Mr. 0. Salvin on the Ornithology of Guatemala . 199 
was shot in the Bay of Fonseca by Capt. J. M. Dow, who kindly 
presented it to me. 
69. Thalasseus regius, Gambel: Baird, Birds N. A. p. 859; 
t/ Cones, Ibis, 1864, p. 388 ; Salv. ibid. p. 385, et 1865, p. 190. 
Also abundant on both coasts. 
70. Gelochelidon anglica (Mont.) : Coues, Ibis, 1864, 
p. 389, et 1865, p. 190. 
Common at Chiapam. 
71. Sterna paradisea, Briinn. : Coues, Ibis, 1864, p. 389; 
if' Salv. ibid. p. 387. 
I observed only three or four of this species on Grassy Cay, 
Turneff. They were, I believe, preparing to breed on that 
island, which was also tenanted by great numbers of S. antil- 
larum. 
72. Sterna forsteri, Nutt.: Coues, Ibis, 1864, p. 390. 
The only Tern I ever saw on the lake of Duenas. 
73. Sterna antillarum, Less.: Salv. Ibis, 1864, pp. 384 
& 387; Coues, Ibis, 1864, p. 390. 
Mr. E. Bartlett has lately sent home a specimen of a Sterna, 
which I have no doubt is the S. superciliaris, Vieill. The dif¬ 
ferences between this bird and S. antillarum are ably stated by 
Dr. Coues as above quoted, and apply equally to the Bogotan 
specimen he had before him and j;o Mr. Bartlett’s from the 
Upper Amazons. 
74. Haliplana panayensis (Gm.) : Salvin, Ibis, 1864, 
pp. 381 & 385. Sternapanaya, Lath. Ind„ Orn. ii. p. 808. Hali¬ 
plana discolor , Coues, Ibis, 1864, p. 392 ; Lawr. Ann. Lyc. N. Y. 
viii. p. 105. 
I cannot agree with Mr. Lawrence in justifying Dr. Coues’s re¬ 
description of this bird under a new specific name. GmelinT 
remark, “ cervix ex cinerascenti nigra f I think at once shows 
that the bird he was describing certainly was not H. fuliginosa , 
with which both he and Latham were well acquainted. This cha¬ 
racter is, on the contrary, applicable to the present species, and 
is also noticed by Latham (Gen. Hist. vol. x. p. 119), where he 
