342 Zoological Society : — 



' Compli'inent aux opuvres de Buffon,' M. Lesson has elevated to 

 gonerio rank l)y the name of Leffrioci/iclus, a hird previously described 

 in the ' Annales des Sciences Natnrelles' (ix. p. 1G8, anno 1838) as 

 PefrodroHia mcxieavu. AVhilc lately in Paris I was favoured by 

 Prince Charles Bonaparte with a sight of several volumes of verj'^ 

 l)eantiful coloured drawings of birds and other animals of which 

 M. Lesson in his lifetime had published descriptions only. IVLLesson's 

 descriptions, as is w ell known, are so short and often so inaccurate as 

 to render identification of the originals almost impossible ; and these 

 drawings are therefore very valuable, and, as they are to be disposed 

 of, will, it is to be hoped, ])ass into the possession of some public 

 institution, where access to them may always l)e had. Among them 

 is a plate of the so-called Leyriocinclus, which, there is no difficulty 

 in perceiving at a glance, is a member of Lafresnaye's geniis Ram- 

 pJiocinclns, and so closely resembling the II. brachyurus, the type of 

 that genus, as to leave little doubt that the two generic names are co- 

 equal. But if Lesson's locality is correct (Vera Cruz), which, how- 

 ever, I am hardly inclined to believe, the Lcyriocincbis mexicanvs may 

 possibly be a new species of this peculiar form — hitherto considered 

 as confined to the Antilles, but thus extended geographically to the 

 mainland. 



Three species of Ramphocinclua only are given by Lafresnaye 

 in his article in the 'Revue Zoologique ' (1843, p. G7). Of the 

 first of these — the type of the genus — R. brachyurus {Turdus 

 brachyurus, Vieill. Nouv. Diet. xx. 2.'>5, et Enc. Mcth. p. GfiS), 

 the P.iris ]\Iuseum contains several fine examples from the islands 

 of St. Lucia and Guadaloupe. Yieillot says his bird was from 

 Martinique, which is very probable, as that island is situate between 

 the other two. 



Upon reading attentively Lafresnaye's description of his second 

 species of the genus, R. treiindus, I think there can be little doubt 

 that, if not absolutely identical with, it is at all events a very 

 close ally of the bird wliich Mr. Gould described as long ago as 

 1835, under the name of Stenorhynchus rufcauda. There are two 

 specimens of this bird in the British Museum, from the island of 

 Nevis. 



Stenorhynchus, having been previously employed in Zoology, was 

 changed by Mr. G. R. Gray in 1840 to Cinclocerthia. 



Prince Bonaparte, hi his ' Conspectus ' (p. 223), has somehow or 

 other confounded the third species of this same genus along with 

 Campylorhynchus scolopaccus of Spix, which is quite a different form 

 and is the type of the wren-like genus Cumpylorhynchus, and Thryo- 

 thorus lonyirostris of "N'ieillot, which he likewise quotes as synony- 

 mous, is, I believe, a true Thryothorus. Again, Zoothera cinclops 

 of the same work (p. 2.'»3), since generified into Cinclops (Cinclojjs 

 melanolevcus of Mr. G. R. Gray's lately published List of Genera), 

 seems to be nothing more than a bird of this genus — probably 

 R. brachyi rus, though it is dangerous to draw positive conclusions 

 from so meagre a description. 



Under these circumstances I propose to reduce into one group, or 

 at all events to place in close juxtaposition, the following six generic 



