‘J 
a - 
. 
-elassed as a Cassicus, — for it has the bill of that genus 
and the boat-shaped tail of Quiscalus. 
(119.) The African beefeater (Buphaga), as we 
have already intimated *, is altogether excluded from 
this family, not only because the whole structure of 
this curious bird is far different from that so general 
among the Sturnide, but because its introduction here 
would manifestly disturb the progressive and circular 
series here exhibited. The only reason, indeed, that 
appears to have influenced all ornithologists in placing 
it with the starlings, is the propensity which both have 
to frequent the haunts, and perch upon the backs, of 
cattle. Now, as crows and ravens are well known to 
do the same, they might, by a parity of reasoning, be 
classed in the same group ; for a starling is unquestion- 
ably more like to a crow, than the beefeater is to a 
starling. In Buphaga, we have, in short, the scansorial feet 
and tail; with the bill (fig.157. aa)so perfectly resembling 
that of the honeyguide (6 6), that one of our best ornitho- 
logists, without suspecting the affinity, has named a new 
apecies of ae Indicator Buphagoides ! stating 
; = as a reason, that it has “ nearly 
= the appearance of the beefeater’s 
~ bill, partially agreeing in the 
strong and angulated form so 
= conspicuous in that genus.” T 
This species we have personally 
examined; andif any doubtshad 
then remained in our mind on 
the propriety of removing Bu- 
phaga from the Sturnide, they 
would have been immediately 
dispelled ; but we had, in truth, 
= already determined this point, 
by a careful i arialyeie of the Sturnine family. 
(120.) The analogies of the family we have now in- 
vestigated, whether in regard to the corresponding groups 
among the Corvide, or to its own internal relations, are 
'* Class. of Birds, i. p. 144, + Lin. Trans. xvi. p. 91. 
“ H 
STURNIDZ. — BUPHAGA EXCLUDED. 103 
* A 
