ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB. 
51 
genus Catherpes as distinct from Salpinctes, Professor Baird noted certain 
discrepancies in the structure of the feet ; and in 1864 (Eeview, p. 109)^ 
he enlarges upon the remarkable structure of the tarsus of Salpinctes, which 
he characterizes as “ especially peculiar among all , its cognate genera by 
having the usual two continuous plates along the posterior half of the 
inner and outer faces of the tarsus divided transversely into seven or more 
smaller plates, with a naked interval between them and the anterior scu- 
tellse.’^ This is certainly a remarkable feature for a presumed thoroughly 
Oscine bird to exhibit, since it is highly characteristic of OscinesJ;,o have 
the postero-lateral tarsal plates continuous, meeting in a sharp ridge be- 
hind. I verify the state of the case in Salpinctes as given by Professor 
Baird, but I find, to my surprise, that in Campylorhynchus the lateral 
plates, but especially the outer one, are broken up into a series of conspic- 
uous scutella ; and that Catherpes shows a tendency, not so full}" expressed, 
to similar division of the tarsal envelope. If this structure really possesses 
the significance attributed to it by many of the best writers, the question 
whether these birds are Wrens at all is reopened. That they possess de- 
cidedly Wren-like habits is no strong argument, for nothing is more falla- 
cious than such teleological bending of diverse structures to similar ends. 
It will be remembered that Lafresnaye, and other writers of repute, have 
placed species of Campylorhynchus in the genus Picolaptes, which is a 
member of the large family Dendrocolaptidce ; some of these birds have 
rigid acuminate Certhia-like tail-feathers, and Creeper-like habits ; in oth- 
ers, however, the tail is soft, and among them is witnessed the greatest 
diversity of habits. On comparing our Campylorhynchus with a typical 
Dendrocolaptine {Dendrornis erythropygia), I find that the bills of the two 
are extremely similar, and that the tarsal envelope of Dendrornis is broken 
up posteriorly into a number of plates, of which those on the inner aspect 
are continuous with those in front, while the postero-exterior ones are a 
series of rounded and isolated scales. Again, in the case of Salpinctes, it 
will be recollected that Bonaparte placed it in the genus Myiothera, and 
considered it an Ant-thrush (Formicariidce). On examining the tarsus of 
a species of Thamnophilus, a typical Formicarian, I find that the plates are 
divided behind, and the general structure is substantially the same as in 
Salpinctes. The case of Catherpes is less clear, but it would doubtless go 
with Salpinctes. These points may not suffice for the summary dismissal 
of the genera under consideration from the Troglodytidce, but they go to 
show that their position in that family is not assured. — Elliott Coues. 
Occurrence of the Curlew Sandpiper in Massachusetts. — Mr. 
Charles I. Goodale, our accomplished Boston taxidermist, has a fine 
Curlew Sandpiper {Tringa suharquata) which was sent to him to be 
mounted. It was shot in East Boston, Mass., early in May, 1876, as it 
was feeding on a sandspit among a flock of “ Peeps.” This bird is in 
very perfect spring plumage, and furnishes the second authentic instance 
