THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. 
place for further items of hiterest. At that time I had not recognised the 
description of the White-fronted Bee-eater, also taken from General Davies’ 
draAvings, but since have seen a copy made by Latham which proves that 
it Avas also named from a specimen of this bird. It is somewhat curious 
that Latham should have named such a distinct and strildng form four times, 
as the draAAdngs are all ver}’^ mucli alike and should have been easily recognis¬ 
able as made from the same species. 
No subspecies Avere named until I examined the specimens for my 
“ Reference List ” in 1912, Avhen I separated it into fom-, thus 
Myzantlia melanocephala melanocepliala (Latham). 
NeAv South Wales. 
Myzantha melanoce'pJiala whitei Mathews. 
“ Differs from M. m. melanocepJiala in its slightly smaller size and paler 
coloration above, especially on the head and rump. South Australia.” 
Victoria, South Australia. 
Myzantha mekmocephala leachi iVIatheAvs. 
“ Differs from M. in. melanocepliala in its smaller size and its darker coloration 
above and beloAv. Tasmania.” 
Tasmania. 
Myzantha melanocejihala crassirostris MatheAVs. 
“ Differs from M. m. inelanoce.phala in its pale coloration and larger bill. 
Ganns, Queensland.” 
Queensland. 
In my 1913 “ List ” these Avere retained unchanged, but to the range of 
the first named Avas added South Queensland, and the range of the last restricted 
to North Queensland. 
As regards the Tasmaman form, A. G. Campbell had AATitten : “ The 
Tasmanian bird is distinctly’- larger and darker than the mahiland, with darker 
cere, biU, and legs, and no prominent Avhite tips to the primaries.” The 
discrepancy in size is due to the fact that Campbell AA^as making comparisons 
with Victorian bh’ds. 
Of the Cardwell bhd {crassirostris), Campbell and Barnard have stated: 
“ This pa.rticularly common bh’d was seen, but not in numbers, on the tableland. 
As expected, it Avas slightly smaller in size.” 
46 
