HARPORHYNCHUS. 47 
Smith- Collee-| Sex : alee al } | 
sonian, tor’s | and Locality. Gollecrenan| Received from | Collected by 
No. No. | Age. 5 | 
16,511 | 1,090 | @ Cape St. Lucas. 1859, | Dep MAME MRS Baty Nasrevetee 
12,957 | 496| ¢ “ ane abla 8 20 | Va RM an 
13,090 | 764 | ¢ “ sce o alae beers 
26,310 | 1,089 | ¢ “ Spring, ’59. | “ Pe ie ges 
{ 
(12,957.) 10.50. Iris orange. (13,090.) 11.00. Iris orange. 
Harporhynchus lecontei. 
Toxostoma leconteit, Lawn. Ann. N. Y. Lye. V, Sept. 1851, 109 (Fort 
Yuma).—Harporhynchus lecontei, Bonar. C. R. XXVIII, 1854, 57.— 
Is. Notes Delattre, 39.—Bairp, Birds N. Am. 1858, 350, pl. 1. 
Hab. Gila River; Fort Yuma. 
The specimen upon which the species was based by Mr. Lawrence, 
collected at Fort Yuma, by Dr. Leconte, still remains unique, and 
of H. crissalis a second specimen only has been obtained. It is not 
a little remarkable that two species so large and conspicuous should 
be both from the same region, and so very rare. With much the 
same shade of coloration, H. crissalis is a little darker, the under 
tail coverts deep chestnut instead of rusty fulvous; the bill is much 
longer and more slender, the tail also much longer. 
No. 53. Fort Yuma. Cab. of Geo. N. Lawrence. 
HMarporhynchus crissalis. 
Harporhynchus crissalis, Henry, Pr. A. N. Sc. May, 1858.—Barrp, Birds 
N. Am. 1858, 350, pl. lxxxii. 
Hab. Region of the Gila River, to Rocky Mts. 
A second specimen (11,533) of this rare species is larger than the 
type, but otherwise agrees with it. Its dimensions are as follows :— 
Length before skinning, 12.50; of skin, 12.50; wing, 3.90; tail, 6.50; its 
graduation, 1.45 ; 1st quill, 1.50; 2d, .41; bill from forehead (chord of curve), 
1.65, from gape, 1.75, from nostril, 1.30; curve of culmen, 1.62; height of 
bill at nostril, .22; tarsus, 1.30; middle toe and claw, 1.12. 
The bill of this species, though not quite so iong as in redivivus, 
when most developed, is almost as much curved, and much more 
slender—the depth at nostrils being but .22, instead of .26. The 
size of this specimen is equal to the largest of redivivus (3,932) ; the 
tail absolutely longer. The feet are, however, considerably smaller, 
the claws especially so; the tarsus measures but 1.30, instead of 
1.52; the middle claw .29, instead of .36. With these differences 
in form, however, it would be impossible to separate the two 
generically. 
