Icterus wagleri. 



Psarocolius Jlavigaster, Wagl. Isis, 1829, p. 756, nee Vieill. 

 Pendulinus dominicensis, Bp. Consp. p. 432, nee Linn. 



Nigro-sericeus : tectricibus alarum minoribus infra et supra, dorso 

 postico et abdomine toto flavis, hoc aurantiaco tincto : tectrici- 

 bus caudce inferioribus nigris. 



Long, tota 8*0, alee 4 # 2, caudee 3*7. 



There are examples of this hird at the Smithsonian Institution 

 collected by Lieut. Couch in Coahuila. I have likewise examples of 

 it in my own collection. Icterus prosthemelas, Strickland (Contr. 

 Orn. 1850, p. 120. pi. 52) (which is not the same as Pendulinus 

 lessoni, Bp.), is a closely allied species, but is smaller and has the 

 under tail-coverts yellow. 



Emberiza belli, Cassin (Pr. Ac. Sc. Phil. 1850, pi. 4. p. 104), and 

 Emberiza bilineata (ibid. pi. 3) seem to me to form natural members 

 of the genus Poospiza, and I propose to call them Poospiza belli and 

 Poospiza bilineata. 



Junco cinereus has recently been described as new for the third 

 time as Struthus caniceps (Woodhouse in Pr. Ac. Sc. Phil. vi. p. 202). 

 As I have already observed, the name Junco ought to be employed 

 instead of Struthus for all the three closely allied species of this 

 genus, which will henceforth stand as J. cinereus, J. oregonus, and 

 J. hyemalis. 



Zonotrichia gambelli (the third species of Bp.'s Consp.) is now 

 considered in America as the young of Z. leueophrys : Z. mortoni 

 (the fifth species), of which I have seen the type in the Philadel- 

 phian collection, is nothing more than a Chilian specimen of Z. pi- 

 leata sive matutina : Z. querula (the ninth species) is the same as 

 (the tenth) Z. comata, and ought rather to be placed in the genus 

 Passerella. 



Struthus atrimentalis, Couch (Pr. Ac. Sc. Phil. vii. p. 68), seems 

 to be the same as Spinites atrigularis (Cab. Mus. Hein. p. 133), 

 though M. Cabanis' phrase is not very perfect. 



The beautiful Zonotrichia cassinii lately described by Woodhouse 

 (Pr. Ac. Sc. Phil. vi. p. 60) is very closely allied to Peuccea bach- 

 manni, and must be placed next to it. 



Dr. Gambel's Fringilla blandingiana (Journ. Ac. Phil. i. pi. 9) 

 is the same as Pipilo rufipileus, Lafr. It is not an Embernagra, as 

 arranged by Bonaparte, nor a Pipilo, and, as divisions are made now- 

 a-days, ought probably to have a distinct generic appellation. 



Chondestes ruficauda, Bp. Notes Orn. p. 18, of which I found 

 several specimens in the collection at Philadelphia, is a typical Aimo- 

 phila, and Embernagra pyrgitoides, Lafr., seems to be nothing more 

 than A. rufescens, the second species of that same genus. 



The Philadelphian Collection has likewise specimens of Chryso- 

 mitris yarrelli (Aud.), not however from Western America, but from 

 the Orinoco ; and I believe Audubon was altogether in error as to 

 its locality, and that it is an inhabitant, not of the northern, but of 

 the southern portion of the American continent. 



