No. 2.] THE AUSTRAL AVIAN RECORD 27 



but not Meliphaga atricapilla Jard. & Selby. Name proposed 

 to be used Melithreptes atricapillus Vieillot." 



Gould, howe-ver, did not accept this determination and 

 continued the usage of Shaw's name of lunulatus for the 

 Meliphaga atricapilla of Temminck, and used melanocephalus 

 of himself for the Meliphaga atricapilla Jardine and Selby. 

 As a synonym of the former, in the Handbook, he placed 

 " Meliphaga brevirostris Vig. and Horsf. in Linn. Trans., 

 Vol. XV., p. 315 ? " and wrote (p. 569) : " Dr. Bennett, of 

 Sydney, and Mr. George French Angas have called my attention 

 to a Melithreptus inhabiting New South Wales, which they 

 consider to differ from all those figured by me in the folio 

 edition, and which they state had been found breeding, 

 proving, in their opinion, that it must have attained maturity. 

 The remarks of those gentlemen were accompanied by two 

 very fine skins, which, with two others that had been in my 

 collection for some time, are now before me. At a first glance 

 almost any ornithologist would imagine these birds to be 

 the young of M. lunulatus, and I must admit that this was my 

 own impression ; but upon a more minute examination and 

 comparison, I perceive characters which render me somewhat 

 doubtful of this being the case. In the first place, I find 

 all the specimens larger and stouter than any of M . lunulatus 

 to which I have access ; in the second, I have been informed 

 that the bare space above the eye is greenish -blue, and not 

 red ; all the under-surface of the body is sandy-brown in 

 lieu of pure white : the axillary feathers are buff instead of 

 white : the wings are brown, and not wax -yellow ; the crown 

 of the head is brownish-black instead of pure black ; and 

 the lunate band on the occiput is greyish-buff, and not white. 

 . . . Should it ultimately prove to be distinct, then it must 

 bear the inappropriate name of Melithreptus brevirostris, as I 

 find it is strictly identical with the type-specimen of the bird 

 so-called by Vigors and Horsfield, formerly in the collection 

 of the Linnean Society, and now in the British Museum." 



The species brevirostris was subsequently recognised and 

 admitted under that name, and it might be observed that 



