Galbalcyriiynchus purusianus axd Pipra c.elesti-pileata SQ 



a priori thc priority of the discovery showing themselves 

 deaf to ali attempts at proof by documentar}^ evidence. Thc}^ 

 brought their veredict alieady formed, so that I dcemcd it 

 prudent not to continue the uselcss dispute. Thc lucklcss Ro- 

 sinante brought forward to lead the chargc was thc circum- 

 stance that an idcntical Galbalcyrhynchus, from the Ri ver 

 Juruá, had recently becn described by Dr. von Ihcring. of 

 the São Paulo ]\Iuscum and that also an idcntical Pipra had 

 becn collected somcwhere in the interior of. Brazil and des- 

 cribed somewherc by somebody at some time, avoiding howc- 

 ver the clearing up of the mystery. (*) 



Let us now rapidly examine the history of the pro- 

 blematic Galbalcyrhynchus. It is true that v. Ihering in a 

 chapter entitled «O Rio Juruá», published in the VP!.' vo- 

 lume of the « Revista do Aíuseu Paulista », giving thc list 

 of birds gathered by the collector Garbe, pag. 445 and X.1' 

 118 mention a Galbalc5a-hynchus leucotis innotatus subspe- 

 cies nova, accompanied by the observation which I translate: 

 « I believe for this rcason that thc form from the ri\'er Ju- 

 ruá represents a variety distinguished by the desappearance 

 of the white patch from the auricular region in the male. 

 I designate this subspecies as G. leucotis innotata subspec. 

 nova. Differt a G. leucote macula alba auriculare obsoleta 

 vel absente ». Therc were l 9 ^^'^^ ^ cfcT, but of these 

 only one was an adult. The chapter has no separate date. 

 The volume VI of thc «Revista do Aluseu Paulista», bears 

 the date 1904, but as far as concerns our institution and 

 myself I can affirm that I received our copies of this vo- 

 lume late in ig05 and for ali I know by inquiry among 

 correspondents it seems at least that the real date of dis- 

 tribution and true publicity was nof carlier than 1905. 



The present examplc is one more clcar dcmonstration 

 of the necessity of the exact date of distribution bcsidcs the 

 honest dating of each separate article, cspccially when, as 



(*) Meanwhile in the last mimber of the « Ibis » (Vol. VT, N.'" 21, 

 January 1906), I have come across a description, with a coloured plate, 

 of the new Pipra, with the name Pipra cxquisila, statiriií the first description 

 had been published in March iÇO) ! (pag. 35 seji'. ). Hinc illae lacrymae ! 



February igoó. G. 



