Brewster on Helminthophaga leucobronchialis. 22 1 
chialis , and, reasoning from that analogy, it seems quite as con- 
sistent to refer the present example with yellow wing-bands 
to lawrencei as the specimen No. 605, with white wing-bands, 
to leucobronchialis . Assuming this to be granted, we will 
next consider a young bird (No. 4,668, author’s collection) of 
which the individual just described was ascertained to be the 
parent. Although in process of change, the fall plumage is fortu- 
nately sufficiently developed to afford some important points : the 
gray first plumage of the under parts is replaced across the breast 
and along the sides by patches of bright yellow feathers , while 
the sprouting second plumage of the throat is pure white ; the 
lores are black, but the few second feathers which appear on the 
auriculars are, like those of the throat, white A 
It may with confidence be stated that this individual would 
have developed a fall plumage characterized by black lores, white 
throat, and yellow breast and sides, a condition, in short, nearly 
similar to No. 605. Now the only way of accounting for the 
parentage of such an offspring is to assume that the female, No. 
4,667, had mated with a male of either H. pinus or H. chrysop- 
tera; for had the male been either laxvrencei or chrysoptera , 
the black throat and cheek patches would inevitably have been 
reproduced. 
A nice muddle, certainly ! But let us see how all the facts in the 
several cases look when more closely associated. We have found : 
(1) That the prominent characters of leucobronchialis and law- 
rencei are not original, but are essentially borrowed from their 
allies, H. pinus and chrysoptera. (2) That the characters of 
leucobronchialis are inconstant, and that this supposed species 
intergrades with pinus. (3) That the characters of lawrencei 
are also inconstant, and that lawrencei interbreeds with some 
unknown ally — presumably H. pinus , producing offspring that 
resemble aberrant specimens of leucobronchialis . 
The inference to be drawn from all this can scarcely be doubt- 
ful. Race affinities will not explain the peculiar characters of 
either leucobronchialis or lawrencei , for the region over which 
all the known specimens have occurred is everywhere occupied 
by either one or both of the species to which they are most inti- 
mately related. Nor can they be considered as either immature 
* Specimens of young chrysoptera , in precisely the same stage, have the throat and 
cheek-patches distinctly indicated by black or ashy pin-feathers, according to sex. 
