Letters, Announcements, l^c. 105 



' Journal fiir Ornithologie * for this year did uot reach me 

 till the 7th of September ; and I should like to hear what 

 was the real date of its appearance. Once before it was 

 noticed in ' The Ibis ' (1877, p. 239, note) that the number 

 containing " Ornithological Results of the ' Gazelle ' Expe- 

 dition/' although dated July 1876, was not issued to the 

 subscribers until January 1877 ! I think that such a pro- 

 ceeding is very objectionable. 



In the notice of my paper '^ On Certain Cassowaries/' 

 there is a passage not quite exact. You say that I "now 

 doubt whether Cassowary No. 2, from Warbusi, is really 

 identical with No. 1, from Wandammen, i. e. whether C. 

 ultijugus really = C. salvadorii, i. e. if the localities are rightly 

 assigned.^' 



In my paper I have written nothing of the kind. On the 

 contraiy, acknowledging the identity of C. altijugus and C. 

 salvadorii, I have only expressed my doubts whether C. sal- 

 vadorii is really from Warbusi, a locality whence we know 

 certainly that C. tricarunculatus comes. I have added that 

 probably the tickets o£ the two specimens referred to C sal- 

 vadorii and to C tricarunculatus have been exchanged, so that 

 the ticket of C. salvadorii, on which was written " Warbusi," 

 most likely belonged to C. tricarunculatus, and to C. salva- 

 dorii belonged the one attached to C. tricarunculatus, on which 

 was simply written "Nouvelle Guinee, 1876. '^ On this sup- 

 position the specimen of C. tricarunculatus sold to Count 

 Turati by Laglaize would be from Warbusi, as the type spe- 

 cimen was, and C. salvadorii, with the ticket " Nouvelle 

 Guinee, 1876," might possibly be from Wandammen, like 

 the specimen originally named C. altijugus. 



I wish to mention that in the same paper of mine on Cas- 

 sowaries (p. 4, or 422 of the volume, line 20), I have wrongly 

 quoted "Ann. Mus. Civ. Gen. vii. p. 717, note, 1877,'' in- 

 stead of " Sclater, Ibis, 1877, p. 372, note." 



It should be understood that my name Clialcopsittacus 

 bruijni has no priority over C. insignis, Oust., bestowed 

 one week before mine. Might not this bird possibly be the 



