THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. 
hour’s hard chopping, I secured five fine eggs. They were somewhat nest- 
stained and heavily incubated, but I am glad to say they were eventually 
blown. They were a little larger than typical eggs of Barnardius. This is a 
very handsome Parrot, and I think I never saw a finer pair than the proprietors 
of this nest. The native name is “ Chelyup,” which is, no doubt, a rendering 
of the call-note.” 
The range, as at present known, is confined to the extreme South-west 
Australia, and I recently subspecifically differentiated the more inland form 
as follows : 
Purpureicephalus spurius carteri. 
“ Differs from P. s. spurius in being darker above, the cheeks greener and 
the under-surface dark purple.” 
In the present place I am not recognising this form, but when more 
material is studied I think it will be reinstated. 
I have noted Gould’s record from Port Essington. I cannot give any 
explanation of this, as I consider it must be a pure mistake, the nature of 
the generic form precluding the probability of its existence in that locality. 
It should be emphasized that, basing the range on this record, Salvador! in 
the Gat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XX., p. 557, 1891, gives as “ Hab. Western 
Australia from King George’s Sound to Port Essington,” and further catalogues 
a specimen from “ N. W. Australia ( J. T. Cockerell).” I have repeatedly 
indicated the falsity of the Cockerell localities, as had been pointed out by 
Sharpe previously, and consequently this record is apparently just as false. 
I wrote : “ The wickedness of the Cockerell labelling mostly irritates in 
the fact that Cockerell was a splendid collector and made beautiful bird 
skins and secured so many rarities, so that it is always possible that 
some of his novelties were really novel, but owing to his action no reliance 
can be placed upon any of his records.” 
390 
