40 



6. Oethonyx ocpirocephala, Finscli. 



In my former notes {Trans. N. Z. Inst., 1868, p. 108), I objected to the 

 separation of Mohoua ochrocephala and Certliiparus alhicillus, as in Dr. Finsch's 

 list, and referred both species to the former genus. 



The practice of adopting local native names to designate new genera, 

 appears to me objectionable, inasmuch as it causes confusion in the general 

 nomenclature. The name " Moho " has been selected for a genus of honey- 

 eating birds inhabiting the Sandwich Islands. In New Zealand this name is 

 applied generally by the Maoris to various species of aquatic rails, belonging 

 to no less than three distinct genera. On the other hand, the appellation of 

 " Mohoixa " given by M. Lesson as the native name, and selected by him to 

 distinguish the genus, has no existence in the Maori language, and its continued 

 adoption would only perpetuate what is obviously a blunder. I therefore 

 propose to restore the genus Orthonyx of Temminck, to which I can discover 

 no tangible objection. And as I cannot see any valid reason why two species 

 so closely allied both in structure and in habits should be separated generically, 

 I have decided to refer both Mohoxia ochrocephala, Gray, and Gerthiparus 

 albicillus, Lesson, to this genus. '*" 



7. Sphenceacus fulvus, Gray. 



As the common species Sphenmacus ptmctatus is liable to some variation, 

 both in size and plumage, I feel rather doubtful about the specific value of the 

 bird described by Mr. G. E,. Gi-ay under the above name. A specimen in 

 Dr. Hector's collection, at Otago, which I had an opportunitv of examining 

 in 1865, and which I supposed to be referable to Gi^ay's S. fulvus, measured in 

 length to end of tail 1^ inches ; wing fi-om flexure 2|^ ; tail 4 ; tarsi f . 

 The plumage generally was lighter and more fulvoiis than in ordinary speci- 

 mens ; the tail feathers dark brown edged with paler ; bill, tarsi and toes very 

 pale bi'own. Another specimen (nrinus the tail), in Mr. Lea's collection, was 

 very similar although somewhat darker. 



Whatever importance I might be inclined to attach even to trivial charac- 

 ters when constant, I should hesitate to accord to these occasional examples 

 the rank of a distinct species. 



* Since the above was written, I have received the July Heft of the Joxmial fiXr 

 Ornithologie, and am glad to find that Dr. Finsch has not only adopted my view as to the 

 propriety of uniting Mohoua ochrocephcda and Certliiparus alhicillus generically, but has 

 in fact anticipated me with regard to Orthonyx, by placing both species in that genus. 

 It is gratifying to me to discover that, quite independently of each other, we have arrived 

 at the same conclusion on so nice a point. 



