CUCULID^. 253 



mistaken by Lc Vaillant for tlie female of that bird. It is, liowever, 

 not so common. Its food is the same, and its call-note not very 

 unlike. 



500. OxylophUS Afer, Gray ; Cue. Afer, Leach, 

 Zool. Miscel, PI. 31 ; Shaw, Vol. IX., Pt. 1, p. 115 ; 

 Le Coucou, Edolio var., Le Vail., p. 209 ; Oxylophus 

 Vaillantii, Swain. ; Nat. Lib., Vol. 11, p. 188 ; Zool. 

 111., pi. 18 ; C. Levaillantii, Lesson. 



General colour above, black, glossed with green ; wing- 

 feathers ' brownish ; under parts dirty- white ; head crested; 

 throat and neck faintly striped with black ; tail graduated, 

 each feather, with the exception of those in the centre, tipped 

 with white. Length, 12" ; wing, 6" 3'" ; tail, 8". 



Whalberg killed this species on the Limpopo. Le Vaillant did not 

 observe it in South Africa, his specimen having been procured near 

 the Line ; but two specimens have been forwarded to me by Mr. W. 

 Cairncross, who obtained them near Swellendam. 



Genus EUDYNAMYS, Vig. and Horsf. 

 Bill loug, broad, with the culmen curved, and the sides 

 compressed to the tip, which is slightly eraarginated ; the 

 gonys short and angulated ; the nostrils basal, lateral, and 

 placed in a short membranous groove, with the opening large 

 and exposed ; wings moderate, with the fourth and fifth 

 quills equal and longest ; tail lengthened and rounded ; tarsi 

 rather short, robust, covered in front with broad scales ; toes 

 unequal, the outer .anterior toe the longest. 



501. EudynamyS 'Niger ; Le Coucou d Grosbec, 

 Le Vail. Ois. d'Af., No. 214 ; Eudynamys Niger, Bp., 

 p. 101 ; Giiculus Crassirostris, Shaw, Vol. IX., Pt. J, 

 p. 16; Cuculus Honoratus, Linn. ; Le Tachirou, Le 

 Vail., No. 216. 



5 — All black throuj;tiout. This is "La Coucou a Grosbec" 

 of Le Vaillant. 9 — Broaze-brown throughout, speckled 

 with white : " Le Tachirou " of Le Vaillant. Length 

 about 12". 



Le Vaillant has here committed a great blunder. He has described 

 the male and female of one bird as two different species ! affirming 

 that he found the sexes of both. Adhering to a resolution of describ- 

 ing all the species said to be South African, we describe both ths sexes, 

 though we fully agree with Sundevall, that the bird is not South 

 African, and regret that in this and many other instances Le Vaillant 

 should have shown himself so false and untrustworthy. 



