INHABITING THE PHILIPPINE ARCHIPELAGO, 1i7 
member of the genus, the only other species that may have supplied Sonnerat with his 
example are the Malaccan, Sumatran, and Bornean forms (G. fasciatus, Vieill., apud 
auct. recent.,=C. swmatrensis', S. Miiller, and Graucalus dobsoni, Ball, J. A.S. B. xli. 
p- 281, no. 23, an excellent species, belonging to this group and recently discovered by 
Mr. Ball in the Andaman Islands. But there isno evidence that Sonnerat obtained any 
birds from the Malayan peninsula, the Andamans, Sumatra, or Borneo during his voyage 
from Port St. Louis to Manilla; and on the other hand we have the fact that D’Auben- 
ton’s plate 629 represents a Graucalus with a black lorum and ocular stripe—a character 
possessed by the Philippine species in some phases of plumage, and the constant 
absence of which is said to be (and is, I believe) a principal distinguishing character of 
the Malayan’. 
Two examples of this Philippine Graucalus are contained in the British Museum. 
Both are in the plumage of G. dussumieri; yet they are catalogued under two different 
numbers and two distinct titles in the Hand-list. One, from Mindanao, through the 
brothers Verreaux, is named by them G. Jagunensis; the other, from the Cuming 
collection, procured at Cataguan, is named G. dusswmieri. 
A species usually associated with the subject of PJ. Enl. 629, is the so-called Grau- 
calus lineatus, Lesson, Tr. d’Orn. p. 349. The error has probably arisen in consequence 
of Lesson (/. ¢.) not quoting the real author of the title, and his giving Corvus nove- 
guinee, Gm., as a synonym, and adding PI. Enl. 629 as a reference. The bird described 
by Lesson (/. ¢.) under this title is said by him to be from New Holland. It is clearly 
not the Malayan G. concretus, Hartl., nor the Philippine species ; and it is difficult to 
identify; for, among other characters given, is a white tail. In the Manuel d’Orn. i. p. 
220, Lesson included a Ceblepyris lineata, Swainson, and a Ceblepyris tricolor*®, Swain- 
son, introducing the two titles with the observation that “ Mr. Swainson describes two 
new échenilleurs, which he names,” etc. The diagnosis given in the ‘ Manuel’ differs 
from that given in the ‘ Traité, but is evidently a condensed account of the Australian 
Graucalus (Ceblepyris) lineatus, Swains.* Zool. Journal, i. p. 466, New Holland (1825) 
= Graucalus swainsonii, Gould®, Synop. Birds Austral. pt. iv. pl. —. fig. 2, ‘east coast 
of New South Wales.” 
Mr. Blyth (J. A.S. B. 1861, p. 96) refers to, and partially describes, a species of 
, @. coneretus, Hartl. apud nos, Ibis, 1872, p. 371. 
? The Malayan species is considerably smaller, average length of the wing being 5:50, as against 6°25. It 
is not of so dark a shade of plumbeous, and the transverse bands are narrower. It is not so well marked and 
striking as the Philippine species. The Andaman species is larger than the Philippine and possesses a 
characteristic plumage of its own. 
3 Apparently =C. humeralis, Gould, P. Z.S. 1837, p. 143, over which title it takes precedence. 
‘ Dr. Riippell (Mus. Senckenb. iii. p. 30), having failed to find the reference to Swainson, is hard upon 
Lesson for the meagreness of his diagnosis. 
5 This species must retain its original title of G. lineatus, Sw. Mr. Gould (J. c.) states that he altered it to 
G. swainsonii because the name lineatus had been previously given to another species of this group. But the 
“other species” was this very bird. 
