PIED WAGTAIL. 541 



must therefore bear. Yet, neglecting this fact, Temminck 

 in 1835 (Man. d'Orn. Ed. 2, iii. p. 175) cancelled his 

 original descriptions, substituting for them those of a bird 

 from Japan, though still confounding with it that of Western 

 Europe. In 1840 he became convinced of this error, but 

 instead of leaving the latter under its old name, he adopted 

 for it (op. cit. iv. p. 620) Mr. Gould's yarrelli and continued 

 his lugubris to the eastern bird.* It is further clear that 

 M. lugubris was admitted, before Mr. Gould's discovery, to 

 refer to the British Pied Wagtail, since F. Boie (Isis, 1835, 

 p. 252), after mentioning that the Paris collectors reported it 

 as an annual visitor to certain places in their neighbourhood 

 on its way to England, says that Delamotte (somewhat to 

 his surprise it would seem, for he thought the fact worthy 

 of record) met with no other species in this country 

 as he travelled from Dover to Suffolk. In like manner 

 Werner (Atlas des Ois. d'Eur.) figured our Pied Wagtail as 

 M. lugubris. 



As to the question whether our Pied Wagtail should be 

 regarded as specifically distinct from the light-coloured bird 

 which prevails on the continent opinions will doubtless still 

 vary. The reader may gather that the Editor, by his treatment 

 of such cases as are afforded by Parus ater and Acredula can- 

 data, is not prone to raise local races to specific rank on 

 slight grounds, but the present differs from those cases inso- 

 much as specimens intermediate in colouring seem to be 

 wanting, and, though each form not unfrequently encroaches 

 on the other's borders, and instances of their interbreeding 

 are said to be known, each very remarkably maintains its 

 proper characters. The present case therefore is more 

 analogous to that of the large northern Falcons, already 

 described, though not exactly like it ; for those two Falcons, 



* Even here he made another complication, for his M. lugubris of 1840 in- 

 cludes two birds now generally regarded as distinct : one, which visits Eastern 

 Europe and is the M. vidua of Prof. Sundevall, the other, found in Japan and 

 the M. japonica of Mr. Swinhoe. When Prof. Schlegel caine to Temminck's 

 assistance in the ' Fauna Japonica ' this error was detected, and the Japanese 

 form therein appeared as " M. lugens, Illig." but whether Illiger ever described 

 such a bird is unknown to the Editor. 



