124 



That description exactly fits the examples one generally meets with in collections 

 of New Zealand birds. But Mr. Gray's description does not accord with the coloured figure 

 which he gives of the bird. Eeferring to this figure, in my account of the species 

 (vol. i., p. 36), I said: "The figure of this species in the 'Voyage of the " Erebus " and 

 "Terror"' is incorrect, on account of the exaggerated extent of white on the under-parts ; 

 but the attitude is a very characteristic one." It seems pretty clear, therefore, that the 

 description and the figure represent different birds. 



After diagnosing Miro albifrons, as quoted above, Mr. Gray says : " The original of this 

 description is contained among the drawings of Forster, and it is very like Petroica 

 longipes, Garn. (= Miro australis). The figure of Forster differs, however, from the bird 

 referred to by the white extending from the forepart of the breast to the base of the tail, 

 leaving the throat of the same colour as the back. I have subjoined a figure, for the 

 purpose of making known the original drawing from which Latham took his description, 

 that it may assist in elucidating the species should it hereafter be discovered." 



Now as to the other form, of which I have obtained about a dozen specimens, 

 collected in the high-wooded country known as the Karamea Saddle. This bird can be 

 distinguished at a glance from Miro australis, and Gray's figure suits it fairly well. It is 

 appreciably larger than the last-named species, and, instead of having the abdomen white as 

 in that bird, or the under-parts rufescent as in Miro albifrons, it has almost the entire 

 under-surface of a pale lemon-yellow. The frontal spot, too, instead of being very small, 

 as described by Mr. Gray, is even more conspicuous than in the North Island bird. 



Writing of Miro albifrons Mr. Gray says: "It may eventually prove to be the same 

 species as M. longipes (==M. australis)"; and in my own account of this form (op. cit, 

 p. 36) I remarked : " My collection contains a specimen from Christchurch, in which the 

 whole plumage is suffused with brown, and the under-parts are smoky-grey instead of being 

 white." I have since received an example from Otago which is scarcely distinguishable 

 from ordinary specimens of Miro australis. 



On a review of all the facts I am disposed to define the group thus : — 

 Miro australis, Sparrm. North Island form; with under-parts, within very narrow 

 abdominal limits, pure white. 



Miro albifrons, Gmelin. South Island form; with under-parts rufescent, the colour 

 spread over a wider surface. 



Miro bulleri, Sharpe. Another South Island form; with almost the entire under- 

 surface pale lemon-yellow. Conspicuous spot of white on forehead. 



Female. — Similar to the male, but a trifle smaller, and paler in plumage. 

 I was at first inclined to separate the second South Island form as Miro ochrotarsus 

 (Forster), described as Turdus ochrotarsus in the ' Descriptions Animalium ' (p. 82, 1844) ; 

 but my friend, Dr. Sharpe, who has recently described Forster's ' Drawings ' in the ' History 

 of the Bird-collection in the British Museum,' points out that Gmelin's name of albifrons 

 is founded on the 'White-fronted Thrush,' of Latham (Gen. Syn., vi., part i., p. 71), 

 which was described from a specimen in Sir Joseph Banks' collection from 'Dusky Bay.' 

 Forster's drawing is taken from a specimen procured at Dusky Bay, on March 28th, 

 1773, and, as Dr. Sharpe points out, there cannot be the slightest doubt that Forster's 

 Turdus ochrotarsus is founded on the identical specimen as Gmelin's Turdus albifrons, 

 and becomes a pure synonym. Dr. Sharpe has therefore given the name of Miro bulleri 

 to the bird which I believed to be M. ochrotarsus (Forster). 



