1906 J Correspondence. 483 



place. It is, however, of very little importance whether the real type 

 is in Paris or in Boston, for we have, we think, conclusively shown that 

 the specimens with a short, blackish bill are but the young of the long- 

 billed D. rostripallens. That Mr. Elliot did not recognize the example 

 in the Lafresnaye collection as a young bird, is not at all surprising as his 

 material, when writing the review of the genus Dendrornis, was evidently 

 altogether unsatisfactory. 



It is, we believe, sufficiently demonstrated in the foregoing lines that 

 the labelling of the Lafresnaye collection has not been done with proper 

 discrimination '), and from the fact that specimens are marked "types," 

 it does not always follow that they are really entitled to be considered as 

 such. We may conclude these remarks by saying that we have not been 

 led by the intention "of disparaging the good name of another institution," 

 but we deemed it a duty to call attention to obvious errors, in order to 

 prevent in future similar mistakes as those which have resulted from 

 wrongly labelled specimens in the case of Synallaxis azarce and Musci- 

 capara boliviano,. We express the hope that our American fellow-workers 

 will take up the matter and that they may enlighten us about the way 

 in which the supposed types in the Lafresnaye collection are labelled, 

 by whom they are marked as types, and about the exact data on the origi- 

 nal labels of the collectors if such are extant, as we propose to do shortly 

 in a paper on the specimens in the Paris Museum. 

 Very truly yours, 



Dr. A. Menegaux, 

 C. E. Hellmayr. 



[The foregoing communication from the authors of the ' Passeres Tracheo- 

 phones' of the Paris Museum of Natural History is a most welcome con- 

 tribution to the pages of 'The Auk.' Had the explicit information now 

 conveyed been given in the introduction to the series of papers reviewed 

 in the preceding issue of this Journal (antea, p. 351) there would have been 

 no basis for the strictures referred to above. As a result of them we have 

 now information all ornithologists interested in the South American ornis 

 will be grateful for, presented as it is in such a commendable spirit. 



It is to be hoped that some one fully equipped for the task will soon go 

 over the types in the Lafresnaye Collection in the Boston Society of Natural 

 History and make known their real status and history, so far as may be 

 possible. — J. A. A.] 



1 Cfr. also Salvin's remarks in 'The Ibis,' 1874, p. 321. 



