( 282 ) 



wing (wliich we measure 3oI mm.) is only '■) mm. loiigiT tliaii in (he latter ; moreover, 

 the author evidently forgot to think of rri.tfaiinjis, wliich its also a subspecies of 

 tinvaeliotlaiidiai'. Worst of all, lie does not state thedift'erencesfrora 'r.noiyifhollfiiidiae 

 Horaekollandiae; for the latter he fixed the type locality as New Sontli Wales, 

 which seems to belong to the same fannal region as Victoria. Probably Mr. 

 Mathews regards as "typical" nopnchollaiidiac a large form with brownish face 

 and brownish nnderside, inhabiting New South Wales only. If that be so, his 

 riorduni would proliably be the same, as one of his two specimens (a young bird) 

 is brown underneath, the other almost pure white. If we take this view, and 

 presume that the birds from Queenslatid, West Australia, and North-west, as well 

 as those from South Australia, are always white or nearly white below, the latter 

 could be separated under Mr. Mathews' first name : perplexa. 



7. Tyto novaehollandiae melvillensis Math. 



Aiialral Avian Rerord. i. 2, p. 35 (April 1912 Melville Island). 



Diagnosis : " Differs from 7'. n. /irr/ilr.ra in its smaller size and darker buff 

 below." Measurements not given. 



Mr. JIathcws possesses two specimens, both marked " ? " : one is aiijuirently 

 adult, another, unfortunately marked as tiie type, is a young bird with remains of 

 down. The adult " ? " has a wing of 3iH) mm., which would be small lor a female, 

 but is it correctly se.xed ? This bird is not darker buff below than ^^ perjilcxa." 

 The other sjiecimen is underneatii darker buff than " j/nr/i/fxa'" ; its wiug measures 

 over 'A'M mm., but cannot be relied upon, as it is a young bird. Both have the upper 

 surface a shade darker than the other owls of this species from Australia. It is there- 

 fore possible, but — considering the variation of Barn-owls — needs to be confirmed by 

 a letter series, that the Alelville owl differs slightly and will have to be called 

 mcltiUcnHis. Th(' material on whicli Mr. Mathews based his new subspecies would 

 not have been sufKcient for us to separate it. 



All which a study of these forms admits of being done at jiresent is to assume — 



(A) T. n. iiocacliollandiae, u larger and (underneath) darker form from Victoria 



and New South Wales (synonym r'wrdani), to be confirmed by a 

 series I 



(B) T. noracliollandi<i(' )i<ijih'xa. from the rest of Australia (underneath never 



l)rownish ? and averaging smaller, synonyms kimberU, inarkiuii, irhitei). 



(C) T. nomehollandinc mdcilleusis from Melville Island — a doubtful form 



which rests on one adult— apparently wrongly sexed — and one juvenile 

 specimen, and which requires further confirmation ! 



Besides these birds we have, in the Tring Museum, two remarkable specimens 

 of the species 7'. noiyudwllniidiac. One is a skin purchased from a dealer in 

 London, without locality, but jirobably from New Sontli Wales. It is above of a 

 bright yellowish orange-buff, with less extended black markings than usually, and 

 the white ones rather more extended. Underside pale yellowish buff, whitish in 

 the middle of the abdomen and belly. Spots on underside large, flanks with arrow- 

 head-shaped blackish spots. It is a young bird in its first full plumage, and, 

 judging from the size of the feet and bill, a female. We can, of course, not say if 

 this one specimen is a variety of T. n. nocaehollandiae, which we believe it is, or a 

 local form from an uncertain locality. There is a somewhat similar example in the 

 British Museum. 



