144 Capt. Blakiston on the Birds of the 
the American continent, I became convinced that such a bird 
existed, and made known my belief, both by letter to my friend 
Mr. George Lawrence, of New York, and also to Prof. Baird and 
Mr. Cassin, when I visited Washington and Philadelphia in the 
spring of 1859. This conviction, however, was not founded on 
any specimen seen, but from the verbal evidence gained from 
the traders and Indians of the country. No one could have 
been more loth to believe in a “ Large Goose” than myself, 
because I always fancy that, if any bird is shot, it is sure to be a 
very large or particularly small one, so many persons being in the 
habit of making molehills into mountains in the sporting way; 
but still I was assured so frequently, by those who could have no 
interest in intentionally deceiving me, of the existence of this 
“ Large Goose,” that had I obtained it I intended to have named 
it major ; I am delighted to find, however, that Mr. Boss has 
dedicated it to our mutual friend and zealous naturalist, Mr. 
George Barnston. These reports, moreover, exactly agree with 
Mr. Bosses observations of its associating only in small flocks, 
and being “yellow” (as the Indians said) on the breast. By 
some it was called the “ Barren Goose.” 
In concluding my remarks on the Berniclce of Northern Ame¬ 
rica, I may add that one Indian on the Saskatchawan testified to 
four kinds of Grey Geese (all those similar to the Canada Goose 
are called Grey Geese), which he specified as follows:—1, the 
Large Goose; 2, the Common Grey Goose; 3, the Short-necked 
Goose; and4, the Small Goose. No. 1 is now known as B. harn- 
stonii ; No. 2 is B. canadensis ; and No. 4, B. hutchinsii; but No. 3 
(which, however, I never heard of from any other source) cannot 
be accounted for by any species yet known to naturalists. More¬ 
over I should remark that Mr. Andrew Murray has described 
(‘Edin. New Phil. Journal/ April 1859, p. 226) a Goose, which 
he considers distinct from B. canadensis , under the name of B. 
leucolcema , which he received “ from Hudson’s Bay.” In colour 
and markings I should suppose it to be Mr. Boss’s B. barnstonii ; 
but the table of comparative measurements (if we except the 
total length, which appears to be of the skin) agrees so nearly 
with those of B. canadensis that I cannot see how it is to be di¬ 
stinguished by greater size. I reiterate that the average length 
