''^i89o'."'] PKOCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM. 345 • 



111 proportionate length of bind limb Cliamcva surpasses any of the 

 Wrens and greatly exceeds any Titmouse. 



The tibia and tarsus of Cliama'a are as long as the con-esponding 

 bones in Campylorhynclnis^ and but for the shorter femur of Chamcea the 

 hind limbs of the two birds would be of the same length, although Cam- 

 pylorliynclius is almost one-half the longer of the two, and certainly four 

 times as heavy. 



In the arrangement of the phalangeal articular facets Chamcea is 

 wren-like, the second and fourth being in the same plane, while in the 

 Paruhe the second is above the fourth. 



Chamcva is characterized by a considerable development of the pro- 

 cuemial ridge, this probably bearing some relation to its ground-haunt- 

 ing ]ial)its; still the amount of development of the pro and ectocnemial 

 ridges is variable, both among the Wrens and Tits. 



It appears, then, that in its cranial characters Ghania'ci is much like 

 Psaltriparns, while the shoulder girdle is slightly and the pelvic girdle 

 decidedly wrenlike. 



Dr. Shufeldt's conclusion that Chanum tiuds its nearest relative in 

 PsaUriparns WHS therefore more correct than my own, that Chaniceahe- 

 longed with the Wrens, and I can only say that at the time I ventured 

 this opinion Psaltriparus was not available. 



On the other hand, none of the characters shown in the skeleton of 

 ChuDUva seems sufBcient to warrant placing the genus either with the 

 Wrens or Tits, but rather bear out the intermediate position indicated 

 in the name of Wren-Tit. 



That Chanuea should show resemblances to or leanings toward more 

 than one group of birds is not at all surprising, for, as Professor New- 

 ton most truly says : 



This last aud liigliesfc group of birds (Osciues) is one which, as before hinted, it is 

 is very hard to subdivide. 



iSouie two or three natural, because well differentiated, families are to be found in 

 it. * * ' 



But the great mass, comprehending incomparably the greatest number of genera 

 aud species of birds, defies auy sure means of separation. Here and' there, of course, 

 a good many individual genera may be picked out capable of iho most accurate 

 definition, but genera like these are in the minority and most of the remainder present 

 several apparent alliances from which we are at a loss to choose that which is near- 

 est. * * * We may take examples in which what we may call the Thrush form, the 

 Tree creeper form, the Finch form, or the Crow form is pushed to the most extreme 

 point of differentiation, but we shall find that between theoutposts thus established 

 there exists a regular chain of intermediate stations so intimately connected that no 

 precise lines of demarkation can be drawn cutting off" one from the other.* 



Limited as my studies of the skeletal characters of the Oscines have 

 been they are sufficient to emphasize the above remarks, and it is 

 probably not assuming too much to say that with a sufficiently large 

 series of specimens any two oscinine birds may be osteologicaly linked 

 together. 



•^ Art. Ornithology, Ency. Brit., ix, vol. xviii, p. 47. 



