610 REVIEW OF JAPANESE BIRDS. 



V, 1877, pp. 73, 74), by Major^Biddulpb in one* (Ibis, 1881, p. 50; Stray 

 Feath., IX, 1881, p. ol5), and by Dr. Scully in several others (Ibis, 1881, 

 p. 431 ; Stray Feath., X, 1881, p. 103). 



On the other hand, Mr. Brooks and Dr. Scully {U. ec.) state that they 

 examined large series of the European birds, in which they never found 

 the spot wanting; Hume {I. c.) came to the same result from an inspec- 

 tion of thirteen European specimens; I myself have before me thirty-four 

 specimens from Europe and Asia, all referable to 6\/awi/mr«s, either 

 typical or one of the subspecies {scandulaca, hrittanica, etc.), and 1 find 

 the spot present on the fourth primary in every one of them. Suppose 

 that Messrs. Brooks and Scully have examined about a dozen specimens 

 each ; we would then have eighty Old World examples of G. familiaris 

 examined by four observers who were unable to procure a single onewilh. 

 out it. In a curious contrast to this result is the following general state- 

 ment by Mr. Dresser (B. of Eur., Ill, p. 201), viz, that "some of the 

 European birds have the fourth primary marked, and others have it quite 

 plain." He does not give any further details; does not state in which 

 specimens it was found and in which absent : does not even give the pro- 

 l)ortional number between the two forms. Ua only examined twenty 

 specimens of Old World Certliia familiaris (besides two C. hodgsoni^from 

 Cashmere), and from his statement quoted above one might think that 

 in that series the specimens with and without the spot were about equal 

 in number. How are we to reconcile these facts? Or did Mr. Dresser 

 only use a careless expression, and did he only mean that he has really 

 seen one or two E uropean specimens without the spot ? Of course, 

 I do not deny that such specimens occasionally occur, but even if the 

 spot should be found in 1 or 2 per cent, of Old World G. familiaris, such 

 an occurrence would not invalidate the claim of G.hodgsoni to specilic 

 or subspeciflc distinction, the more so, since this character does not seem 

 to be the only one by which it may be recognized. That this character 

 seems to be much more variable in Gerthia familiaris americana does 

 not affect the question at all ; nor does it matter much that in five ex- 

 amples of the true Gerthia hrachydactijla Brehm (7iec Gerbe !) I find 

 that one lacks the spot (U. S. Nat. Mus. No. 102928) while four have it. 

 The latter form I consider a perfectly distinct species, entirely neglected 

 by the English ornithologists, because described by Brehm and not oc- 

 curring in Great Britain, and sadly misunderstood by most of the Con- 

 tinental European ornithologists, even by those who adopt the name 

 given by Brehm. t 



* He afterwards obtained two immature specimens of the same species (Ibis, 188Ji, 

 p. 270 ; Stray Feath., X, 188i, p. 261), and as he has no remarks to the contrary, it is 

 probable that these also exhibited the characteristic features of this form. 



t How Certliia hrachydactyla which is particularly characterized by the shortness of 

 the hind claw coiicoiiiitant with a much loiig^er bill than in C. familiaris, 

 can possibly bo " inimatare" specimens of the latter, as surmised by Mr. Seebohm 

 (Brit. B. Eggs, I, p. 513), is quite incomprehensible to me. He also states that V. 

 hrachydaettjla occurs in all parts of the distribution of C. familiaris ; but who ever 

 found the ^rae Short-toed Creeper in Great Britain, Scandinavia, Asia, or.AmericaT 

 So far as we know at present, it is restricted to Central and Southern Europe. 



