TROGLODYTID.E — MIMIN.E : MOCKINGBIRDS; THRASHERS. 281 



the latter, with the express statement, however, that they were '' an aberrant group, related to 

 the Troglodytiche'' {2d ed., 1884, p. 242), "departing from the prime characteristic of the 

 family in having the tarsi scutellate in front'' {ibid., p. 248). I now avail myself of the first 

 opportunity, incident to the resetting of the type for the present edition, to remove the Mimince 

 from Turdidcc to Troglodytidce — 'the position assigned them in the A. 0. U. Lists, 1886-95. 

 This is a happy atavism — a reversion to the stand taken by Baird in 1858, when he com- 

 bined the Mockers with the Wrens under the family name of " Liotrichidcc,^' after the example 

 set by Cabanis in the Museum Heineanum of 1850. In so far as American forms are con- 

 cerned, the Troglodytidte here given are precisely Baird's Liotrichidce under another name: and 

 they correspond exactly to what are recognized by Sharpe (Cat. B. Brit. Mus., vi and vii, 

 1881 and 1883) as the subfamilies Troglodytince and Mimince of the so-called " Timeliidcs or 

 Babbling Thrushes" — that vast assemblage of some 1,100 species of chiefly Old AVorld birds 

 wliich makes a sort of ornithological waste-basket for want of any satisfactory classification. 

 To discipline that unruly mob is not our present purpose ; we have only to recognize by name 

 a family group to contain our own Mockers and Wrens ; and as Troglodytes Vieill., 1807, 

 antedates hoih. Leiothrix Swains., 1831, and Timalia Horsford, 1820 (or Timelia Sund., 

 1872), we use Troglodytidce instead of ''Liotrichidce'' or "■ Timeliidcc'''' without prejudice to 

 any question of the relationships of American Wrens and Mockers to the various Old World 

 birds concerned in the case, and with the assurance that in any event Troglodytidce is a straitly 

 orthodox name for the family with whose members we have here to do. 



In 1858 Bafrd divided his Liotrichidce = Troglodytidce into four subfamilies — Mimince, 

 Ccimpylorhynchince, Troglodytince, and Chamceince. There is much to be said in favor of this 

 arrangement, especially regarding the position thus assigned to the refractory genus Chamcea. 

 In 1884 I had no difficulty in distinguishing Cam])ylorhynchince from Troglodytince (see Key, 

 2d ed., p. 274), upon consideration of the North American genera alone. But other American 

 forms obliterate the dividing line between them, so that they must be combined in one, to be 

 called Troglodytince. Upon this understanding, our Troglodytidce now consist of two sub- 

 families, which may be easily recognized, as follows : 



Analysis of Subfamilies. 



Size large, and general aspect thrush-like. Length 8.00 or more, wing 3.50 or more. Rictal bristles evident. Tarsal 

 scutellation moderate, in some cases obsolete. Inner toe free to its base from middle toe. Represented by Mocking- 

 birds, Catbirds, Thrashers MimincB 



Size small, and general aspect wren-like. Length 8.00 or less, wing 3.50 or less (usually much less). Rictal bristles not 

 evident. Tarsal scutellation moderate, in some cases excessive. Inner toe extensively coherent with middle toe. 

 Represented by all species of Wrens Troglodytince 



Subfamily MIMINiC: Mockingbirds; Thrashers. 



Birds of maximum size among Troglodytidce, simulating Turdidce in some respects; dis- 

 tinguished from Troglodytince by greater size, rictal bristles, different nostrils, and nK)re deeply 

 cleft toes. Tarsi scutellate in front (the scutella sometimes fusing, however, as in the Cat- 

 bird). Wings short and rounded, about equal to tail only in Oroscoptes ; 1st prhnary short, 

 but not spurious; 2d primary shorter than 6th. Tail large and rounded or much gradu- 

 ated, usually decidedly longer than wings. Tarsus about equal to middle toe and claw; feet 

 stout, in adaptation to somewhat terrestrial life. Bill various in form, usually longer or at 

 least more curved than in Thrushes; in Harporhynchus attaining extraordinary lengtli and 

 curvature. As a group the Mimince are rather soutiiern, hardly passing beyond the U. S. ; few 

 species reaching even the Middle States, and the maximum development being in Central and 

 South America. They are peculiar to America, where they are represented by Oroscoptes, 

 Mimus, Galeoscoptes, Harporhynchus, and 5 or 6 related genera, with upward of 40 recorded 

 species. About one-half of tliese fall in Mimus alone ; nearly all the species of Harporhynchus 



