236 Letters, Announcements, &^c. 



one brownish-white. Legs yellowish-brown; feet and claws 

 rather darker brown. 



I observe that my examples of P. rama shot in April are 

 nearly as rufous as the above-described small specimens. Those 

 shot in the autumn and winter are much greyer, and darker. 

 The usual length of P. rama is from 5 inches to 5'125 in. ; wing 

 from 2-25 to 2-375. 



Although Dr. Jerdon was satisfied that the birds above de- 

 scribed are distinct from P. rama, I do not think that their 

 small size alone should constitute them a separate species. I 

 am doubtful about it, as I have so often shot diminutive ex- 

 amples of well-known species. I have, however, a single spe- 

 cimen, a female, of a Pliylloscopus, which I cannot make out. 

 This bird exactly resembles in size and colour P. brevirostris, 

 but is entirely without any yellow under the wings ; nor is 

 there any tinge of greenish yellow on the edges of the lesser 

 wing-coverts. This bird Mr. Hume pronounced to be the 

 English Chiffchafi^, P. rufus, because it was white under the 

 wings instead of yellow. But one of the very characteristics of 

 P. rufus, according to Yarrell and Macgillivray, is the having 

 the " under wing-coverts primrose-yellow " and " the axillar 

 feathers and lower wing-coverts pale yellow." 



My bird may be either an accidentally pale-coloured specimen 

 of P. brevirostris, or it may be the new Phijlloscopus mentioned 

 by Dr. Stoliczka in his " Ornithological Observations in the 

 Sutlej Valley," recently published in the 'Journal of the 

 Asiatic Society'*. 



With regard to Phylloscopus brevirostris, I do not myself 

 believe it to be a good species ; for I have repeatedly heard it 

 singing the well-known notes of the ChiffchaflF, and shot the 

 bird as it sang, to make sure. I have specimens with bills as 

 long as any ChiffchafF^s. The bird frequents dal-fields, and 

 sings as it feeds from bush to bush. The song was subdued 

 (the time being only January), but there was no mistaking it. 



I have lately had frequent opportunities of hearing the call- 

 note of Reguloides proregulus. It is very different from that of 

 R. superciliosus, and is extremely shrill, feeble, and tinkling. 

 * [ Vide supra, p. 211.— Ed.] 



