Recently published Ornithological Works. 605 



but complain of being accused with omitting all mention of 

 the new species described in it I As regards the assertion that 

 two species described in Proc. U.S. Nat, Mus. vol, i., should 

 have been included by the English recorder in his Aves for 

 1878, inasmuch as, althovigh the volume is dated 1879, the 

 sheet is dated at foot Dec. 1878, we reply that even the sheet 

 in question was not available until 1879 was well advanced 

 and the record for 1878 had been closed. As for part iv. of 

 the ' Proceedings of the Zoological Society^ for 1879, although, 

 as they state correctly, it was not issued till 1st April 

 1880, yet Messrs. Reichenow and Schalow have no suffi- 

 cient excuse for their omissions to record the new species 

 therein; for they were named in the scientific abstracts of 

 the meetings of that society, similar to the German Sitzung- 

 berichte, and the latest, that of 16th December, must have 

 been issued on the 18th or 19th of that month. The English 

 recorder had therefore a perfect right to enrol species so pub- 

 lished in Aves for 1879. 



" It may possibly have been a little hard upon the German 

 recorders to have expected them to have included in the list 

 of their omissions the genera and species described by Mr. 

 S. B. Dole in the ' Hawaiian Annual,^ a publication which 

 was not at that time generally accessible, although the 

 English recorder had managed to get hold of it. 



''The last point to which we shall reply is one which 

 bears a somewhat different aspect. Messrs. Reichenow and 

 Schalow accuse us of having had the shortsightedness to in- 

 clude in the list of their omissions for 1879 a certain Astur 

 sharpii, ' respecting which the English ' Record ' says 

 '' omitted from 1878 '\' To show our readers how the matter 

 really stands, we will quote from the Zool. Rec. Aves, p. 36. 

 "'Astur sharpii, sp. n., E. Oustalet, Bull. Soc. Philom. 



(6) ii. p. 25, Marianne Islands. [Omitted from Zool. 



Rec. xii.] ^ (i. e. 1875) not 1878. 

 " 'Astur sharpii, sp. n. \_nec Oust.], distinguished from A. 



cruentus, Gould; E. P. Ramsay, P. Linn, Soc. N. S. W. 



iii. p. 173, Port Moresby/ 

 " The latter is, of course, the species which Messrs. Reich- 



