1837.] Description of a New Species of Falconine OwL 25 



brown : vent and under tail coverts, pure white *. lining of the wings, 

 impure rufous, like the breast, and bimaculate barwise with brown: 

 the quills internally on the ., jnner webs, barred with pale pure rufous. 

 Feet, bright yellow; bill and nails blackish blue horn ; cere greenish j 

 iris golden yellow. Intire length of the bird (male) twelve inches? 

 of the tail, six; of the bill, one ; of the tarsus, \ T 6 ¥ ; of the central 

 toe, 1 _? F ; of its nail (straight) T 5 g-; of a closed wing, 8|. Weight 7oz. 

 Expanse of wings, 27 inches. Intestinal canal 16 inches long, of 

 medial subequal caliber. Two inches from anal end, two caeca, each of 

 2§ inches in length, and slender, with enlarged globose distad extremi- 

 ties. Stomach soft, large, spheroidal, distinctly solvent, but consider" 

 ably thickened in the outer coat, and submuscular on the surface. 

 Contents, large black beetles. 



Comparing our bird with Noctua, to which it has the closest affinity ? 

 it may be observed that the accipitrine tendencies of the genus are 

 here much more apparent, particularly in the decreased size of the 

 head, the greatly superior development of the wings and tail, and the 

 greater firmness and still closer set of the whole plumage. The tarsi 

 are rather lower, and the bill is more compressed before the cere, than 

 in Noctua; nor have the wings the same technical formula. But these 

 distinctions are trivial in comparison to the high development of the 

 general falconidine (family of Diurnal Raptores) structure in our bird j 

 and which structure is, as it were, latent in Noctua. 



Noctua approaches' the Diurnal Raptores by its firm plumage 9 

 and the v£ry small development of the ear conch and of the disc, 

 not to mention the absence of egrets, and the small head. Our 

 genus can scarcely be separated from the sub-family of the Noc- 

 turnes, which latter would appear to include the Surnianae. Or, if 

 the latter be allowed a sub-family distinctness, I know of no genera fit 

 to be ranged under it, as the analogical equivalent of the Accipitrinae 

 and Falconinae, save Surnia and our Ninox, the genus Surnium of 

 authors being much more strigine than the type of the Noctuinse. 

 Our genus has wings less than the tail, but longer in proportion to it 

 than Accipiter. It may be a question, therefore, whether Ninox sym- 

 bols Accipiter or Falco. Our bird at ten paces, w T ould pass for a Tin- 

 nunculus, with which it agrees very much in structure and in habits 

 (insectivorous). But, in Tinnunculus there is a wide deviation from 

 the type of Falco : and the truth would seem to be the Diurnal as well 

 as Nocturnal Raptores require to be reclassified. 



