Clirysotis canifrons of Lawrence. 105 



restricted, and tliat the thighs are paler. I believe that 

 all caged birds of this species have the yellow colours less 

 bright than wild-shot examples, and that the thighs are more 

 of a dirty yellow, as is the case in one which I have alive 

 now. There is not a great transition from dirty yellow to 

 grey, and 1 think therefore that the two different statements 

 as to the colour of the thighs are not of much importance. 



After having said so much, I hope that Mr. Lawrence will 

 pardon me if I cannot agree with him that he "has shown 

 conclusively " that his C. canifrons is of specific value, and 

 maintain that I had sufficient reasons for uniting C. canifrons 

 with C ocliroptera. 



I quite hold with Mr. Lawrence that there are points in 

 which his supposed C. canifrons agrees rather with C. roth- 

 schikli from Bonaire than with C. ochroptera. But these two 

 species are very nearly allied, and any description taken from 

 one without comparison with the other, especially one taken 

 from a livingbird,must in many respects apply to both. More- 

 over, the alleged habitat, " Aruba '^ — or, since Mr. Lawrence 

 seems now to doubt its correctness, the uncertainty of the 

 locality whence it came — forbids me to refer C. canifrons 

 with any certainty to C rothschildi, that species being known 

 only from Bonaire, whence live birds are not exported, 

 while live birds are brought in multitudes from Northern 

 A'^enezuela, where C. ochroptera abounds. 



Lastly, as regards the measurements, those of Mr. Lawrence 

 are only very little larger than mine, and Mr. Lawrence him- 

 self has stated that they are only " approximate.'^ This is 

 likely to be so when they are taken from a living bird ; 

 besides, according to my experience, the total length is 

 always considerably greater when taken from a living bird 

 or one '' in the flesh " than from a bird-skin of the ordinary 

 make. 



