55 



cliildren, but as to Rallus Forsteri we are fiiUy convinced of our error. In a 

 set of specimens from the Pelew Islands, some liad the rufous pectoral band, 

 in two others it was entirely wanting, and in one bird there was only to be 

 seen a faint trace of it." They, therefore, conclude that their so-called Rallus 

 Forsteri is only a variety of age or season of the well known R. jjectoralis, 

 Lesson. 



I have examined a large series of specimens in New Zealand, and although 

 I have never seen one in which the pectoral band was absent, I have found it 

 varying, both in extent and depth of colouring, from a narrow interrupted line 

 of rufous brown to a broad zone of rich chestnut. In other respects all the 

 specimens are veiy much alike. 



20. OcYDROMUs NiGRiCAJS'S, Buller. 



Dr. Finsch is of opinion that the new Rail discovered by Dv. Hector in 

 the Otago Province, and described by me in the Transactions of the New 

 Zealand Institute (Vol. i., p. Ill), is identical with Gallirallus fuscus, DuBus, 

 which, he states, Mr. Gray confounded with G. hracliypterus, Lafr. 



It is natural to enqiiire how, if Gallirallus fuscus be a well established 

 species, it has hitherto been omitted from the List of New Zealand Birds 1 

 Although Dr. Finsch states that G. hrachypterus (of which Gray considers 

 G. fuscus a synonyme), " never occurs in New Zealand," he includes it in his 

 enumeration of New Zealand Birds, Journal fur Ornithologie, 1867, pp. 

 346-347. 



21. Phalacrocoras Nov^ Holland:^, Stephens. 



In his review of my Essay, Dr. Finsch observes (Journ, fur Orn,, 1867, 

 p. 339), — " Graculus carhoides cannot be separated as a species from our 

 European G. carbo, Linn." Referring to this, my friend. Captain Hutton, 

 writes to me, — " I think Dr. Finsch is wrong in uniting our Graculus 

 carhoides with the Eiiropean G. carbo. I was well acquainted with the latter 

 in all seasons in the Crimea, and I am pretty well acquainted with Cai-boides 

 up here (Auckland), and 1 feel sure that they are different." 



I agree with Captain Hutton in his view as to the specific distinctness of 

 the two birds, but the so-called G. carhoides must be referred to Phalacrocorax 

 NovcB Hollandice, as originally described by Stephens {Cont. of Skald's Gen. 

 Zool., Yol. xiii., pi. 1, p. 93). It was noticed by Mr. Gould, and described 

 (from Australian specimens) under the name of P. carhoides in the Proceedings 

 of the Zoological Society (Part v., p. 156). It appeared again, under the same 

 name in his great work on the Bii'ds of Australia, where he states that it 

 " exceeds in size its prototype, the Phalacrocorax carbo of Europe." In his 

 more recent Hand-hooh, Mr Gould has rectified the nomenclature, making his 

 so-called P. carhoides a synonyme of P. Novce Hollandice, to which the New 



