244 GRALLATORES. CHARADRIUS. Puover- 
lume of his “ General Synopsis,” from three specimens sent 
to him by Mr Boys of Sandwich, of which one was killed in 
May 1787, the others in April 1791. Sinee that time we 
have other instances of its capture, amongst which may be 
particularly noticed two young birds of the year, killed up- 
on the Norfolk coast in 1827, and recorded by Wittiam 
YarRELL, Esq. in the third volume of the Zoological Jour- 
nal, where he has, with his accustomed perspicuity, minute- 
ly pointed out the characters that distinguish the present 
species at this age from the young of Charadrius Hiaticula. 
Of this latter Monracu was inclined to consider it only a 
variety, as may be gathered from the contents of his paper, 
published in the seventh volume of the Linnean Transac- 
tions, and afterwards transcribed into the Supplement to the 
Ornithological Dictionary, under the head of “ Ringed 
Plover.” Such an opinion, however, I feel confident, could 
only have arisen from his never having seen a specimen of 
the Kentish Plover, as, upon examination and comparison 
with C. Hiaticula, so accurate an observer and intelligent a 
naturalist must have been at once convinced that they were, 
though nearly allied, yet perfectly distinct species *. As to 
the Charadrius Alexandrinus of authors, which was also 
considered by him to be C. Hiaticula in its adolescent state, 
from being unable to refer it to any other species within his 
knowledge, I agree with ‘Temmincx and Wac LER, that it 
ought to be expunged from the list of birds, being merely a 
nominal species, founded upon citations from other authors ; 
and referring not only to the present bird, but also to Cha- 
radrius minor of Tremminck (Char. Curonicus of LarHam’s 
Index, Ornith.), another species of Ringed Plover, very si- 
milar in its markings, but inferior in size to C. Hiaticula ; 
* On referring to Dr Renn1e’s late edition of Monracu’s Dictionary, 
I was surprised to find that the Kentish Plover is considered by him also as 
“ a variety of the Ringed Plover.” I must therefore suppose that he also 
has never seen the former bird, or at least. had the opportunity of compa- 
ring it with the latter. 
