Genus— L A Z U L E N A . 
Lazulbna, nov. . . . . . . . . . . . . Type L. macleayii. 
Smallest Dacelonine birds with long stout bills, long wings, long tails and 
small legs and feet and peculiar coloration. 
The bill is long with the culmen keel flattened, the edges entire, 
the under mandible with an upward tendency. The coloration of the 
bill above is black, the basal part of the lower mandible horn. The 
wing is long with the secondaries short : the tip consists of four primaries 
the first equal to the fourth, the second and third a httle longer, 
subequal and longest. 
The tail is long and rounded with httle graduation. 
The feet are small and dehcate, the tarsus and toes scutellate. 
The sexes show shght but striking differences in coloration. 
In order to determine exactly the affinities of the Austrahan Halcyons ” 
it has been necessary to review the whole of the species so classed by Sharpe, 
the latest monographer, in the Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum. I 
publish here the results of my criticism and hope that these may be of use to the 
yomiger school of Austrahan ornithologists. I have always had before me in 
the preparation of this work the idea of making available to this younger school 
facts and fancies not easily achieved by the lonely worker in the Antipodes. 
I have received thanks from some of these earnest truthseekers who have added 
to the facts and thereby helped the fancies with which we delve into the past 
ornithological history of Australia. I here make these comments as it appears 
that in so doing I have offended some of the older ornithologists who would 
have wished to remain content in their ignorance and who have written objecting 
to my technicalities asserting that Austrahan ornithology was complete when 
they had done their little bit. It will never be complete as long as man ^ives. 
The separation of the species lumped by Sharpe in the genus Halcyon 
seems a very necessary task but one which might well dismay the boldest 
worker. To reconstitute an intricate series wliich has been split by many 
workers only to be reassociated by less sldlful followers is to court criticism. 
Lumping is an easy matter ; sphtting is much more difficult especially when 
the species are very similar in design and structure. It necessitates a review 
of the attempts to disassociate and reconstruct the group. 
I4I 
