234 Messrs. Salvin and Godman on Mexican Birds. 



"* Catharus mexicanus. 



Mr. Ridgway (Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. x. p. 505) has recently- 

 described a Catharus from Costa Rica under the name of 

 C fumosus, and with it associates the bird from the State of 

 Panama, and draws a comparison between it and a Guate- 

 malan specimen attributed to C. mexicanus. He further 

 expresses his opinion that the birds from Costa Rica and 

 Veragua, referred by us (B. C.-A., Aves, i. p. 6, pi. 2. f. 1) 

 to C. mexicanus, belong to this new form. Trujillo's col- 

 lection adds five specimens to the ten we previously had for 

 examination, so that we now have before us nine specimens 

 from Mexico, three from Guatemala, one from Costa 

 Rica, and two from the State of Panama. Amongst these 

 we do not find a single one that at all suggests the pos- 

 sibility of there being two species represented amongst 

 them. There is some variation in the coloration of the upper 

 surface, and there is a sexual difference in the colour of the 

 head, and this is all. The darkest of our specimens is one 

 from Guatemala, the lightest is from Mexico. We have not 

 seen Mr. Ridgway's specimen ; but of this we are satisfied, 

 that Catharus mexicanus has an uninterrupted range from 

 Eastern Mexico to the State of Panama. Trujillo's speci- 

 mens were all obtained in the neighbourhood of Jalapa. 



i Harporhvnchus ocellatus. 



This well-marked species has hitherto only been known to 

 us from two specimens obtained in the State of Oaxaca, and it 

 has always been considered one of the rarest of Mexican birds. 

 Senor Ferrari-Perezes collection contains several examples, 

 all shot in the neighbourhood of the city of Mexico, showing 

 that the bird must have been strangely overlooked by col- 

 lectors for many years. 



/ CaMPYLORHYNCHUS RUflNUCHA. 



In our ' Biologia Centrali-Americana/ Aves, i. p. 64, 

 we treated this name as a synonym of C. capistratus ; but a 

 series of specimens obtained in the neighbourhood of the 

 town of Vera Cruz now convinces us that this is an error, 

 and that the two birds are perfectly distinct, as was urged 



