448 MR. C. BODEN KLOSS ON 
This genus has never been satisfactorily reviewed—a proceed- 
ing that is much called for—and the uncertainty which exists 
regarding the status of some of its birds and their names makes 
unanimity on the part of independent workers difficult. 
Mr. Baker may, of course, be correct in his condemnation of 
my /irst determination, but at present he is regarding all birds, not 
seen by him, as similar to specimens obtained by another collector 
in another locality—scarcely a safe conclusion in this instance. 
Hume’s description of intermedia is very indirect, and as my 
koratensis is called into question and referred to it, I will not 
express an opinion again until I have examined and compared 
further material. 
Mr. Baker says that the birds I have called polcoptera * are 
young specimens of neglecta. Perusal of Hume's original des- 
cription of this form (Stray Feathers, V, 1877, pp. 203-5) based 
on “numerous lovely specimens” shows that its wing-length ranges 
from 96 to 106 mm. The types of polioptera had wings of 104 
and 106 mm; my Siamese birds were rather larger, as I pointed 
out (wings measured flattened 109—112 mm.), but Sharpe’s two 
specimens do not, of course, indicate the variation in size of his 
form. If Hume has fairly indicated the size of neglecta (and I 
know of no Jarger dimensions on record) it is impossible to believe 
that the greater are young examples of the lesser. 
I have accepted as “neglecta a number of specimens from 
Peninsular Siam having Hume’s measurements, and only radically 
differing from culminata Hay, of the Malay States, to which 
Oates rightly says it is allied, in having the vent and undertail 
coverts white instead of grey, as he notes (Fauna Brit. Ind., Birds, 
1, p. 493). 
Hume mentions no white on the inner webs of the primaries 
in neglecta: on the other hand, polioptera has the inner webs broad- 
ly white. The birds which I allocate to these two agree respective- 
ly in these particulars: the latter has much larger white tips to 
* The references to Ogilvie Grant ( Ibis 1918, p. 597, line 14: lege 
Kloss) and to Herbert (Ibis 1918, p. 594, line 11: lege Hartert) are no doubt 
slips of the pen, but do not help to make Mr, Baker’s meaning clearer, 
JOURN, NAT. HIST, SOC. SIAM, 
