1 7 6 
General Notes. 
most is very slight; and its value is further diminished by the fact of 
Guatemalan specimens having a slight yellowish tinge on the lores, break- 
ing down the chief point of distinction between Mr. Ridgway’s races” 
cit. : p. 135). It is just such intergradations as these which prevent the 
recognition of these forms as “species” but not as “races,” for races are 
supposed to intergrade, while species are not. It is just this difference 
that we seek to recognize by the third term in the trinomial system of 
nomenclature. Races, in their extreme phases, are as certainly recogniz- 
able as species, and often present wider differences of coloration and size 
than frequently occurs among closely allied species ; but whereas in the 
latter we know no connecting links, we expect them to occur between 
races at points geographically intermediate to the regions where they re- 
spectively present their greatest degree of differentiation, and to find at 
such intermediate points more or less difficulty in deciding whether the 
form there occurring is to be referred to the one phase rather than the 
other. In respect to the commingling of certain races in Mexico, and the 
argument based thereon, it is necessary to consider the season of capture 
of the specimens in question before concluding that because two supposed 
races have occurred at the same localities they are not, after all, geograph- 
ically distinct in their breeding habitats. 
Hitherto we have had no general treatise on the birds of the region to 
which the present work relates, the abundant literature of the subject being 
widely scattered in special papers or more general .works, usually not easy 
of access, and often inaccessible, to the general student. The importance 
and usefulness of the present work cannot therefore be easily overestima- 
ted. A similar work for South America would be a great boon to even 
thb specialist, but it seems almost too much to hope for at present. The 
execution of the “ Biologia,” as regards typography and illustrations, it is 
almost needless to say is excellent, for nothing less would be expected at 
the hands of its accomplished and enterprising authors. — J. A. A. 
(Brncral ITotcs. 
Nest and Eggs of the Painted Flycatcher (Setofihaga fiicta ). — 
For my knowledge of the nidification of this species, and for the nest and 
eggs in my collection, I am indebted to Mr. Herbert Brown, who became 
familiar with the birds while in Arizona. From Mr. Brown’s observations 
it appears that they differ somewhat in their habits from Setofihaga 
ruticilla , as they seldom or never catch insects on the wing, but pick 
them from the leaves and branches of the trees; one specimen was seen 
feeding her young with what appeared to be moths and long-legged flies. 
The nesting-site was on a hillside in a slight depression in the ground. 
A nest, now before me, was taken from a hole in a road bank, in the Santa 
Rita Mountains, by Mr. Brown, June 6, 1880. It is loosely constructed of 
