486 PICID.E. 



pecker, Picoidcs tridactylus, figured in 1809 by Donovan 

 (Br. B. vi. pi. 143) because, as he said, a " solitary indi- 

 vidual of this was lately shot in the north of Scotland." 

 Nothing more is known of it as a reputed British bird,* and 

 this evidence is too vague for serious consideration. 



Lastly we have another purely American species, the 

 well-known Flicker or Golden-winged Woodpecker, Colaptes 

 auratus — one of the most characteristic birds of the Eastern 

 United States and Canada. An example is recorded (Zool. 

 p. 6327) to have been shot at Amesbury in Wiltshire in the 

 autumn of 1836; but, on the principle already acted upon, 

 its transatlantic origin excludes it from admission to the 

 present work ; it may however be remarked that a specimen 

 of this far-migrating bird is said (Journ. fur Orn. 1856, 

 p. 355) to have been sent from Greenland. 



The Pickhe form in Prof. Huxley's arrangement of birds 

 the group Celeomorpha (Proc. Zool. Soc. 1867, p. 467), since 

 raised to a higher grade by Prof. Parker (Trans. R. Microsc. 

 Soc. 1872, p. 219) under the name of Saurognathee. It 

 may be convenient to state that the substance of Malherbe's 

 pretentious but unsatisfactory ' Monographie des Picides ' 

 (Metz : 1859-62) has been succinctly given in Sundevall's 

 ' Conspectus Avium Picinarum ', and that tbe structure of 

 the European species is the subject of a treatise by Kessler 

 (Bull. Soc. Nat. Mosc. xvii. p. 285) and of a shorter notice 

 by Nitzsch, published many years after his death (Zeitschr. 

 fur Ges. Naturw. 1866, p. 477). 



* The sale-catalogue of Donovan's Museum in 1818 includes as Lot 420 a bird 

 of this species to which is added the remark "very rare; discovered in Scot- 

 land''; but this must not be taken to refer to the reputed Scottish specimen, 

 though perhaps artfully intended to convey that meaning. When he had a really 

 British specimen his words were expressly to the point. A later sale-catalogue in 

 which the name of this species appears is too obviously fraudulent to require 

 further notice (r/. Ibis, 1863, p. 375). 



