BESEKT TRUM PETEK BULEFTXCH. 
mark on the rump. The species, according to all ap- 
pearances, belongs to the north of Europe, but as it 
has always been confounded Avith the Common Ihdl- 
finch, it is not jrossible to assign it a fixed locality.” 
Such is the history of this bird. I sec no reason 
Avhatevcr for constituting it a distinct species any more 
than for forming different species out of the A'arictics 
of rams 2 >alustns, which Mr. A. Nervton has shcAvn to 
present at least three different forms between this country 
and Laplaiifl, but not sufficient to constitute specific 
difference. Having seen the birds I entirely agree in 
this opinion; and the rule which seems to obtain with 
most birds of exhibiting strongly marked and permanent 
climatic variation, must not be overlooked as it applies 
to the present one. Under any circumstances it is quite 
unirecessary that I should give a figure of this assumed 
species. 
2. — P. Langicauda, Temminck, P. Sibiricus, Pallas. — 
This bird was stated by Temminck to have been cap- 
tured in Plungary, and it is admitted into the European 
list by Keyserling and Blasius. It is hoAvever rejected 
by Schlegel, Degland, and Bonaparte. There does not 
appear any authentic account of its occurrence in Europe. 
It inhabits Eastern Siberia and the Altai mountains. 
3. — P. Caucasica, Pallas, Loxia ruhicilla, Guldenstadt, 
is admitted into the European list by Keyserling and 
Blasius, Schlegel, and Bonaparte. The latter says of it: 
— ^‘The Loxia ruhicilla of Guldenstadt is a Carpodacus; 
but it is much more strongly formed than ErytJirina, 
Avith which in other respects it has less affinity than 
with P. roseus, Avhich is also much smaller.” 
He then alludes to a female in the collection of M. 
De Selys, about the authenticity of which there is some 
doubt. 
