' 8 



than were correctly included in Mr. Putnam's list eight 

 years earlier. 



Almost simultaneously with the appearance of Mr. 

 Samuel's list appeared my "Catalogue of the Birds found 

 at Springfield, Mass., with Notes on their Migrations, 

 Habits, etc. ; together with a List of those Birds found 

 in the State not yet observed at Springfield" (Proc. Essex 

 Institute, IV, July, 1864, pp. 48-98). In this paper I 

 gave one hundred and ninety-five as found at Springfield, 

 and two hundred and ninety-seven 2 as inhabitants of the 

 state. The Springfield list included one species (JEmpi- 

 donax acadicus) given erroneously, but which has since 

 been taken within the area covered by the list, and some 

 others have since been added. In the supplemental list 

 three species were given that I now regard as synonyms, 

 and some eight or ten others were included on the author- 

 ity, of Nuttall, Peabody, Audubon, Cabot, Bryant, and 

 Brewer, of which there is no recent record of their cap- 

 ture, but which (with perhaps two, or possibly three, 

 exceptions) are very likely to occur. Excluding, how- 

 ever, all these there still remain two hundred and eighty- 

 two thoroughly authenticated as birds of the state. Of 

 fifteen others mentioned as likely to occur, over one-half 

 have since been added. 



In 1868 was published a "Catalogue of the Birds of 

 New England," by Dr. Elliott Cones, in which nearly all 

 the species previously attributed to Massachusetts were 

 included. The Great Auk (Alca impennis) was here for 

 the first time recognized as a former inhabitant of Massa- 

 chusetts, and the Barn Owl (Strix pratincola} and the 

 Varied Thrush (Turdus ncevius) were added in the Ap- 

 pendix from notes furnished by the present writer. 



*Squartarola helvetica was accidentally omitted from the Springfield list, though 

 given in the classified list at the end of the paper; hence In my " summary " (p. 97) 

 "290" should stand 297. 



