574 DR. O. FINSCH ON THE BIRDS OF TRINIDAD. [June 23, 
allied C. gutturosa, Desm. The latter we possess from Brazil and 
New Granada. 
The females of the two species are closely allied ; but the female of 
€. manacus may be distinguished by being paler olive-green beneath, 
the underpart of the breast and vent especially are pale yellowish 
white. 
56. CHIROXIPHIA LANCEOLATA (Wagl.); Scl. Cat. p. 251. 
Chiroxiphia melanocephala (Vieill.?) ; Bp. Consp. i. p. 172. 
Pipra pareola, Hahn, Vog. aus Asien, Afr. &c, Liefer. xvi. f. 4 
(opt.). 
An old male and a young male. The latter is dull olive-green ; 
wings and tail dull olive-brown, with greenish edgings externally ; 
the head capped bright scarlet as in the old male; the two middle 
tail-feathers already prolonged and lanceolated as in the old male, 
put green. 
Specimens from New Granada (Baranquilla) are in every respect 
like. 
“Le Manakin 4 longue queue de Vile de la Trinité”’ (Pipra me- 
lanocephala, Vieillot, Enc. M. p. 389) has nothing whatever to do 
with this species, and remains doubtful. Dr. Léotaud has omitted 
this species. 
CoriINGINa, 
57. CHASMORHYNCHUS VARIEGATUS (Gmel.); Scl. Cat. p. 257. 
Procnias variegatus, Léot. p. 259. 
One specimen in change of plumage; upper and under parts like 
the female (green) ; rump and upper tail-coverts white; surface of 
head brown like the male; some of the remiges already deep black. 
Long.al.  caud. rostr.  rict. lat.ad bas. tars. 
5" 10" Bye Btu Sy V6e 63°" 123" 
(hh oO) Shai! 8 14 6 13 (3 ad., Venezuela.) 
58. CHASMORHYNCHUS NIvEvS (Bodd.); Scl. Cat. p. 258, Ibis, 
1867, p. 108; Taylor, Z. c. p. 88. 
Procnias nivea, Léot. p. 261. 
One young bird in obscure green plumage, without a frontal horn, 
agreeing with a specimen from Guiana (Demerara) in the Bremen 
Museum. 
Long. al. caud. rostr. rict. lat. ad bas. tars. 
5" eg gi" Way gt VY Ay 1 (Trinidad.) 
jp 310 iz 14 53 12 (Guiana.) 
The occurrence of this species in the Island of Trinidad, as stated 
by Dr. Léotaud, has been doubted by Dr. Sclater, who believed that 
Dr. Léotaud might have been wrong in his determination. As the 
specimen belonging to this collection proves, there cannot remain 
any doubt that Dr. Léotaud was right in identifying the species. 
