Vol. XVIII 

 1901. 



J Tenth Supplement to the A. O. U. Check-List. 311 



501/;. Sturnella magna neglecta vs. ShirneUa ludovkiana {cf. 

 Bangs, Proc. N. Engl. Zool. Club, I, 1899, 20). 

 The description by Brisson, on which Sturnus ludoviciana Linn. 

 is based, does not satisfactorily apply to S. ?n. 7ieglecta, aside from 

 the improbability of Brisson having specimens at that early date 

 collected within the range of neglecta. The attempt to revive 

 the name from Swainson is contrary to current usage in similar 

 cases. 



Quiscalus Vieill. {\Z\6) \s. Scaphidura Swains. (1827). 



{Cf. RiDGWAY, Proc. Wash. Acad. Sci. Ill, 1901, 151). 



Scaphiduriis was proposed as a substitute for Quiscalus., which 



was erroneously supposed to be preoccupied in botany, and is 



consequently a pure synonym of Quiscalus, Scaphidurus as 



reinstated by Ridgway (/. c^^^Megaquiscalus Cassin. 



519. Carpodacus mexicanus frontalis vs. C. m. ohscurus 

 {cf. Oberholser, Auk, XVI, 1899, 186). 

 As Fringilla frontalis Vieillot, 181 7, is simply the reference of 

 Loxia frofitalis Lath, to the genus Fi-iiigilla., and not a new name, 

 Fringilla frontalis Say, 1824, is obviously not invalidated. 



534^-. Fasserina nivalis tOTvnsendi vs. Passer ina townsendi 

 {cf W. Palmer, Fur Seals and Fur Seal Islands N. Pac. 

 Oc. Ill, 1899, 423 ; Grinnell, Condor, III, 1901, 20.) 



The proposed change is not deemed necessary. 



719.1. Thryomanes leucophrys vs.* Thryomancs hewickii leu- 

 cophrys {cf. Oberholser, Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus. XXI, 1898, 

 443-) 

 The reasons given for the proposed change are not considered 



satisfactory. 



725/;. Cistothorus palustris griseus Brewster vs. Cisto- 

 thorus griscus {cf. Wayne, Auk, XVI, Oct. 1899, 362). 



The proposed change is deemed inadvisable at present. 



