106 
Recent Literature. 
the Pacific provinces. Each has its own restricted summer habitat, where 
it alone is found.” Of the two Western varieties, plumbeus appears to be 
the best marked, or, in other words, “ to be further advanced in the process 
of differentiation.” The measurements given show plumbeus to be appre- 
ciably larger than either cassini or solitarius. 
Mr. Henshaw here confirms the conclusion he has previously announced 
respecting the status of certain forms of the genus Z onotrichia, he regard- 
ing intermedia as ,a subspecies of g ambeli, and the latter as specifically dis- 
tinct from Z. leucophrys. Varieties gambeli and intermedia are considered 
to be, respectively, the dark coast and light interior races of one species, 
the Z. gambeli of authors. His discussion of the relationships of the Melo- 
spiza rneloda group has already appeared in full in this Bulletin (Vol. IV, 
pp. 155 - 160 ). In view of the great stress often laid upon differences of 
habit as diagnostic of specific and varietal forms, his remarks upon this 
point under Pipilo maculatus megalonyx (p. 300 ) are well worthy of atten- 
tion, as expressing the conclusions of an unbiased observer of long experi- 
ence. After affirming that at best such evidence is “ but a precarious 
means of discrimination, especially between birds closely related,” he adds : 
“ Apparent discrepancies in records are by no means always, perhaps, in 
fact, only in comparatively rare instances, attributable to inaccuracies of 
observation. But too often the fact is overlooked, or practically ignored, 
that in birds of the same species, at the same locality, and even at the 
same time, there may be a very marked diversity of habits, which is an 
expression of nothing more or less than individual taste or the result of 
quite adventitious circumstances. Such being the case, it is scarcely to be 
wondered at that in distant localities, where the observer is ever on the 
alert for new facts, he should, not infrequently, be misled into false com- 
parisons by a note new to his experience, or some hitherto unnoticed habit, 
which, perhaps, had it been marked nearer home, would have attracted 
but casual attention.” 
The status of the so-called Western Fish Crow ( Corvus caurinus ) is 
considered at length. After discussing the question in its various bear- 
ings, testing in detail the supposed evidences of its specific distinctness, 
he arrives at the conclusion that, while some of the Crows of the Pacific 
slope differ a little in voice and habits from their Eastern relatives, all of 
those occurring south of the northern boundary of Washington Territory 
must be referred to the Common Crow, Corvus americanus. Those occur- 
ring along the Pacific coast from Puget Sound northward to Alaska are 
found to be smaller, with a relatively shorter tarsus, than those from more 
southern localities, and to these Mr. Henshaw proposes to restrict the 
varietal name caurinus , which was originally based on specimens from 
Puget Sound and Washington Territory. It therefore follows that the 
Fish Crow of the Atlantic coast has no representative species on the 
Pacific slope. 
Of the Jays of the genus Perisoreus, Mr. Henshaw regards Mr. Ridgway’s 
