|. ATI A V M U ** T M LH HfJ PNi 
PIED HONEY-EATER. 
Marsh-Sandpiper ( Totanus stagnatilis). The latter bird is an accidential 
visitor to Australia. During the breeding-season the female is not much 
in evidence, but the male careers around hi his erratic flight, tossing himself 
vertically in the air and hi his descent uttering his piercing, but monotonous 
and long drawn cry of ‘ Te-tltee-tee-tee.’ ” 
Macgillivray, writing about the region of the Barrier Range, New South 
Wales, observed : “ The Pied Honey-eater ( Certhionyx variegatus) was noted 
here, feeding in the blossoming box and lignum, but occasionally flying out 
to the surrounding sand-ridges to visit the flowering turpentine and honey¬ 
suckle trees ( Eremophila longifolia). This Honey-eater is very shy, and 
we had great difficulty in getting near enough to procure specimens. It is 
also very quick on the wing. It flies, singing, into the air from the top of a 
tree, and suddenly drops, always turning over backward in its descent.” 
Captain S. A. White, recording the results of an Expedition to the 
Musgrave and Everard Ranges, wuote : “ Rare; a fev T birds seen amongst the 
granite outcrops,” and later from the northern end of the Flinders Ranges : 
“ A small party of these birds w r as seen in the ranges feeding in the Eremophila 
bushes. An adult male and tw r o immature birds were secured ; the latter 
had the whole of the under-surface creamy-wdiite, thickly spotted with 
blackish-brown spots. They were a pair and the male could be easily picked 
out owing to the stronger markings. The erratic movements of this bird 
■were very pronounced; tins I had already noticed in the north-west of 
Australia.” 
Connected with the teclmical history of this species are several blunders. 
First it was described as a new genus and species by Lesson from a specimen 
procured by Peron and Lesueur and labelled as coming from Timor. It had 
been labelled but not described as a new r species by Cuvier. The specimen 
was apparently obtained at Shark’s Bay, West Australia, where this species 
is sometimes common, and it does not occur at Timor. Then Gilbert met 
with it in the Perth district and Gould, ignorant of the specimens in the Paris 
Museum, again described it as a new genus and species. Cabanis then 
proclaimed Gould’s genus name to be preoccupied and proposed a new one. 
However, Bonaparte recognised that the bird hr the Paris Museum was the 
same and suggested the retention of Cuvier’s MS. specific name and Lesson’s 
generic name. 
For some inexplicable reason Gray, accepting this, subordinated Lesson’s 
name as a subgenus of Gould’s Entomophila which had priority, and, of 
course, Gadow continued the blunder hr the Cat. Birds Brit. Museum, and 
this rvas followed by Australian ornithologists who had not access to original 
literature, although Ramsay had correctly used the genus name Certhionyx. 
VOL. XI. 
401 
