208 Recent Ornithological Publications. 
latter common to the Indian, Australian, and /Ethiopian regions. 
The only species described by Dr. v. Schrenck as new to science 
is a small Sylvian— Salicaria ( Calamodyta ) maackii —nearly allied 
to Calamodyta phragmitis , C. cariceti , and C. aquatica } of which 
a figure is also given. We must also not fail to call attention to 
some of the notices of rarer Anatid® in this volume. The true 
breeding-quarters of the Mandarin Duck ( Aix galericulata) —a 
“ very common bird” on the Amoor—were, we believe, previously 
quite unknown. And, in conclusion, we must again remind our 
readers of the great value of the whole work, even though excep¬ 
tion be taken to some of its details. We may, indeed, say that 
Dr. v. Scbrenck’s volume is absolutely essential to any one who 
wishes to attain a complete knowledge of the birds of Europe, or 
even of England, as giving details concerning the range of the 
greater part of our native species, and a fauna of a country 
whence many of our rarer stragglers have been derived. 
4. American Publications. 
The Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia have issued 
their ‘ Proceedings y up to the close of 1860. At p. 374 will be 
found a paper of much interest to those of our friends who have 
been working at the ornithology of the West Indies, being a 
Catalogue of Birds from the island of St. Thomas, collected and 
presented to the Academy by Mr. Bobert Swift, with notes by 
Mr. Cassin. Twenty-seven species are enumerated. Tyrannula 
martinica is evidently the same bird as is described in Proc. 
Zool. Soc. 1860, p. 314, as Elainia riisii *. Before adopting for 
it the Linnean name employed by Mr. Cassin, we should like to 
see specimens from Martinique. Dendrceca petechia is rightly 
distinguished from D. cestiva of the continent f. The Humming¬ 
bird (No. 12) should be Eulampis chlorol®mus. The Eupsychor- 
tyx , about which there has been some discussion in this Journal 
(antea, p. 114), is considered to be E. sonninii —“exactly the 
species figured by Mr. Gould under the name, and identical with 
* See also ‘Ibis/ 1860, p. 30/. 
t Compare Dr. Cabanis’s remarks on this section of the Dendrcecce in 
‘ Journ. f. Orn.’ I860, p. 327. His D. ruficeps, of which we have exa¬ 
mined many specimens, is the same as Mr. Cassin’s D. vieilloti, Proc. 
Acad. Philad. 1860, p. 192. 
