554 Recently published Ornithological Works. 



the dense scrub about thirty miles from Athcrton,in Queens- 

 land. The nest is an open cup-shaped structure placed in 

 or near a tree-trunk. iThe eggs are of a nearly uniform 

 faint creamy or warm white, " totally different from those 

 of the typical Bower-birds, which are noted for their 

 strikingly contrasted colours and the peculiarity of their 

 markings." The curious habits of the males and the large 

 bowers which they construct are described from Mr. Sharp's 

 information. He also tells ns that the hen builds a bower 

 for herself, similar to that of the male, but ranch smaller. 



The Tooth - billed Bower -bird, which was originally 

 described by Ramsay in 1875, has also long remained 

 unknown as regards its nesting-habits, but Mr. Sharp has 

 solved this riddle also. As is told us by Mr. North, 

 Mr. Sharp found the first nest of this bird about five miles 

 from Atherton, in N.E. Queensland, on the 7th of November, 

 1908, and a second on the following day. The nest is a 

 frail structure very loosely built, as will be seen by 

 ^Ir. North's figure of it. The first nest contained two 

 eggs of a uniform creamy-brown colour, resembling very 

 much the eggs of ^lurcedus maculosus. Strictly speaking, 

 however, Scoinpo'ctes is not a Bower-bird, for it makes 

 no bovver. On the other hand, it is not a true Cat-bird, 

 for it forms a playground, which the Cat-birds do not. 

 Mr. Sharp's field-notes on both these species, which are 

 given by Mr. North at full length, are of great interest, and 

 he well deserves the best thanks of all ornithologists for 

 the trouble he has taken in the matter. 



72. North on a neiv Australian Parrot. 



[Note on some Living Examples of Psephofus dissimilis. By Alfred 

 J. North. Vict. Nat. xxv. p. 176 (1909^] 



Mr. North examined at Sydney 16 living specimens of a 

 Parrakeet brought from Pine Creek, some 200 miles S.E. of 

 Port Darwin, in the Northern Territory of South Australia. 

 At first he regarded them as referable to Psephotus 

 dissimilis of Collett described from the same locality {cf. 

 Hartert, Nov. Zool. xii. p. 21 1), but on further examination 



