BROWN FLYCATCHER. 
in the same place, by Vigors and Horsfield, but the species name they selected 
suggest their doubt as to its correct location, viz., macroptera . Almost at 
the same time Quoy and Gaimard described it as a new species of Muscicapa , 
indicating another peculiarity by their specific name, platyrhyncha. The species 
had, however, received a name years previously, as Latham had described it 
from the Watling drawings, but his generic guess was quite inaccurate, for 
he placed it under Loxia ! The drawing was unrecognised by G. R. Gray, 
but when Strickland re-examined the paintings he consulted Gould, who at 
once declared its identity and accepted Latham’s name, at the same time 
indicating that Sylvia leucophcea was another name for the same species, given 
to another painting. Watling’s note in connection with the latter reads : 
“ This little bird follows the gardeners and workmen, picking up worms, 
etc. It is very familiar.” The latter description is much better than the 
former, and it may be noted that Blyth preferred it, citing the one now used 
as a doubtful synonym. 
When Gould introduced the West Australian form as a new species 
he proposed a new genus for it, explaining that it reminded him as much of 
a Flycatcher as a Robin, apparently referring only to Caley’s comparison with 
the Robin, as the settlers called it the Brown Flycatcher. The Western form 
had more brown on the tail than the Eastern, but was otherwise similar. All 
the eastern forms were lumped until De Vis separated a pale form. Soon 
after that all pallid birds, whether from the north, whence pallida was described, 
or from the north-west, were called pallida and then some southern forms 
were ascribed to assimilis. Thus Hartert, writing upon birds from Derby 
and Kimberley, made a series of mistakes, using the name Microeca fascinans 
assimilis , writing : “ I do not understand why North accepts the name pallida 
for this form, or why Campbell recognises both assimilis and pallida, both 
names evidently applying to the smaller and paler subspecies of fascinans .” 
As type locality of Microeca assimilis Gould he gave “ Gulf of Carpentaria,” 
whereas it should have been West Australia, and as type locality of Mdcroeca 
pallida De Vis he gave “ Norman River, Kimberley district ” instead of Norman 
River, south-east Gulf of Carpentaria. Consequently North was right in 
using pallida in preference to assimilis, as the birds resemble the Gulf form 
much more than the south-western one, and Campbell was right in recognising 
both assimilis and pallida as they are easily separable, and the names do not 
both apply to the smaller and paler subspecies. 
In my “ Reference List ” I endeavoured to correct Hartert ’s errors, and 
disposed of the species under five subspecies as follows : 
Microeca fascinans fascinans (Latham), New South Wales ; M. f. victories 
Mathews “ Differs from M. f. fascinans in being greyer above,” Victoria and 
69 
