THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. 
confirmation, and I have had the painting exactly copied for reproduction 
in the Austral Avian Record for reference. 
When Sharpe examined the “ Watling ” drawings (Hist. Coll Nat. Hist. 
Brit. Mus., Vol. II., p. 113, 1906), he recorded : 
“ No - 36 - Hook-billed Shrike, Var. A of Latham, Gen. Syn. Suppl. II., 
p. 70. Lanius curvirostris, Lath., Ind. Orn ., I. p. 78. 
This is a Cracticus, and seems to be C. leucopterus Gould. It has, of course, 
nothing to do with Lanius curvirostris of Linnseus, which is a Vanya from 
Madagascar. Watling 5 s note is: ‘Two-thirds natural size. Native name 
Karro-bee~rang.’ > 55 
Sharpe overlooked the fact that this variety had been named by Stephens 
Vanga australis , and that Stephens’ name had been cited as a synonym of 
C. destructor in the Cat. Birds Brit. Mus. The figure shows a frontal view 
of the present species and it is obviously the basis of Latham’s description 
which reads : “ Hook-billed Shrike, Var. A. This species extends further 
than generally imagined as it has been found in New Holland ; it differs in 
having the whole top of the head black, below the eye on each side ; but the 
base of the bill on the forehead is white.” 
The colour of the back of L. curvirostris is black, whereas the colour of 
the back of the present series is grey. As there is no view of the back Latham 
did not know this, and hence his reference of the figure to the Madagascar 
species which has a similar hooked bill and under-surface. 
Stephens simply copied Latham's account and gave the name Vanga 
australis to the variety, probably on geographical grounds, at the same time 
querying its identity with the recently named Barita destructor of Temminck. 
Concerning the succeeding “ Watling ” drawing Sharpe wrote : “ This 
figure is the type of Lanius torquatus Lath., which has generally been referred 
to Cracticus destructor. Dr. Gadow considered the description of the Clouded- 
Shrike to be insufficient for recognition. There can, however, be no doubt 
that the identification is correct, and L. torquatus becomes a synonym of C. 
destructor, as was determined by Gray, Cabanis, and other good ornithologists. 
I have previously called attention to the fact that Gould often described 
as “ species ” forms which we now regard as “ subspecies ” only, but also 
pointed out that Gould fully understood that these “ species ” were repre- 
sentative forms of really less value, i.e. subspecies. I find that under the 
heading “ Genus Cracticus ” Gould actually wrote : “A great similarity exists 
between the species inhabiting New South Wales, Tasmania, and Western 
Australia, but the annexed descriptions, with a due attention to the localities, 
will obviate all difficulty in determining the species.” The words “ with a 
due attention to the localities ” draw attention to the fact that the slight 
394 
