1852.] 211 



with black bristles ; from the base of the lower mandible two short stripes of 

 white run downwards and backwards. Lores pitch black. Wings brown, infe- 

 rior wing coverts, and edge of wing at flexure, white ; primaries with three or four 

 narrow spots of silky white on their outer margins, and all the quills with circu- 

 lar spots of white on their inner webs. Tail brown, narrowly tipped with white 

 and crossed with two bands composed of spots of white, which are wanting on 

 the outer webs of the two lateral feathers. Throat and upper part of the breast 

 dark chesnut ; all the under parts bright reddish yellow, tarsi and toes thickly 

 covered with plumage of the same reddish yellow as the under parts. Bill and 

 claws black, irides golden yellow. 



But two specimens of this bird have been taken to my knowledge ; the first was 

 captured Oct., 1821, and kept until winter when it made its escape; the second, 

 and the one from which the above description was taken, flew into an open shop, 

 July, 1852. It is strictly nocturnal, utters a low tremulous note, and is an active 

 and efficient mouser. It is different from any other species yet known to inhabit 

 North America, and appears to have some general resemblance in color to N. 

 Harrisii, Cassin, but not sufficient to render it necessary to state their difference. 



I have named this species as a slight tribute of respect to that zealous Natu- 

 ralist, Prof. Jared P. Kirtland, of Cleveland, Ohio. 



2. Bubo subarcticus, nobis. 



A large light colored species. Tail crossed by five bands, wings with the third 

 primary longest, second shorter than the fourth, tooth or lobe of the upper man- 

 dible remarkably developed. 



Total length 24 inches, wing from flexure 17, tail 9|, and extends 3| beyond 

 the folded wings, tarsus 2J, bill over its convexity 1 5-12ths, egrets 3 inches. 



Above white and fawn color, zig-zagged and barred with brown, scapulars 

 broadly marked on their outer webs with white. Tail bright fawn, crossed by 

 five bars of brown, outer webs of the exterior and tips white, two central feathers 

 colored similar to the back. Quills with seven bars of brown. 



Beneath white ; on the breast, sides, and flanks, each feather crossed with bars 

 and narrow stripes of deep brown, forming on the breast a wide irregular band 

 of the latter color. Lower tail coverts white, each feather with a single narrow 

 band of brown. 



Face groyish white, lores tipped with black, egrets with their outer webs and 

 tips black, inner webs white, bill dark horn color, lighter at the point, claws 

 black, irides yellow. 



The specimen now described was shot in January, 1851, near this city, and 

 proved to be a female. I have seen two others which were precisely similar in 

 their markings to the present. This species does not agree in many essential 

 points with Richardson's description of the Arctic horned Owl, nor dees it agree 

 either in color or anatomically with the common great horned owl, which is 

 very abundant here, and of which I have kept living specimens for more than a 

 year. Of the latter species I have seen some very dark colored specimens, which 

 are mostly, but not invariably, male birds. 



Some of my reasons for considering the bird just described as distinct from the 

 common species, are as follows : It differs, 1. In color and markings. 2. In 

 measurements; it has comparatively greater length of tail, and of wings. Ana- 

 tomically; the cranium of a specimen in my possession, shows a greater devel- 

 opment of the posterior lobes of the brain and other differences, and a more dis- 

 tinct tooth-like lobe of the upper mandible. 4. I have seen three specimens all 

 corresponding in every particular, and all occurring only in the depth of winter, 

 when the great Cinereous Owl, {Syrnium cinereum,) the Hawk Owl, {Surnia 

 funerea.^ and the Snowy Owl, (o. nyctea^) were with us. My conclusion is, 

 therefore, that it is like these species, an inhabitant of the Arctic regions of this 

 continent, and one of the rarest of the winter visitants in the northern parts of 

 the United States, and in Wisconsin is much less common than either of the 

 three species mentioned. 



The Committee to which had been referred Dr. WetherilFs paper 

 entitled " An Analysis of the Cotton Plant and Seed/' &c.; reported in 



