538 U. S. p. R. E. EXP. AND StRVEVS — ZOOLOGY— GENERAL REPORT. 



particularlj' tbe case on the outer webs of the tertials and of the middle tail feathers, and to a 

 less marked extent on the inner webs. In some specimens of S. magna the dark bands are 

 entirely transverse on the exposed part of the tertials, but in the concealed portions they are 

 more or less confluent, and in all cases they are broader. The tip of the middle tail feathers of 

 S. magna very rarely shows a few completely transverse bands, but they become confluent 

 towards the middle, and exhibit a general tendency to angularity, whereas in S. neglecta the 

 sides of the bands are more or less parallel and, in fact, often widen at the exterior, and become 

 nearly or quite confluent. 



There is no difference observable in the under parts, except that, as a general thing, the sides, 

 tibia, and crissum are whiter, although this is not constant. There is, however, a slight tinge 

 of reddish in the white of S. magna scarcely found in neglecta. The yellow is rather lighter. 

 There seems to be a constant tendency in neglecta to an extension of the yellow of the throat 

 over on to the side of the lower mandible, instead of being confined strictly to the inferior surface 

 of the head and neck. 



To sum up the preceding remarks it may be stated that the real difference between the 

 species lies in the greater tendency to narrow transverse bands on the upper surfaces, especially 

 of the middle tail feathers. Although there is an average difference in the paler tone of color 

 above and below, yet there are specimens, especially from Washington Territory, in which such 

 difference does not exist. 



The yellow on the side of the lower mandible appears to be a pretty good mark. It is 

 not to be denied, however, that the difiiculties of separating the specimens of the two species 

 are exceedingly great, and that in many cases it is necessary to take an average of characters, 

 no single one furnishing a suflSciently permanent peculiarity, and for quite a number of 

 western specimens, as 8621, from Fort Thorn, 8604, 8608, 8610, from Fort Steilacoom, and 8624, 

 from Presidio, California, I am entirely at a loss which name to assign. No. 8608, in fact, agrees 

 in every respect with eastern sjiecimens. 



In discussing the question of specific distinction between the two birds, the remarkable 

 difference in their notes, as attested by all observers from Lewis and Clarke down to the present 

 day, must be kept in mind. 



