Familtj of Laniadce. 295 



probable tbat the passage from the short-billed Shrikes to Tham- 

 nojjhilus, Vieil. will take place among the birds of that continent. 

 Two species, recently published by M. Temminck (Pi. Col, pi. 

 256.) seem to warrant this belief; for in the figure oi Lanius per- 

 sonaius, Tern, we see the straight bill of Thamnophilus, with the 

 cuneated tail of Lanius ; while in that of Lanius virgatus we see 

 the lengthened bill, and truncated tail, of Thamnophilus. M. Tem- 

 minck has not noticed this affinity ; but on the contrary believes 

 this last bird will lead us immediately to the Muscicapidce.* Nous 

 donnons cette espece nouvelle comme pouvant servir de type a une 

 section du genre Lanius, intermediare ouindiquante le passage qui^ 

 des Pie-grieches, conduit an genre Muscicapa de Linne. La force 

 etlalongueur dubec, enrapport de la petite stature^ ne pertnettent 

 point d'associer cette espece et celles qui lui ressemblent plus ou 

 mains avec les oiseaux donnes comme type des vrais Gobe-mouches^ 

 et mains encore avec le moucherolles . M. Temminck judiciously 

 goes on to observe, that the square form of the tail constitutes a 

 marked difference from the European Lanianw ; this is true, but 

 we find that a square, or even tail, is universal among tlie African 

 Thamnophili; while la force et la longueur du bee, is the pecu- 

 liar character of that family. M. Temminck very clearly proves 

 that this bird has no connection either with the genus Muscicapa 

 or Muscipeta ; but has not informed us to which particular group of 

 the Muscicapidw it really indicates a passage ; neither can I pos- 

 sibly conjecture where this group is to be found. On the whole, I 

 am therefore more inclined to believe, from a review of the above 

 argument, that the Lanius virgatus will ofl'er no immediate tran- 

 sition to the Muscicapidw, but rather will represent one of those 

 forms by which we shall quit the short-billed rapacious Shrikes, 

 and enter upon the insectivorous Thamnophili. I wish, neverthe. 

 less, tiiat the reader should bear in mind that this opinion is nut 

 formed from an actual examination of the bird, but solely from the 

 remarks of M. Temminck, which I have already quoted. That 

 this bird will constitute a distinct type, appears evident from the 

 confession of this celebrated ornithologist ; but he has neither dc- 



* It iR ncceifgary to quote this pasiiagc, because the real iiitiiation of this bird 

 is important. 



