512 BULLETIN 50, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. 



Fewu/r. —L,ength (skin), 136.89; wing, 66.65; tail, 10.89; cuhnen, 

 21.59; gonys, 11.94; depth of bill at base, 10.41; width of maxilla at 

 base, 7.87; tarsus, 21.59; middle toe, 16.75.^ 



Galapagos Archipelago (Indefatigable, Duncan, Albemarle, Jervis, 

 Chatham, and Barrington Islands)." 



Cadornis scandens (not of Gould) Sclatek and Salvin, Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., 



1870, 323 (Indefatigable I.).— Salvin, Trans. Zool. Soc. Lond., ix, pt. ix, 



1876, 485, part (Indefatigable I.).— Ridgway, Proc. U. S.Nat. Mus.,xii, 1890, 



108, part (Indefatigable I.). 

 Oeospiza assimilis (not Cadornis amimilis Gould) Eidgwav, Proc. U. S. Nat. 



Mus., xvii, no. 1007, Nov. 15, 1894, .361 (Indefatigable I.; Albemarle and 



Jervis islands?). 

 Geospim fatigata Ridgway, Proc. V. S. Nat. Mus., xviii, no. 1067, Apr. 23, 1896, 



293 (Indefatigable I., Galapagos Archipelago; U. 8. Nat. Mus.); xix, 1897, 



539 (monogr. ). 

 Geospiza scandens fatigata Rothschild and Hahtert, Novit. Zool., vi, Aug., 1899, 



164 (Indefatigable, Barrington, Duncan, Albemarle, James, and Chatham 



islands). 



'One adult from Indefatigable Island. 



I have mj^self only measured three adult and two immature males from Inde- 

 fatigable Island and two adults from Barrington Island. The average measurements 

 of these, together with specimens measured by Messrs. Rothschild and Hartert, are 

 as follows: 



■'I have examined adult specimens only from Indefatigable and Barrington islands, . 

 the other islands being given on authority of Messrs. Rothschild and Hartert, who 

 refer the Barrington birds (my (!. barringtoni) to this form. As to the propriety of 

 this reference I am doubtful, since the authors mentioned admit that "the shapes of 

 the bills of the type specimen and some of the other specimens certainly look some- 

 what different, as they are plumper at the tip,'' though adding that "other speci- 

 mens again are quite like those from the other islands." The authors mentioned 

 had not been able to examine adult males from Chatham nor Duncan islands; 

 therefore, the limits of the present form and the status of the specimens from Bar- 

 rington, Chatham, and Duncan islands must remain doubtful uijtil more satisfactory 

 series have been carefully examined, measured, and compared. 



