Notice of Audubon's Birds of America. 138 
must confess that, familiar as we have been with the S. autum- 
nalis, we never imagined that its claim to a distinct species ever 
would be questioned. We have seen it repeatedly in August and 
September on its way south, but never does the writer re- 
. member to have scen it in company with the Sylvia parus. It 
-may be the case, but we are not yet satisfied that it is so. 
~The Sylvia rara is the young male of S.azwrea. Both birds, 
— both names, are to be found in Bonaparte and in et 
“The Sylvia Childrenii of Audubon’s Biography, is the imma- 
ture bird of the common summer yellowbird of authors. This 
is an important correction, as writers have since been misled by 
the error. It has been adopted by Nuttall, as well as by Rev. Mr. 
Peabody, in his report on the birds of Massachusetts. As the 
bird breeds, to the certain knowledge of the writer, in this imma- 
ture plumage, it is impossible for beginners not to be perplexed 
without the knowledge of this fact, namely, that the absence of 
the reddish spots on the breast shows it to be a young bird, hoger 
not a different species. 
- The Sylvia palmarum of Bonaparte, is the same bird stith 
the S. petechia of the same as well as of other authors. 
- The Sylvia pusilla of Wilson, and the S. sphagnosa of Au- 
dubon, Nuttall, and Bonaparte, are not new species, but identical 
with Sylvia Canadensis of esareccined cp ie He young wiih in 
r ¢ different states of plumage. © 
: ~The Sylvia tigrina of Sonahietes is not the same with the bird 
described under that name by Gmelin and Latham, but is iden- 
tical with Sylvia montana of authors. 
~The bird described by Audubon as a new species, under the - 
name of Sylvia Roscoe, is the young of the common Maryland 
yellow-throat. This too, is an important correction, 
These are some of the more important corrections of errors of 
former works, to be found in the volume on our table. They 
are all important, and possibly further investigation may add to 
their number, and thus reduce yet more the number of species. 
It will be remembered that this reduction is one of the most 
difficult for naturalists to determine correctly. Writers are much 
more prone to create new species than to cancel previous ones 
and to study out their identity with others. The young stu+ 
dent, therefore, owes Mr. Audubon a debt of gratitude for much 
labor and perplexity saved him by these investigations. 
