3l6 Tenth Supplement to the A. O. U. Check-List. \^'^ 



216.1. Forzana coturniculus {cf. McLain, Bull. Cooper Orn. 

 Club, I, 1899, 99) . 



Specimens recently received from California, but not yet criti- 

 cally determined, seem to indicate that it would be premature to 

 take the action proposed, namely, to remove the species from the 

 Check-List. 



[230.1.] Gallinago major (Gmel.) vs. Gallinago media {cf 

 Oberholser, Auk, XVI, 1899, 179). 

 The name media from either Frisch or Gerini is clearly not 

 tenable, these authors being not consistently binominal. 



323. Macrorhamphus scolopaceus vs. Macrorhamphns gris- . 

 ens siolopaceiis {cf, Howe, Auk, XIII, April, 1901, 161). 



277<z. ^gialitis meloda circumcincta vs. ^. meloda. 



Again deferred, the case not having been reinvestigated, 

 through oversight. 



287. Haematopus bachmani vs. H. iiiger (Pallas). {Cf. 

 Sharpe, Hand-List Bds. I, 1899, 147.) 



Meleagris gallopavo merriami Nelson, Auk, XVII, April, 

 1900, 120. 



317. Zenaida zenaida vs. Zenaida meridionalis {cf. Forbes & 

 RoPiNSON, Bull. Liverpool Mus. I, 1899, 36). 



358. Falco richardsoni vs. Falco columbarius richardsoni {cf 

 Bishop, N. Am. Fauna, No. 19, 1900, 75). 



Strigidae vs. Alucojiidce {cf. Coues, Auk, XVII, Jan. 1900, 



65)- 

 Stiix vs. Ahico {cf. CouES, /. ^.). 



377. Surnia ulnla vs. Sumia ulula doliata (Pall.). Cf. 

 Sharpe, Hand-List Bds. I, 1899, 296. 



