NEW SPECIES OF COCCOTHRAUS TES. 



153 



Remark. I have classed the two above species with Corythus because 

 the expert at home seen to consider them as of that genus, and because till 

 the generic characters of the whole of CoccothraustincB vel LoximifE have 

 been revised, they may as well be Cory t hi as anything else.* Their fore 

 toes, however, are not wholly cleft ; nor their tails, properly speaking, 

 forked ; nor their wings longer than in Pyrrliula. 



Family CoccothraustiNjE, genus new, Munia, nobis, 



Character, Bill as gross as in Coccothraustes, with the ridge line sub- 

 arched ; the mandibles equal, pointed and entire ; upper mandible flattened 

 on the ridge towards the base and spread like a plate over the forehead. 

 Gape strongly angulated but without salient process in either mandible. 



JVares round, vertical, sunk, free. Tarsi stout, scaled, longer than the 

 central toes : toes long, slender, unequal compressed — outer fore basally con- 

 nected — hind/ large : nails slender, acute and straightish. Wings short and 

 feeble ; primaries scarcely exceeding the tertiaries ; 3 first quills subequal 

 and longest. Tail medial, wedged and pointed. 



Species \st. M. Rubroniger, black and red Munia, nobis. 



Head, neck, and breast, glossy black : centre of the belly, vent and 

 under tail coverts, the same, but tinged with red : rest of the body and 

 wings, pure cinnamon : rump darker, with lake tinge : rectrices brighter, 

 with an orange chesnut hue : bill and legs soft plumbeous : iris black 

 brown. Sexes exactly alike : young, brown, above ; dirty rufous of a pale 

 tinge, below ; and the bill and legs darker and duller. Size of the species, 

 to 5 inches by to 7, and weight ^ oz. 



Species 2ud. M. Acuticauda, sharp-tailed nobis. 



Remarkable, even among its congeners, for the perfectly cuneat« and 

 acute form of the tail, just like a Woodpecker's but not rigid. HMd, neck, 

 breast, most part of the back, wings, rump, thighs and upper and under tail 



* It appears to me not impossible that Cu VI ER wouUl liave considered the two first described 

 species as Corythi, and these two as Coccotliravsti^s-' Subhcinachalus inclines much to 

 Pyrrhula ; and none of the four species are typical. Hence the dilficulty in classing them. 



O 



