228 ORNITHOLOGICAL EXPLORATIONS. 



and larger arm-coverts are marked with some few and distant cross- 

 bars, against the uniform and narrow barring of canorus. 



3. Only the six first primaries have white cross-bars on their inner 

 webs, the white bases of the following quills forming a distinct and large 

 white speculum on the under surface of the wing. In the other form 

 eight i^rimaries at least are distinctly barred, the white speculum being 

 much less pronounced. Besides, the white bars are narrower and more 

 numerous than in the bird in question ; the bars or spots, e. </., on the 

 inner web of the first primary are only five in the latter, while in the 

 former their number is seven, at least. 



4. The dark cross bars of the under surface are more blackish, broader, 

 more distant, and, consequently, fewer. 



5. The spots on the tail-feathers are rather larger and more distinct. 

 The two first points agree with Cabanis's description of canorinuSj 



1862 (the alleged canoioides Mull.), but his '^subtus fasciis ut in C. 

 canoro crebriorihus angiisiis,^^ compared with point 4, as above, prevents 

 them from being united. It nniy be that they will turu out to be races of 

 the same species, but at present a decision is hardly possible. It mast 

 be borne in mind that I consider C. canorinus Cabanis of 1862 and G. 

 canorinus Cabanis of 1872 to be two different birds. 



This is the same species which Taczanowski and Dybowski record 

 from Kamtschatka as " Cuculvs indicus Cab.," but I need only quote a 

 few words from Cabanis's description (Mns. Hein., IV, i, p. 35), to show 

 that his indicns does not belong here, as he describes it as "subtus fas- 

 ciis aliquantulum angustioribus sen tenuioribus," and "tectricum saba- 

 larium fasciolis u^t in C. canoro tenuissimis creberrimis." This is cer- 

 tainly nothing but the Indian Cuenlus canorus, which, if really separable 

 from the European bird, shoidd stand as Cuculus canorus indicus, by 

 which name it was originally designated by Blyth (Jour. As. Soc. Beng., 

 1846 (p. 19)). In fact, the name indicus may perhaps finally be found 

 to belong to the foregoing species {€. telephonns), from which it seems to 

 differ chiefly by a somewhat smaller size, and a weaker and shorter bill. 



Cuculus peninsulw comes nearest to the bird which is recorded from 

 Japan as C. himalaynnus, but which I think should properly stand as G. 

 Jceluxgensis Swinhoe, or perhaps G. saturatus kelungensis. The chief dif- 

 ferences have been mentioned in the diagnosis, the two forms being easily 

 distinguished by comparing the under side of the wing, which on the 

 whole is mnch lighter in the Kamtschatkan bird. The difference in the 

 number of white bars on tbe primaries is apparently not so great, since 



