184 Count T. Salvador! on the 



with transverse scales ; and if such is the case, the two genera 

 belong to two different sections *. 



The geographical distribution of L. olivacea would be as 

 follows : — The type specimen is said to have been from Guinea, 

 which is very probable, but we have no sure proof of this, as 

 I do not think that the name of the collector is known. 

 Besides, the bird is found in Prince's and S. Thomas's 

 Islands. It appears from Cassin's statements that Du- 

 chaillu ; s specimens collected on the Camma, Muni, and 

 Moonda Rivers belong to the same species, as well as the speci- 

 mens from Kameroon collected by Reichenow and Zenker ; 

 Dr. Reichenow also includes Angola in the range inhabited 

 by L. olivacea, and mentions Schiitt as the name of the 

 collector. From what I have said, Ashantee is inhabited by 

 the same species, which therefore appears to be distributed 

 over the western coast of Africa from Angola to Ashantee, 

 and to be also found in the islands of the Bight of Guinea 

 (Prince's Island and S. Thomas Island). 



As regards the Liberian birds mentioned by Biittikofer, I 

 have some doubt as to whether they may not belong to a 

 distinct species. I have seen one of the specimens (a male), 

 collected by Biittikofer at Sofore Place, June 11, 1880, which 

 differs strikingly from that which I have from Prince's Island, 

 and from the description of L. olivacea given by several 

 authors, in having the greater wing-coverts of the secondaries 

 not dark purple or steel-blue, but golden coppery on the outer 

 web, slightly edged with purple, resembling in that respect 

 Hagedashia hagedash. Should this character be constant in 

 adult specimens from Liberia, the form residing there would be 

 specifically different, aud I propose for it the name Lampribis 



* Quite recently, while this paper was passing - through the press, 

 Dr. Dubois has published the twelfth fascicule of the ' Synopsis Avium ' 

 containing the Family Ibididaj. There is a note concerning Ibis olivacea, 

 which he rightly declares totally different from Hagedashia liagedash, 

 but he has failed to recognise that Ibis olivacea and Lampribis vara are 

 one and the same species. Besides, he has attributed Dubus's species to 

 the genus Lophotibis, a point which f. am not able to discuss; but should 

 he be right, then Lamjjribis would not be different from Lophotibis. For 

 the present I am inclined to consider the two genera distinct. 



