Zoological Affinities of Aphanapteryx. 275 



Consequently, if the Solitaire of Bourbon (Reunion), and the 

 Didus herberti of Schlegel be left in the genus Apterornis, the 

 Oiseau bleu as well as the Poule rouge au bee de Becasse of Caiiche 

 should be separated from it, and the generic name of Aphana- 

 pteryx, proposed by Herr von Frauenfeld, ought to be kept for 

 the last species. But, on the other hand, it is plain that Aphana- 

 pteryx imperialis (Plate VII.) is nothing else than the bird figured 

 in Van den Broeeke's voyage (fig. 1), to which Prof. Schlegel has 

 given the name Didus broeckii ; and this cannot give rise to any 

 contradiction, since the learned Director of the Museum at Ley den 

 has distinguished this species from those which had a straight 

 instead of a curved bill. The specific designation proposed by 

 Prof. Schlegel ought then, according to the law of priority, to 

 take the place of that which has been more recently given, and 

 Aphanapteryx imperialis should bear the name of Aphanapteryx 



BROECKII. 



This bird, by the side of Ocydromus, holds the place which 

 that occupies by the side of the Rails ; and these relations are 

 of the same nature as those which exist between Porphyria and 

 Not amis ; and it belongs undoubtedly to the family Rallidce 

 — conclusions which the study of its external characters would 

 not have allowed to be established. 



EXPLANATION OF THE WOODCUTS. 



Fig. 1, p. 258, a copy in facsimile of Van den Broecke's fifrnre. 

 2, ,, „ ,, Herbert's figure. 



.3, p. 261, lower mandible from Mauritius, upper vieAv. 



4, „ „ „ ,, side view. 



5, p. 265, tarso-metatarsus from Mauritius, front view. 



6, „ ,, „ „ _ outer view. 



7, p. 268, tibia from Mauritius, front view. 



8, „ „ „ inner view. 



XXIV. — On the Kingfishers of South Africa. 

 By R. B. Sharpe. 



The present paper is written chiefly with the view of correcting 

 a few errors which have found a place in Mr. Layard's ' Birds 

 of South Africa.^ The different criticisms upon, and reviews of, 

 this work which have appeared have not touched particularly on 



