1S4 MR. V. h. SCLATKR ON SOME SPECIKS OF PARROTS. [Feb. 14, 



Mr, Gould in the Society's 'Proceedings' for 1856 (p. 137). The 

 typical specimen of this bird, now in the British Museum, obtained 

 by Macgillivray during the voj^age of the ' Herald,' was, I believe, 

 previously unique. The living specimens in question were brought 

 to this country in the ship ' Curacoa,' and acquired by purchase for 

 the Society on the 5th inst. I exhibit a sketch by jNIr. Wolf 

 (PI. XVI.) representing this species. 



I have already on more than one occasion spoken of the series of 

 Cockatoos in the Society's Gardens, which is very full and com- 

 plete*. In my last communication on this subject I proposed to 

 divide the White Cockatoos into two sections, characterized by the 

 form of the crest, which in the one case is pendent, in the other re- 

 curved at its extremity. In this it appears that, as I have lately 

 become aware, I had been anticipated by Dr. Schlegel, although I 

 have not yet been able to consult his original article upon this sub- 

 jectf. But in Dr. Schlegel's more recent paper upon the same 

 subject^:, he has fallen into what every one who is acquainted with 

 our living series of Fsittacidce must allow is a very great error, in 

 stating that Cacatua ducorpsii and Cacatiia ophthalmicUy as described 

 and figured by me in the articles above referred to, are mere varie- 

 ties of C. triton ! Dr. Schlegel is so kind as to add that my de- 

 scriptions and figures of these birds are " de nulle utilite pour la 

 science." To this I have only to reply that I regret to find he has 

 not understood them better. It is true no exact dimensions are 

 stated in my notes ; but the birds described were (and still are, I am 

 happy to say) alive, and it is not always easy to take exact measure- 

 ments of living birds. But on reference to my second paper 

 (P. Z. S. 18G4, p. 188) it will be found that I have given what I 

 must maintain is an exact and very recognizable diagnosis of C. 

 ophthalmica, ending with " crassitie vix miuore qiiam in C. cristata," 

 which, I consider, is a sufficiently precise account of its size. And 

 in the table above the diagnosis in the same paper I have classed C. 

 ducorpsii amongst the smaller section of the group, along with C. 

 sanguinea and C philippinarum, with which it agrees in size. No 

 naturalist, in fact, after seeing specimens of C. ophthalmica and C. 

 ducorpsii, could regard these two birds as specifically identical. The 

 former is a large species, closely allied to C. cristata, as I have already 

 pointed out. The latter is a small species, very closely allied to C. 

 sanguinea of Gould,, and to be united to that species, if not allowed 

 to stand alone. Neither do I in the least believe that there are any 

 grounds for uniting C. ophthalmica to C. triton, whatever may be 

 the length of Dr. Schlegel's "series" of specimens of this bird. 



The fact is that in this, as in many other cases. Dr. Schlegel is 

 misled by the idea that there are no other species of birds in exist- 

 ence excejjt those represented in the Leyden Museum. In a similar 

 frame of mind he has denied the existence of many other excellent 



* See P. Z. S. 1862, p. 141, et 1864, p. 187. 

 t Jaarb. v. h. Genootscliap Natuia Artis Magistra v. h. j. 1861. 

 % " Notice sur les Cacatous blancs a houppe jaune," par II. Schlegel (Ned. 

 Tijdschr. v. d. Dierk. 1865, p. 318). 



