partly fused scutes.

Only one species known.

Great Hook-billed CreeperLatham, Gen. Synops. I p. 703 (1782).Certhia pacificaGmelin, Syst. Nat. I p. 470 (1788—ex Latham).

Great Hook-billed CreeperLatham, Gen. Synops. I p. 703 (1782).

Certhia pacificaGmelin, Syst. Nat. I p. 470 (1788—ex Latham).

BothMr. Scott Wilson and myself have at length discussed this beautiful bird in our books on the Hawaiian Avifauna. Of the actual status of this bird in former times we know nothing. Latham described it first (Gmelin named this species after Latham's description) from a pair in the Leverian collection, which is now preserved in the Vienna Museum. About half a century ago several specimens were collected by the late W. Mills near Hilo, on the island of Hawaii, the only island where it existed. Nothing certain was heard of the "Mamo" until, in 1892, my collector Henry Palmer obtained a fine male, which was caught before his eyes by a native birdcatcher. In July, 1898, Mr. H. W. Henshaw saw "at least a pair, possibly a whole family," in the woods of Kaumana, and in 1899 a native heard the, to him, well-known call near the same place. This brings the existence of the Mamo down to the year 1898 or 1899. In view of the futile efforts of Messrs. Henry Palmer,Perkins, Henshaw and others to observe this rare bird again, we may well suppose that this species is either extinct, or will very soon vanish if any are left.

In former times the Mamo was probably more or less common. Its golden yellow feathers were of great value, and, though the majority of the famous war-cloaks are composed of the feathers ofMoho nobilis, a few such cloaks are known to consist of Mamo feathers. It is supposed that it took generations to complete such a cape.

I only know of specimens of this bird in Vienna, Leyden, Paris, Honolulu, Cambridge and Tring.

The two examples in the Vienna Museum were obtained by Fichtel at the sale of the Leverian collection. One is perfect, the other has the upper portion of the bill wanting.

Hemignathus obscurusLichtenstein (non Gmelin!), Abh. Akad. Wiss. Berlin, 1838, p. 440 pl. 5 fig. 1 (Oahu).Drepanis(Hemignathus)ellisianaGray, Cat. B. Trop. Is. Pac. Oc. p. 9 (1859—based on Lichtenstein'sH. obscurusfrom Oahu).Hemignathus lichtensteiniScott Wilson, Ann. & Mag. N. H. ser. 6, vol. IV, p. 401 (1889—Oahu, based on the Berlin specimen).Hemignathus ellisianusRothschild, Avif. of Laysan, etc., p. 87 (1893) p. 310 (1900).

Hemignathus obscurusLichtenstein (non Gmelin!), Abh. Akad. Wiss. Berlin, 1838, p. 440 pl. 5 fig. 1 (Oahu).

Drepanis(Hemignathus)ellisianaGray, Cat. B. Trop. Is. Pac. Oc. p. 9 (1859—based on Lichtenstein'sH. obscurusfrom Oahu).

Hemignathus lichtensteiniScott Wilson, Ann. & Mag. N. H. ser. 6, vol. IV, p. 401 (1889—Oahu, based on the Berlin specimen).

Hemignathus ellisianusRothschild, Avif. of Laysan, etc., p. 87 (1893) p. 310 (1900).

Weknow only of one single specimen, the type of the namesellisianusandlichtensteini, figured and described by Lichtenstein, in 1838, under the name ofHemignathus obscurus. It is true that Lichtenstein says, that Herr Deppe procured several specimens, but there is only one in the Berlin Museum, and we have no knowledge where the others may be, if they are still in existence.

There can hardly be any doubt thatH. obscurus ellisianusis extinct on Oahu, where it was discovered by Deppe. All recent collectors, from Wilson and Palmer to this day, have failed to find a trace of it. Although collecting in the dense forests and rugged mountains of Oahu is most difficult, we may suppose that at least one of these collectors would have come across it, if it still existed.

The following is the description made by Dr. Hartert of the type inBerlin:—

"Above greenish olive-brown, more greenish on the back and rump, and somewhat more greyish on the head and hind-neck; the dark bases of the feathers on the head showing through, lores deep brown. A distinct yellow superciliary stripe. Chin, throat, and middle of abdomen dull brownish white (apparently somewhat faded). Upper breast olive-greenish, sides of breast and flanks dull olive-greenish, more olive-brown on the flanks. Wings and tail deep brown, bordered with yellowish green. Under-wing coverts dull white. Bill brown, somewhat horn-brown, but not blackish, as in the other forms ofHemignathus.

It is not probable that the bill and feet are faded, as in specimens ofHeterorhynchus luciduscollected and stuffed at the same time and kept side by side withH. o. ellisianus, the bill and feet are still blackish and not brown.

Wing 83.5, tail 53, culmen 56, bill from gape to tip in a straight line 47.5, lower mandible from mental apex to tip 40 mm."

Hemignathus lucidusLichtenstein, Abh. d. Kön. Akad. Wissensch. Berlin 1838 p. 451, pl. V figs. 2 ♂ 3 ♀ (1839—Oahu).Heterorhynchus olivaceusLafresnaye, Mag. de Zool. 1839 pl. X. and text (Oct. 1839).

Hemignathus lucidusLichtenstein, Abh. d. Kön. Akad. Wissensch. Berlin 1838 p. 451, pl. V figs. 2 ♂ 3 ♀ (1839—Oahu).

Heterorhynchus olivaceusLafresnaye, Mag. de Zool. 1839 pl. X. and text (Oct. 1839).

TheOahu form ofHeterorhynchusis now extinct, and specimens are only, as far as we know, preserved in the Museums of Berlin (types ofH. lucidus), Boston (type ofH. olivaceus), Francfort, Paris, Leyden, London, Cambridge, Liverpool.

In 1838 Deppe saw this bird in great numbers flying round the flowers of the banana plantations. As the bird was apparently common, it is quite possible that specimens are preserved in several other collections, and it would be most welcome if the officials of continental Museums would give information in case they should find specimens of this interesting extinct bird.

Habitat: Oahu.

Psittirostra olivaceaRothschild, Avifauna of Laysan p. 193 (1900—Oahu, ex Lichtenstein nomen nudum & M.S.)Psittirostra psittacea deppeiRothschild, Bull. B.O.C. XV. p. 45 (1905—new name for the above, the nameolivaceabeing preoccupied by Ranzani).

Psittirostra olivaceaRothschild, Avifauna of Laysan p. 193 (1900—Oahu, ex Lichtenstein nomen nudum & M.S.)

Psittirostra psittacea deppeiRothschild, Bull. B.O.C. XV. p. 45 (1905—new name for the above, the nameolivaceabeing preoccupied by Ranzani).

Psittirostra psittacea psittaceais still one of the commoner birds on most of the Hawaiian Islands, except Oahu, where it was formerly replaced by a closely allied form,P. p. deppei, distinguishable by slightly smaller dimensions, more whitish abdomen in the male, and somewhat more olivaceous upperside. Specimens have been collected on Oahu by Prof. Behn and Herr Deppe, and besides a pair in my collection, I only know of examples in the museums of Berlin and Vienna. There is no trace left of this species in Oahu, and in spite of great efforts Mr. Palmer and all other recent collectors did not come across it. This form has thus shared the fate ofHemignathus ellisianus,Heterorhynchus lucidus,Moho apicalisandPhaeornis oahensis, which have all disappeared from Oahu, whileLoxops rufamay still exist in a few pairs, or has possibly followed suit already.

Fringilla rufaBloxam, Voy. "Blonde" p. 250 (1826).Loxops wolstenholmeiRothschild, Bull. Brit. Orn. Club I, p. LVI (1893—Oahu).Loxops rufaWilson, Aves Hawaiienses part VI, plate and text (1896); Rothschild, Avif. of Laysan, etc., p. 177 (1900).

Fringilla rufaBloxam, Voy. "Blonde" p. 250 (1826).

Loxops wolstenholmeiRothschild, Bull. Brit. Orn. Club I, p. LVI (1893—Oahu).

Loxops rufaWilson, Aves Hawaiienses part VI, plate and text (1896); Rothschild, Avif. of Laysan, etc., p. 177 (1900).

Thisform ofLoxopsis only found on Oahu, where it is doubtless very rare now, if not already extinct. The last known specimen was shot on April 20th, 1893, in the mountains of the Wailua district, on Oahu, and is in my collection. This is the only specimen obtained by the efforts of recent collectors, and, if any should still exist, we may suppose that their fate is sealed.

L. c. rufadiffers fromL. coccinea coccineaof Hawaii by its smaller size and more brownish, somberer coloration.

We know of specimens in the British Museum, including the type of Bloxam'sFringilla rufa, in Liverpool, Philadelphia, Berlin, Berlepsch Castle, Vienna and Tring.

CiridopsWilson, Nature 1892, p. 469.

Thoughformerly supposed to belong to theFringillidae, it is now generally acknowledged to belong to the familyDrepanidae, a peculiar family of different forms restricted in its distribution to the Hawaiian Islands. The genusCiridopsseems to stand nearest toLoxops, from which, however, it is easily distinguished by the form of the bill, the pattern of colouration, stronger feet, and the structure of its plumage, which is somewhat stiff and scanty, while it is soft and rich inLoxops. The feathers of the crown and throat are pointed.

We only know one species belonging to this genus.

Fringilla annaDole, Hawaiian Almanac 1879, p. 49 (Hawaii); reprint in Ibis 1880.Ciridops annaWilson & Evans, Aves Hawaienses, Part IV, text and plate; Rothschild, Avifauna of Laysan, p. 183.

Fringilla annaDole, Hawaiian Almanac 1879, p. 49 (Hawaii); reprint in Ibis 1880.

Ciridops annaWilson & Evans, Aves Hawaienses, Part IV, text and plate; Rothschild, Avifauna of Laysan, p. 183.

The"Ulaaihawane" of the natives of Hawaii is one of the rarest birds known, only three specimens being on record—one, the type, in the Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum in Honolulu, and two in my collection. One of these was brought home by Mr. Scott Wilson, who obtained it from Mr. Bishop in Honolulu, the other was shot by a native for my former collector, Mr. Palmer. No other examples have been obtained. As there are still a good many hawane palms in elevated districts of Hawaii, there is, of course, a possibility that a few examples still exist there; but to all intents and purposesCiridops annamay be looked upon as extinct.

SiphonorhisSclater, P.Z.S. 1861, p. 77. Type:Caprimulgus americanusL.

"Thebill is extremely broad at base, the tip strong and heavily decurved; nostrils tubular and very prominent; rictal bristles strongly developed. Wing pointed, third primary longest; tail rounded, almost graduated. Tarsi long and naked. The sexes differ slightly in coloration. (Hartert.)"

Small Wood-OwleSloane, Voy. Jamaica II, p. 296, pl. 255, fig. 1 (1725).Caprimulgus americanusLinnaeus, Syst. Nat., Ed. X, p. 193 (1758—Ex Sloane. "Habitat in America calidiore").Chordeiles americanusBonaparte, Consp. Av. I, p. 63 (1850).Siphonorhis americanusSclater, P.Z.S. 1861, p. 77; id. P.Z.S. 1866, p. 144; Cory, B. W. Indies, p. 139 (1889); Hartert, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XVI, p. 592 (1892).

Small Wood-OwleSloane, Voy. Jamaica II, p. 296, pl. 255, fig. 1 (1725).

Caprimulgus americanusLinnaeus, Syst. Nat., Ed. X, p. 193 (1758—Ex Sloane. "Habitat in America calidiore").

Chordeiles americanusBonaparte, Consp. Av. I, p. 63 (1850).

Siphonorhis americanusSclater, P.Z.S. 1861, p. 77; id. P.Z.S. 1866, p. 144; Cory, B. W. Indies, p. 139 (1889); Hartert, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XVI, p. 592 (1892).

Back to Index Next