^'°.'.v"l Rcrriif Lifrrafiin: 65 



reference to the Theory of Natural Selection.' It was illustrated 

 with lantern slides. Remarks followed by the Chair and by 

 Dr. Allen. 



At the conclusion of this paper the Union adjourned to meet 

 in Washington, D. C, November ii, 1895. 



The attendance at this Congress, together with the large 

 number of new members elected, not exceeded by any year, was 

 particularly gratifying. It shows the continued interest in orni- 

 thology in this country. 



Jnu. H. Sage, 



Secretary. 

 Portland, Corifi.., Nov. jo, i8g4. 



RECENT LITERATURE. 



Elliot's Monograph of the Pittidse. — Part I\' of this superb mono- 

 graph bears date September, 1894. The eleven plates illustrate the fol- 

 lowing species : Eucichla boschi. Pitta gratiatina (on the plate " Pitta 

 granatitia-inalaccensis" by typographical error), P. gratiatina t>or»eens/s, 

 P. mefooraua, P. ca^ruleitorques, P. atricapilla, P. cyanca (two plates, 

 giving old and voung), P. bracliyura, P. baudi and P. erythrogastra. 

 So little appears to be known of these birds in life that generally (/*. 

 cyanea and P. bracli\ura form exceptions) the text is limited to descrip- 

 tions of the plumage and the discussion of points of nomenclature in 

 cases where names have been misapplied. An interesting case of this 

 sort is furnished by the Pitta atricapilla of Quoy and Gaimard, who 

 described the bird in 1830 and figured it in 1S33. Later Lesson claimed 

 that the name was preoccupied, having been previously given by Cuvier 

 to another species. The name, however, so far as Mr. Elliot can deter- 

 mine, was never published by Cuvier and was doubtless merely a MS. 

 museum name. Quoj and Gaimard's bird was later renamed nova-guinw, 

 under which name it has since been universally known. In restoring the 

 name atricapilla to this species Mr. Elliot acts strictly in accordance with 

 the rule of priority, and makes a defense of the stand he takes which is 

 well worth quoting, since this is but one of a class of cases constantly 

 arising to vex the systematist. He says : " The law of priority is very 

 clear in regard to the treatment of such cases, but some naturalists object 

 to have it enforced on the ground of expedience, and because it uould be 



