247 
escaped the notice of the most casual observer, and yet we have no mention of them in any of the 
hearsay accounts that have been recorded from time to time. In addition to the instances mentioned 
in the body of this work, the following are taken from ‘ Out in the Open,’ p. 127 
“ Another specimen was procured by a gentleman in one of the forests far above the Rangitata gorge ; on being observed on 
a branch of a tree, it was knocked down and caught during its fall. There was fur on its beak, as though it had not long before 
devoured a mouse. This bird also "was set at liberty. . 
“ It has been taken at the W aim ate, where it remained for a day in the roof of a hut. Mr. M. Studholme had it in his ham s, 
but permitted it to escape. ... , „ -. 
« The late Mr. Phillips, of Rockwood, one moonlight night captured a specimen by taking it quietly off a bough ot an app e- 
tree. Mr. Phillips, like Mr. Studholme with his bird, carried it between his hands and allowed it liberty. He described it as 
being about the size of our Kingfisher. Note that each observer of this pretty Owl was impressed with its gentleness and its 
fearless confidence. Roth had enjoyed long colonial experience, were accustomed to birds, men of position and. well-known 
beyond their own districts. Athene parvissima must not be given up, even to satisfy the most erudite of ornithologists.” 
Professor Newton, to whom I submitted the drawing, writes to me: — “I certainly admit that 
your caution has been justified, for it is almost impossible to suppose that the wonderful Strix 
parvissima (!) could have been a bird of the same species/’ And Mr. J. H. Gurney, whose opinion on 
such a point is of the utmost value, sends me the following report :■ — 
“ I have carefully compared Mr. Keulemans’s drawing of the type specimen of Scops nova zealandice with the series of Scops 
Owls preserved in the Norwich Museum, and after doing this, and also referring to the late Professor Schlegels descriptions of 
the specimen in his ‘ Museum des Pays-Eas,’ Oti, p. 27, and ‘ Revue,’ Noctme, p. 13, and to Mr. Sharpe’s description in a footnote 
at p. 44, vol. ii. of his ‘ Catalogue of Birds in the British Museum,’ I concur in the belief there expressed by Mr. Sharpe, that 
Scops nova zealandice is a distinct species ; but if it be so, two questions will still remain undecided— 1st, whether the locality 
of New Zealand assigned to the Leyden specimen by Tcmminek’s label is correct : and 2nd, if so, whether the species is, or is not, 
identical with the New -Zealand bird for which Mr. Ellman proposed the name of ‘ Strix parvissima. 
“ The type specimen of Scops nova zealandice , judging from the materials before me, appears to approach most nearly to 
Scops morotensis, Sharpe, a native of the islands of Morty and Ternate, described and figured in Mr. Sharpe’s Catalogue of Birds, 
vol. ii. p. 75, pi. 7- fig- 1 ? hut it would seem to differ from that species in having a somewhat conspicuous nuchal collar, in the 
under wing-coverts being ‘ almost entirely ochraceous,’ and (to quote Schlegel’s words) ‘ par le manque de taches claires aux 
plumes scapulaires.’ 
u i return Mr. Keulemans’s beautiful portrait of the Leyden specimen by parcel-post and thank you much tor the opportunity 
of examining it.” 
In my account of the Laughing-Owl ( Sceloglaux aliifacies ) I have mentioned a tendency to 
variation in the plumage. I have since examined very carefully Mr. G. R. Gray s type (brought to 
England by Mr. Percy Earl in 1845), and it seems to be a case of partial albinism, for the face is so 
white as fully to justify the specific name bestowed by him. It has the forehead, cheeks, lowei sides 
of the head, and the whole of the throat conspicuously white ; the feathers composing the facial disk 
and the rictal plumes with black shafts, and those on the lower parts of the face with a central streak 
of brown widening towards the base. 
Fam. FALCONIDiE.— Mr. J. H. Gurney writes to me (under date March 29, 1888):— 
“ The Australian Harrier found in the Celebes is not Circus approximans = C. gouldi, but C. assimilis 
=jardinii, and neither of these species occurs in the Malay Archipelago ” *. It will be seen that in 
my account of Circus gouldi I have limited the eastward range of this species to the Fiji Islands. 
* Cf. also Gurney’s ‘ Diurnal Birds of Prey,’ p. 22, footnote. 
As mentioned in the Introduction to my former edition, Mr, Gurney having sent to the Norwich Museum for a specimen 
his Circus wol/i of New Caledonia (P. Z. S. 1865, p. 823) for my inspection, I felt no hesitation, after comparing it with adult 
examples of Circus gouldi , in accepting it as a good species, notwithstanding the opinions to the contrary of Professor Schle 0 el 
and other continental ornithologists. It appears to me to be readilv separable from our bird by its blackish crown and ear-coverts, 
2 K 2 
