MUSSOORI AND GANGAOTRI IN MAY 1874. 277 



to place an example in either one or the other of two affined 

 species. My collection is a very inferior one to Mr. Hume's, 

 but I have seen a good many birds in my time, and I have not 

 yet met the bird I was unable to place in some species or other. 

 I only refer to well-known affined species. The most formida- 

 ble difficulty I know of, is to separate Winter-plumaged Dry- 

 moipus inornatus from Drymoipus longicaudatus ; but I think 

 I see my way out of it. This group of birds, including Prinia, 

 is the one which perhaps is in the greatest confusion just now, 

 and one or more species will shortly be knocked on the head. 

 I don't say that I am able to do so. Mr. Hume has an im- 

 mense collection of these little birds, and might clear them up, 

 if he sets to work. 



Erythrosterna maculata, vide foot-note, p. 236\— The 



bird sent with the nest was not the female of E. maculata, accord- 

 ing to Hodgson's and Mandelli's account of that bird ; it was 

 probably an immature male. I have little doubt about 

 E. pusilla being the female of E. maculata in autumnal 

 plumage. Mr. Mandelli is also of opinion that Siphia tricolor, 

 Hodgson, is the female and immature male of Siphia leucome- 

 lanura; and I believe he is correct. The buffy tinge of the 

 under parts fades more in the North-West than in Sikhim. 



PipasteS maCUlatUS. — Mr. Hume, in a foot-note, p. 251, 

 says : " But all about Poona you do find maculatus frequenting 

 open stony ground." To which I would reply, it is just as likely 

 as that Wheatears and Sandlarks should frequent dense forests. 

 The information Mr. Hume has received is decidedly not to be 

 trusted,* for it is directly contrary to the habits of the bird. 

 I know of no bird so fond of shade : and while P. arboreus can 

 be procured among crops at some distance from trees, the 

 other species, as far as my experience goes, is not to be found 

 except where there are trees. It was impossible for Sykes's 

 bird to have been maculatus, unless it was a wearied migrant 

 that had accidently dropped upon the " open stony lauds." 

 Besides no one knew the green maculatus better than Blyth, 

 and he did not recognize it in Sykes's type, which to him 

 appeared to be P. arboreus. The peculiar, narrow, and indis- 

 tinct striation of the back of maculatus could never have escaped 

 the accurate eye of Blyth ; and I have unbounded confidence 

 in his conclusion that Sykes's type of agilis was not maculatus. 

 Upon this subject I need not say more, and if Mr. Hume and 

 others will fondly stick to the pet term of P. agilis, I cannot 

 help it. They are welcome to the little pleasure, and to 

 Budytes viridis, and all such-like useless terms. Some day or 

 other I hope to have the pleasure of examining Sykes's 



* All I can say is that I shot it there myself.— Ed. 



2 M 



