1862.] CRANIAL BONES OF LEPIDOSIREN ANNECTENS. 129 
Avium, 1850, i. p. 513), though subsequently (Cat. des Ois. d’Eur. 
1856, p. 4) he refers to it as the young of Carpodacus erythrinus. 
Mr. Rowley’s specimen, which I now offer for your inspection, 
seems to me without doubt to be a female of the common Green- 
finch (Chlorospiza chloris), but is distinguished from the ordinary 
type by an entire absence of yellow colouring, which is replaced by 
nearly pure white, and the whole bird is generally of a paler hue. 
One or two friends to whom I have shown it are inclined to suppose 
it a hybrid between the Greenfinch and the Common Linnet (Linota 
cannabina) ; but of such an origin I perceive no indication either in 
the plumage or structure. 
Now Dr. Jaubert, who is without doubt a naturalist peculiarly 
fitted to form an opinion on the subject, has stated—I may almost 
say, proved—that at least the male of the so-called Fringilla incerta 
is a curious variety, probably caused by confinement, of Carpodacus 
erythrinus (Rev. Zool. 1853, p. 109; 1856, p- 66); and his view 
of the case has been endorsed by Dr. Gloger (Journ. f. Orn. 1856, 
p. 313). It is certainly not for me, who know very little about the 
matter, to question his solution; but Prince Bonaparte is also no 
mean authority, and his so long referring the Fringilla incerta to 
the group Chlorospiza, rather than to Carpodacus, must not be for- 
gotten. It appears, then, to me that the only way of reconciling 
these conflicting opinions is by the supposition that this Fringilla 
incerta, which has caused so much perplexity to ornithologists, has 
been made up of the abnormal plumages of two species,—the male 
being founded, as Dr. Jaubert says, on flavescent (if I may coin a 
word wanted to express a variation not uncommon in many classes 
of animals) examples of Carpodacus erythrinus, and the female, as 
I have here suggested, on under-coloured specimens of Chlorospiza 
chloris. 
P.S. 5th May, 1862.—If uncertainty of opinion be ever allowed 
to a naturalist, perhaps it is pardonable in the case of Fringilla in- 
eerta. Since I communicated the foregoing conjecture to the So- 
ciety, I have had an opportunity of examining Prince Bonaparte’s 
great work the ‘Fauna Italica.’’ I must honestly confess that the 
bills of 40th the birds represented in plate 38 have the convex 
character peculiar to the genus Carpodacus. Under these circum- 
stances, I can only say that my supposition must go for what it is 
worth, which I fear may be very little; and I trust to the ornitho- 
logists of the south of Europe to clear up the matter more fully, by 
examining any specimens that may be contained in Prince Bonaparte’s 
collection. 
3. On THE Crantat Bones or LeptpostREN ANNECTENS, 
By T. SpENcEeR Cossotp, M.D., F.L.S., erc. 
(Plate XIII.) 
_ The conformation of the skull of Lepidosiren is exceedingly pecu- 
liar, not only as regards its general outline and construction, but also 
Proc. Zoox. Soc.—1862, No, IX. 
