GREAT CROW-BLACKBIRD. 
37 
with all that his pencil or pen has touched, are established incon¬ 
testably: he may occasionally have been mistaken as to his genera, 
or incorrect in a specific name, but by the plate, description, and 
history, he has always determined his bird so obviously, as to defy 
criticism, and prevent future mistake. 
Mr. Ord has published an excellent paper in the Journal of the 
Academy of Natural Sciences, proving the existence, in the United 
States, of two allied species of Crow-Blackbird, in which he gives 
new descriptions, indicates stable characters, and adds an account 
of their respective habits; but in attempting to correct Wilson, he 
has unfortunately misapplied the names. In this instance, he 
should not have charged Wilson with error, who is certainly cor- 
lect in regard to the species he published; and even had this been 
doubtful, he who so well described and figured the Common Crow- 
Blackbird, ought to have been followed by ornithologists. There¬ 
fore, notwithstanding Mr. Ord’s decision, we consider the quiscala 
of Wilson unquestionably the true quiscala of authors; this is so 
obvious, that it is unnecessary to adduce any evidence in support 
of our opinion, which, indeed, is sufficiently afforded by Mr. Ord’s 
paper itself. 
It is impossible to decide with certainty, what bird authors in¬ 
tended to designate by their Gracula barita; but after a careful 
review of the short and unessential indications, respective syno- 
nymes, and habitat given by different writers, we feel assured 
that they have not referred to one and the same species. Thus, 
the barita of Linne is a species not found in the United States, 
but common in the W est Indies, called Icterus niger by Brisson, 
and afterwards Oriolus niger by Gmelin and Latham: the barita 
of Latham, his Boat-tailed Grakle, is evidently the same with the 
quiscala:* Gmelin’s barita is taken partly from that of Linne, 
* It was probably by Latham, that Mr. Ord was led to misapply the names of the 
two species; for, perceiving that the barita of that author was the quiscala , he inferred, 
that the quiscala was the barita. 
VOL. i .—k 
