ORNITHOLOGICAL NOTES. 
intention of conferring an Qriginal name of his own. The originality 
of the name was due to an accidental but very excusable blunder, 
which ought to have been corrected in the errata, in which case its 
originality would have vanished. It is moreover a proof of the 
confusion likely to arise from retaining rufivertex and ruficervix as 
independent titles for these two distinct species, that the Prince of 
Canino, when in the very act of pointing out the clerical error com- 
mitted by Lafresnaye, has himself perpetrated the converse of the 
same mistake, by writing ruficervix for rufivertex . 
It appears evident, that this is a case, in which without any de- 
parture from the spirit of the u law of priority,” we are justified in 
cancelling altogether the name rufivertex as a mere lapsus calami 
for ruficervix ; and as this name is shown to belong to a distinct 
species from the bird before us, we must retain for the latter the 
specific name dubusia , given to it in 1850 by Prince Bonaparte, 
prior to his criticism above quoted. 
This bird has been adopted as the type-species of three distinct 
generic names, viz. — Iridosornis, Lesson, in “ Echo du Monde 
Savant,” June, 1844; Pcecilornis , Hartlaub, “ Revue Zoologique,” 
October, 1844; and Euthraupis, Cabanis, 1850. Iridosornis being 
the oldest of these, is here retained, though the name Pcecilornis 
has been inadvertently printed on the Plate. 
Desc. — Crown, rich golden orange ; rest of head, throat and 
nape, black ; back, lesser wing-covers and belly, deep Prussian 
blue ; greater wing-covers, remiges and rectrices, black, margined 
externally with greenish-blue ; vent rufous ; upper mandible, horn 
colour ; lower, paler ; legs brown. 
Total length 5.8; beak to front 4, to gape 5, height 2£; wing 3; 
tail 2.7; tarsus 9. 
