214 PKOCEEDIXGS OF UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. 



Laud, is this specimen not the one mentioned by him as received io 

 Leiden as early as 1844, and is not 1859 only a mi^p^int for 1839 ? Or 

 had Schlegel acraally two similar specimens before him? 



I cannot now lay hands on HolboU's papers, but I find in Professor 

 2s"ewton"s "yotes on Birds which have been found in Greenland" (Are- 

 tic Manual, j). 109, 1S75). that •• Holboll says he has seen in Greenland 

 an entirely black example." 



So far as I know, none of the later expeditions into the Arctic men- 

 tions having met with these totally black birds except Mr. L. Kuiulien» 

 the naturalist of the •■ Howgate Polar Expedition. 1877-"7s.~ on the- 

 schoouer •• Florence,** who saw three specimens, of which one was secured. 

 He writes as follows ^Contributions to the ISatural History of Arciic 

 America. = Bull. U. S. National Museum, Xo. 15, p. 105): '*I have seen 

 three entirely black specimens, which I considered to be U.caiho. One 

 was procured in Cumberland, but was lost, with many others, after we 

 arrived in the United States. I have examined specimens of carlo 

 since, in the Smithsonian collection, and my bird was nothing bur a 

 melanistic si>ecimen of U. grylle." It may be remarked, however, that 

 in the Smithsonian Institution lor more correctly the National Museum; 

 is, and has been, only ahead c»f C. carlo, and that Mr. Kumlien's con- 

 clusion that his bird was only a melanistic stage of grylle was not based 

 upon actual comparison. The finer differences in structure and color 

 may easily have escaped his attention or his memory. 



TThen looking over the references collected together above, one can 

 hardly escape the impression, that they all refer to a really vaUd siiecies 

 and no individual variation, no melanism. 



To begin with, there are known to exist, in collections, two specimens 

 at least — one in Leiden, the othtr in the British Museum — which, judging 

 from the descriptions, must be alike, and, on the authority of Schlegel 

 and. Xewton, most nearly related to C. grylle (or, perhajjs, rather C. 

 carlo). 



Assuming now that Schlegel's specimen, described by him as ••d'un 

 noir eufume absolument tiniforme,** is the very same as that upon which 

 r. motzfeldi was based, we will be justified in concluding that Faber's 

 designation of its color, " reddish brown,*" was incorrect and x^robably 

 only taken down from memory. Furthermore, it can hardly fail that 

 the bill difters as much from that of the grylle as does the color of the 

 j)lumage. Benicken's and Fabers descriiJtions are too distinct to admit 

 of doubt on this point. Schlegel, it is true, does not mention any differ- 

 ence in the shape of the bill, but including, as he did, C. columha under 

 grylle. it is evident that he allowed a much greater individual variation 

 than is i>ermissible. Xor does Newton say anything about the bill of 

 the British Museum specimen, but the fact that it was labeled ''Uria 

 carlo" might perhaps indicate that the bill is shaped somewhat as in 

 the latter si>ecies. 



As to the size. Professor Newton remarks that the British Museum 



