1877.] ON SOME BIEDS DESCEIBED BY ME. HUME. 511 



cannot be specifically separated. And I observe that Mr. Hume (Str. Feath. 1877, p. 59) 

 expresses an almost confident opinion that D. fulviis, W'Men, = Trichostoma minus, Hnme, in 

 which case T. minus will also become a synonym oil), tickelli, and not, as I had suggested (Blyth, 

 B. Burma, no. 3GG), of TricJiostoma ahhotti. 



The figure (Plate X. in orig.) of Pellorneum suhochraceum, Swinh..,=Pellomeum jni/ius, 

 Hume, is taken from an example obtained by Lieutenant Wardlaw Ramsay on the Karen hills ; 

 and examples of this species collected by Mr. Limborg above Mectan do not differ. 



The figures of Dri/mocataphus tickelli (Plate XI. f. 1, in orig.) and of Trichostoma ahhotti 

 (Plate XI. f. 2, in orig.) are from Tenasserim examples, obtained by Mr. Limborg. 



Letter on the plates o/ vEgithina viridissima and Prinia rafflesi, in ' The Ibis,' from the ibis, is: 



Marquis of Tweeddale to the Editors o/' The Ibis ' (October 1877). ?• '^^'' 



Sirs, — Permit me, in the cause of scientific exactness, to remark that the artist has coloured the 

 crissum oi jEgithina viridissima d (Ibis, 1877, pi. v.) green instead of bright yellow, and that he 

 has made the subdued brown marks on the under surface of the rectrices of Prinia rafflesi 

 (ih. pi. vi. f. 1) terminal instead of subterminal. 



Yours, &c., 

 Chislehurst, July 7, 1877. TwEEDDALE. 



Letter on Horeites sericea, Alcippe magnirostris, and some Birds described hy Mr. Hume, from ibis, 1877, 

 the Marquis of Tweeddale to the Editors of ' The Ibis ' (October 1877). P- '^^''• 



Sirs, — In the April number of ' Stray Feathers ' for this year (p. 57, note), Mr. Hume remarks 

 that Horeites sericea, Walden (Blyth, B. Burma, no. 392), from the Karen hills, is uncommonly 

 close to Phjlloscopus pallidijies, Blanford (J. A. S. B. 1872, pt. ii. p. 162, t. vii. f. 1). Since 

 describing H. sericea I have been able to compare it with Sikhim examples, marked P. jiallidipcs, 

 Blanf. ; and I find that the two birds are identical. The widely erroneous generic position 

 assigned to his species by Mr. Blanford is my only excuse for being guilty of the offence of 

 bestowing a fresh title on a previously described and admittedly good species. Mr. Hume also 

 observes {t. c. p. 60) that Alcippe magnirostris, Walden, from the Karen hills {t. c. no. 369) is 

 A. fhayrei, Blyth (J. A. S. B. 1845, p. 601). Mr. Blyth may have been in error when he iden- 

 tified (B. Burma, no. 368) A. phayrei with A. nipalcnsis ; but I am unable for the moment to 

 decide whether A. magnirostris is the same as the Arracan species, my collection being packed up. ibis, 1877, 



Besides several birds to which are given distinctive titles in this number, by Mr. Hume, P- ■18S. 

 " if reaUy new," or " if considered distinct," &c.j i^thopyga sanguinipectus, Walden (Ann. & Mag. 



3u2 



