134 Letters, Announcements, ^'C. 



In a former paper on the birds of the Pelew Islands (P. Z. S. 

 1868, pp. 116, 117), Drs. Hartlaub and Finsch had already 

 asserted in positive terms that the Philippines were inhabited 

 by two distinct species of Artamus. On this assertion I 

 ventured some remarks in my memoir on the birds of the 

 Philippine archipelago (Tr. Z. S. ix. p. 174). But as Dr. 

 Finsch, in his more recent paper {I.e.), still identifies the 

 Pelew form with A. leucorhynchus of the Philippines, while 

 treating the Pelew bird as a species distinct from the Artamus 

 of the Sunda Islands, it becomes necessary to review the 

 grounds on which this identification rests. It is not pri- 

 marily a question of correct title that has to be decided, but 

 one of fact. Is there any trustworthy evidence of the Philip- 

 pines possessing two species of Artamus, the one identical 

 with the species found in the Sunda Islands, the other with 

 that confined to the Pelew Islands ? As to there being two 

 Philippine species, it is true that, while Brisson described and 

 figured (Ornithologia, ii. p. 180, t. xviii. f. 2) a species of the 

 genus from a specimen obtained in the vicinity of Manilla, 

 preserved in Aubrey^s cabinet, Sonnerat again separately de- 

 scribed and figured a species observed by him in the Philippines 

 (Voy. N. Guin. p. 55, t. 25). Sonnerat mentions that his 

 species was the one described by Buftbn (Hist. Nat. i. p. 310) 

 under the title of Pie-grieche des Philippines. Sonnerat's erro- 

 neous quotation of the title used by Buffon need not now have 

 been alluded to, were it not that Buff'on really employed as the 

 title part of the native name given by Brisson, and called it 

 le Langraien, and nowhere does Buffon use the title attri- 

 buted by Sonnerat. Buff'on^s account (for it cannot be called 

 a description) is taken from Brisson ; and he quotes the volume 

 and page of the ' Ornithologia.^ As Sonnerat identified his 

 species with that of Buffon, and as Buffon manifestly refers 

 to Brisson^s species, we may assume that the same species was 

 understood by all three authors. Gmelin (S. N. i. p. 305), 

 by adopting the Linnsean title for Brisson^s species, with 

 which he associated that of Buffon, and by bestowing {t. c. 

 p. 307) a separate title on Sonnerat's bird, was the first author 

 who suggested the idea of the Philippines (or rather the vici- 

 nity of Manilla) being inhabited l)y two distinct species of 



