SOMBRE PETREL. 
This species was placed in the synonymy of P.carneipes by Schlegel, who how- 
ever did not correctly determine the latter bird, as he united it with P. fuliginosus 
Strickland, which is P. griseus (Gmelin) of present-day authors. In 1864, 
Coues, unacquainted with Bonaparte’s bird, accepted Schlegel’s disposition of 
N. gama, but pointed out that Schlegel was incorrect in making P. carneipes 
Gould, and P. fuliginosus Strickland, refer to the same bird. The strangest 
feature of Coues’ s monograph is his treatment of P. carneipes. He states : 
“ An excellent suite of specimens of carneipes is in the collection of the 
Philadelphia Academy ” — but gives no details regarding its bill, interposing 
the species between N. amauroso^na Coues and N. tenuirostris Temm., of each 
of which a long description of the bill is given ; yet the bill of P. carneipes differs 
in toto from the bill of these two species. That something was wrong with the 
Philadelphia collection regarding Gould’s bhds seems proven by Coues’s disposal 
of Nectris hrevicauda {p. 127) as, “ This is a species with which I am autoptically 
unacquainted.” Yet he should have had a long suite of Gould’s birds of this 
species at hand. 
In 1866 (p. 192) Coues has the following note : “ P. 126, N. carneipes. 
On the authority of Dr. Schlegel, I placed cinereus juv. Smith, and ga^na Bp., as 
synonyms of this species. Mr. Gray considers them as referring to a species 
of Nectris, or rather Puffinus, not recognised in my paper, viz. P. tristis Eorst. 
I am entirely unacquainted with this bird if it be a valid species. Bonaparte 
and Schlegel make it the same as tenuirostris Temm.” 
Gray, in 1862, had recognised P. tristis Forster as applicable to the Auckland 
Island dark Puffinus, and correctly synonymised P. cinereus juv. Smith, as he had 
before him the specimen figured by Smith and which is still preserved in the 
British Museum, and accurately determined as referable to this species. 
If we accept Bonaparte’s name as applicable to Smith’s bird, then Gray 
would be quite right in adding it to the synonymy. 
His description however seems to be a mixture, the words “ rostro 
breviculo, gracili fuscescente, apice flavido,” recalling P. tenuirostris, while 
Salvin placed it in the synonymy of P. chlororhyncTius Lesson, in which he was 
followed by Godman in the Monograph. The localities given by Bonaparte also 
favour the view of confusion of species by that author. 
Whether Bonaparte’s name should be used for the Atlantic form of P. griseus 
or not seems open to doubt. Ridgway, in the Water Birds of North America, 
Vol. II., p. 390, 1884, proposed for the Atlantic form the name of P. strichlandi, 
and it would be the wisest course to accept Ridgway’s name. Bonaparte, in the 
place quoted, introduced another new form as Puffinus fuliginosus Strickland 
(var.) chilensis Bp. (curilica ex Chili, Nomencl. Mus. Berol.), Mus. Berol. et 
Lugdunens. ex Am. m. a. Lamarre Picot. Major ; rostro graciliore. 
VOL. II. 
97 
