MISCELLANEOUS NOTES. 151 



to the cook, as the two broods used to go about in a patch of long grass between 

 the croquet-ground and the cook-room. One morning my suspicions had become 

 insupportable, I got up early, watched the cook go off to market, and carefully 

 counted the chicks ; an hour after I couinted them again, and found one miss- 

 ing. On this day at least he was not to blame, so, after some consideration, I 

 organized a beat of all the servants and ghora wallas in the patch of long grass. 

 I found the culprit in a bull-frog, which, like Mark Twain's immortal specimen, 

 tried to jump, but was so heavily weighted as to fall on his back. Having 

 speedily despatched him and cut him open, I found inside him no less than 

 three guinea chicks, two of which, his previous day's feeding, were much 

 decomposed, the third being quite fresh and undigested, having only just 

 been swallowed. 



After that summary execution the remainder of my two guinea broods throve 

 in peace. 



D. GOSTLING, r.s.A. 

 Bombay, 12th July^ 1895. 



No. IX.— THE IDENTIFICATION OF BIBDS. 



Mr. E. W. Oates, in volume ix, No. iv, of this Journal, draws attention to the 

 fact that I cannot, with the help even of his book, find any permanent or inva- 

 riable difference between the two species of minivets, fraterciilus -atvA. speciosus. 

 I am very sorry that this should pain him, but in spite of my sorrow I cannot 

 change my opinion. Mr. Oates says that I have given a hasty opinion without 

 consulting his key. Now I must state that I have gone very thoroughly 

 through this key and I have found it most misleading. For instance 

 P. hreviostris is fairly common here and I have got a good many specimens but 

 when I got my first one I at once jumped to the conclusion that I bad a new 

 species, for my bird had the inner secondaries — tertiaries as they are called by 

 Mr, Oates — inost distinctly spotted. Unfortunately, a comparison with the birds 

 of this species in other collections, amongst them those in the Indian Museum 

 Calcutta, I find that it seems to be the rwZe for Eastern specimens to be thus 

 marked. Yet Mr. Oates makes the unspotted inner secondaries the main 

 distinctive feature in his key, 



I regret that more than Lalf the minivets in my possession have been packed 

 to go home, but taking the twenty specimens of speciosus vel fraterculus I now 

 have I find that the length of the tails are as follows : — 



Males— 4-2", 4-1", 4-05", 3'96", 3-95", 3-9", 3-9", 3-8", 378", 3-6", 

 Females— 4-2", 4'12", 4-1", 4-08", 3-92", 3'84", 3'82", .3-8", 3-75", 3-7". 



Does Mr. Oates' key help me here, his distinctive feature being " tail exceeding 

 4 " speciosus ; " tail not exceeding 3*5 " fraterculus? 



Mr. Oates says that I am expressing a " hasty opinion." I would rather 

 suggest that his assertion itself might be thus designated, I have worked at 



