( 161 ) 

 111. Geospiza dubia bauri HiJgw. 



Geosphu hauri Ridgway iu Piuc. U.S. \„t. Mu.h. XVII. p. :j62 (1894), and op. cil. XIX. p. 518 (1896). 

 This form is only known from James Island, where it seems to be rare, as we 

 have only three skins from the Baur collection, including the type. It has a larger 

 beak than G. dubia ihihia., while the wing is of exactly the same length, and 

 therefore we do not think it can be more than subspecifically separated. 



11. G-eospiza dubia simillima subsp. uov. 

 This form from Cliarles Island is almost indistinguishable from G. dubia 

 albemarlei, but the wing is from 2 to 'i mm. longer. We have one perfectly adult S, 

 and four immature birds. 



r.-'. Geospiza fortis fortis Gould. 



Ge'ispiza fnrtis, Gould iu P. Zo„l. Sne. Loiiil. p. :> (1837); Zonl. Voij. Bew/lr, III. Birds, p. 101, 

 pi. XXXVIII (Charles Island) ; Salvia in rmiis. Zool. Soc. Loud. IX. pi. IX. p. 481 (1876) ; 

 Sharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mas. XII. p. 10 (partim). 



Geospiza nebulosa, Gould in P. Zuol. Soc. Loud. 1837, p. 5 ; Sharpe, Cal. B. Brit. Mas, XII. p. U 

 (partim). 



G. fortis, Ridgway in Pmc. U.S. Xnl. Mus. XIX. p. 521. 



This species is most frequent on Charles (whence the type came), Duncan, 

 .Jervis, James, Gardner near Charles Island, Indefatigable, Chatham, and Cowley 

 Islands. The specimens from Albemarle, which Ridgway {I.e.) finally united 

 with G. fortis, lielong to G. dubia, of which they are a subspecies, being far too big 

 to be G. fortis. The, birds from Bindloe, which Ridgway had not seen, and which 

 were lumped with G. fortis by Salvin and others, belong clearly to the same 

 form as those from Abingdon. They can only be separated as a subspecies from 

 G. fortis. We have one yoaag female from Barrington Island, which agrees iu the 

 shortness of its wing with G. f. fratercula rather than with G. f. fortis. It may 

 possibly belong to an unnsimed subspecies, but adult males are re<|nired to decide 

 this question. 



13. Geospiza fortis fratercula Ridgw. 



Geospiza fratercula, Ridgway in Pruc. U.S. Not. Mus. XVII. p. 363 (1894), id. in Proc. U.S. Nat. 

 Mus. XIX. p. 525. 



Ridgway knew this form from Abingdon Island only, but our series from 

 Bindloe is perfectly similar. We cannot fully appreciate the alleged differences in 

 the form of the bill, and the only difference we can see is the shorter wing, which is 

 about 3 to 6 mm. shorter than iu Geospiza fortis fortis. We canuot detect tangible 

 differences in colour between these forms. 



14. Geospiza fuliginosa fuliginosa Gould. 



Geospiza fuliyiiiusa , Gould in Proc. Zool. Soc. Loud. 1837, p. 5 ; Salvin in Trans. Zool. Soc. Land. IX. 



1876, p. 482 ; Sharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. XII. p. 12 ; Ridgway in Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. XIX. 



p. 526. 

 Giiospi~a jKirrulu, Gould in Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. p. 6 (1837) ; Zool. Voij. Beagle, III. Birds, p. 102, 



tab. XXXIX. (1841) ; Salvin in Traits. Zool. Soc. Loml. IX. p. 483; Sharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. 



XII. p. 13 ; Ridgway in Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. XIX. p. 529. 



As will be seen from the above synonymy, Gould, Salvin, Sharpe and Ridgway 

 have separated a species called G. jxircula, which we unite with <J. fuliginosa. 



