^^'y!'] PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM. 607 



"Manual of North American Birds" (p. 334), based largely on a perfect 

 specimen obtained in northern Yucatan by Mr. G. F. Gaumer; the 

 extrejnely worn plumage of the type and the other specimen obtained 

 with it by Dr. Schott having precluded a clear perception of the spe- 

 cific characters. The following year Dr. Sclater also recognized it as a 

 distinct species and gave it (Cat. B. Brit. Mus., xiv, 1888, p. 260) a clear 

 diagnosis, based on additional specimens collected by Mr. Gaumer. 

 He also admitted its relationship to M. stoUdus (Gosse), first indicated 

 in the key of my "Manual," stating that it "clearly belongs to the 

 Antillean group of M. stoUdus, with broad rufous margins to the inner 

 webs of the rectrices." 



The next year Messrs Salvin and Godman {BioJoqia Centrali-Ameri- 

 cana, Aves, ii, pt. 11, March, 1889, p. 03) also recognized it as a species, 

 but assigned it to the group of M. lawrencii, and qualified their opin. 

 ion of its validity by the statement that they could "see very little dif- 

 ference between these Yucatan birds [M. yucatanensis Lawr.] and the 

 form of M. lawrencii found in eastern Mexico, from Vera Cruz north- 

 wards," though admitting that " compared with M. lawrencii from more 

 southern localities, including Yucatan itself,* the amount of red in the 

 tail of .1/. yucatanensis becomes a more conspicuous cli uacter, and the 

 difterence between the two is more obvious." 



More recently, Mr. J. A. Allen seems to be suspicious of its specific 

 distinctness, and says (Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist iv, No. 1, Art. xvii 

 Dec. 29, 1892, p. 345) that " the two original specimens * * » * are 

 both in very worn plumage, and were these the only specimens known 

 I should not hesitate to refer them to 31. lawrencii:' He further says 

 that " while the types bear a strong resemblance in coloration to worn 

 specimens of il/. fyrannvhis [a South American species not referred to 

 in my "Manual"] in which the amount of rufous in the tail is below 

 the normal, this is evidently not the species to which they bear the 

 •closest affinity." 



These somewhat conflicting vicAvs have induced me to reexamine the 

 .subject, although the number of specimens of 31. yucatanensis accessible 

 to me has not increased since the "Manual" was written, except that 

 the type, not then examined, has been borrowed for the purpose from 

 the American Museum of Natural History. This reexamination and 

 comparison of specimens fully confirms my reference of the species to 

 the typical section of the genus, as indicated in the "Manual" and 

 indorsed by Dr. Sclater in the British Museum catalogue, the form of 

 the bill in 31. yucatanensis being Very different from that of if. km- 

 rencii. 



For comparison with the three specimens of 3f. yucatanensis I have 

 selected all the National Museum specimens of the 3f. lawrencii type 

 from Yucatan {3f. I. olivawens, nobis, four in number) and five examples 



* These Yucatan birds are M. lawrencii oHvascens, nobis, those from Vera Crnz 

 northward boiu"; true M. lawrencii. 



