532 Mr. Vigors on some new subjects of Zoology. 



sequence, it is true, to science in general, by whom the produc- 

 tions of Nature may be characterized, provided the task is accom- 

 plished with ability. But every country ought at least to take its 

 share in the general labours of the science, and more particularly 

 in those departments of it, which its peculiar resources and 

 opportunities afford it the means of studying and illustrating 

 to advantage. We certainly give a tacit assent to the imputation 

 which is so generally cast upon this country by continental writers, 

 that we possess no school of Zoology, when we actually apply to 

 foreign naturalists to come into the recesses of our collections, 

 and appropriate to themselves the descriptions of our choicest 

 treasures. This inactivity on our part, or carelessness, or what- 

 ever else it may be considered, that has hitherto prevailed, is 

 deeply to be lamented ; but it is not too late to retrieve it. We 

 have still subjects remaining in our collections, by hundreds or 

 rather by thousands, unfigured and uncharacterized ; and our 

 extensive connections abroad constantly supply us with a 

 succession of new and interesting forms and species. May we 

 not hope that the possessors of these treasures may be induced to 

 bring them into light: and thus contribute to those higher and 

 more generalizing views, with which the science is now usually 

 cultivated, and which are advanced in proportion to the extent to 

 which the works of Nature are made known ? 



The Platycercus auriceps was originally described as a variety 

 of P. Paciftcus in the " General Synopsis of Birds," and was 

 first named and characterized as a distinct species by the late 

 M. Kuhl, in his recent visit to this country. It differs from 

 P. Pacificus by its inferiour size ; by the red markings of the head 

 being restricted to a narrow band on the front ; and by the yellow 

 colour of the vertex of the head, and the scarlet of the crissum. 

 M. Kuhl, in his Monograph on the family [p. 46.], asserts, 

 that it is a New Holland species: and the specimen in the British 

 Museum is marked as coming from that country : most probably, 

 after M. Kuhl. Dr. Latham, on the contrary, states that the spe- 

 cimen he described, which was in the collection of the late Sir 

 Joseph Bunks, came from New Caledonia. I have reason to suppose 

 that the bird now in the British Museum is the same specimen that 



