Hawaiian species to the Heterorhynchus olivaceus of Lafresnaye, stating that he has 

 carefully examined the type of the latter in the Paris Museum, and that it is no doubt 

 identical with the Hemignathus lucidus of Lichtenstein from Oahu. This assertion I 

 am unable to contradict, for I long ago expressly said that, not having seen Lafresnaye's 

 type 1 , I could only judge of his species by the figure, which I still think that few 

 persons will be able to reconcile with the figures given by Lichtenstein, not, however, 

 for the reason assigned by Reichenbach, since the difference in the tail noticed by him, 

 though admittedly shown in the plates, does not exist in the birds. The differences 

 offered by actual comparison of specimens was unquestionably first mentioned by Cassin, 

 who wrote in 1858 : — " It is probably very nearly impossible to determine or reconcile 

 with each other the synonyms of these two species, or the instances in which they have 

 been mistaken for each other ; but we have given them as they appear to us, and as 

 represented in the plates cited." This difference has been recognized by all subsequent 

 writers (including Judge Dole and Mr. Sclater) except Mr. G. E. Gray in the following 

 year, and he really had no materials on which to form an opinion, the genus being 

 represented in the British Museum by only a single specimen (apparently a female) of 

 H. lucidus, which was presented by Sir Edward Belcher, and was therefore probably 

 obtained during the voyage of the ' Sulphur ' between 1838 and 1842. 



If Mr. Rothschild's views be correct, it would seem that it was my good fortune to 

 be the first to meet with and make known the Hawaiian species, and it is therefore not 

 without some sense of retributive justice, for which I thank him, that, as though to 

 make amends for the severity of his remarks, he has proposed to honour me by calling 

 it H. wilsoni, though he thereby commemorates the error with which he charges me. 



Description (from a specimen at Cambridge, no doubt immature). — Upper parts dull 

 olive-green with a brown tinge, the whole of the wing- and tail-feathers being brown 

 with yellowish -green margins to the outer webs. A thin line of yellow nearly surrounds 

 the eye, and may almost be called a streak above it. Lores brown ; throat yellow ; 

 underparts generally huffish white, the decided buff tint being varied by a yellow tone 

 in parts. Sides of the body brownish ; under tail-coverts and flanks buff. A little 

 bright yellow is present at the bend of the wing, the under surface of which is grey 

 and huffish white. The curved bill is dusky, the feet of the same colour. 



Dimensions.— Total length 5 - 62 inches, wing 3, tail 2, tarsus "87, culmen just over 1, 

 the mandible being almost exactly two-thirds of the maxilla. 



Another specimen, also at Cambridge, entirely lacks the yellow tints, and is probably 

 still younger than the last. 



Mr. Rothschild says that the bill is longest in the male. 



1 How Lafresnaye's type (which is included as no. 5677, bis, in the lithographed catalogue of his collection, 

 drawn up after his death by the late M. Jules Verreaux) found its way to Paris is not apparent. The collec- 

 tion is supposed to have been sold in its entirety to the Natural History Society of Boston, and there this 

 specimen should be expected to exist ; but I have learned through the courtesy of Professor Hyatt that it 

 cannot be recognized there. This fact strengthens the assertion that it is at Paris, but still the authenticity 

 of the specimen seems to need verification. 



