BIRDS OF KORTH AND MIDDLE AMERICA. 



515 



on the rump; middle and greater wing-coverts margined terminalh^ 

 with a rather more buflV or light brownish hue, but still not approach- 

 ing tawn}- or rusty; sides of head, chin, and throat dusky or dull 

 blackish brown, faintly streaked with dull whitish, more distinctly along 

 the median line; rest of under parts dull bufty white, immaculate on 

 middle of abdomen, elsewhere broadly streaked with dusky, the streaks 

 giving way on sides and flanks to a nearly uniform light olive; bill 

 wholly clear deep cinnamon, paler on lower and terminal portions of 

 mandible; legs and feet brownish black; length (skin), 96.52; wing, 

 71.12; tail, 11.91; culmen, 17,78; maxilla from nostril, 12.70; gonys, 

 10.16; basal width of mandible, 9.1:0; basal depth of bill, 10.67; tarsus, 



22.10; middle toe, 15.75. 



Galapagos Archipelago (Charles Island; Indefatigable Island 0- 



Cactornis hrevirostris Ridgway, Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., xii, no. 767, Feb. 5, 1890, 

 108, fig. 4 (Charles I., Galapagos Archipelago; collection U. S. Nat. Mus.). 



Geospiza breriro><tris Ridgway, Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., xix, 1897, 541, pi. 57, fig. 6 

 (monogr. ). 



Geospiza conirostris brevirostris Rothschild and Hartert, Novit. ZooL, vi, Aug., 

 1899, 159 (Charles I.; crit.). 



Genus COCORNIS Townsend. 



Cocfjrms^ TowNSEXi), Bull. :Mus. Comp. ZooL, xxvii, no. 3, July, 1895, 123. (Type, 

 C. agassizi Townsend. ) 

 Similar to the more slender-billed forms of Geospiza {'' Cactornlr^), 

 but bill proportionally smaller, more slender, and more decidedly 

 decurved. 



coverts and other features which characterize young birds in their first year. It cer- 

 tainly can not be referred to G. fatifjata, which has the bill altogether longer and at 

 the same time much narrower in both its vertical and transverse diameters. The size 

 and shape of the bill agree very closely with those of G. hrevirostris, though, as might 

 be expected from the difference in age or sex, it is not quite so strong. 



Without having seen the type, Messrs. Rothschild and Hartert refer, quite confi- 

 dently, this form to G. conirostris as a subspecies; but in doing so I feel sure they are 

 in error, having carefully reexamined the type and compared it with the smaller 

 specimens of G. conirostris (my G. vudia) . G. breiirostris is, in fact, far more like 

 G. fruierculu, and there is quite as good reason for considering G. breiirostris related 

 to G. fratercula as to G. conirostris, as the following measurements will show: 



Loeality. 



Wing. 



Minimum measurements of O. 



conirostris, male 



Type of "G. 7nedia" 



Type of G. hrevirostris 



Maximum measurtments of G. 



fmtercida, male 



Average measurements of G. fra- 



teniila, male i 65. 79 



77. -17 

 78.74 

 6S. 58 



67.31 



Citlmen 

 Tail. , from 

 1 base. 



Depth 

 of bill 

 at base, 



13.97 

 15. 75 

 11.43 



48.26 [ 18.54 



48.26 20.32 



46 99 j 18.29 



43.18 17.27 



41.15 17.02 12.19 I 9.40 



Gonys. 



10.41 

 10.67 

 10.16 



Width 

 of man- 

 dible at 

 base. 



8.89 



11.43 



9.40 



10.16 



9.65 



Tarsus. 



22.86 

 22.86 



Middle 

 toe. 



16.51 

 16.51 



20.83 I 15.75 

 20.57 1 14.99 

 20.07 i 14.48 



1 "From Cocos -\- ofjvii = bird." 



