Lettei'Sj Announcementsy ^c. 
125 
that in place of the pure white central line on the black flank- 
feathers seen in the adult^ the immature bird had this part 
chestnut (and I believe I was perfectly correct in so stating^ 
although in some adults a chestnut tinge on this part some¬ 
times remains)—and also that the central rectrices were ru- 
fouSj instead of snow-white_, which they afterwards become. As 
to this bird mentioned by Mr. Sclater with its entirely chest¬ 
nut flanks_, varied with black, I know nothing. Mr. Sclater 
says he has seen specimens; consequently they do exist; but 
although I believed I had examined all the specimens of the 
Phasianidae then existing in the museums of Leyden, London, 
Paris, &c., and also the living birds in the Gardens at Am¬ 
sterdam, Antwerp, Rotterdam, London, and in the Jardin 
d^Acclimatation and Jardin des Plantes at Paris, I have no 
recollection of seeing such a bird. Certainly, if I had, and 
it was a good species, there was no reason why I should not 
have*given a plate of it in my work. After all, may not this 
bird described by Latham be an immature E. nobilis ? for he 
gives its habitat as Java, with a question, and it might very 
possibly have come from Borneo ! I shall take the earliest 
opportunity of examining one of these chestnut-flanked birds, 
and state my opinion of it in this journal. 
The third and last criticism of Mr. Hume is on the error 
I committed (in his opinion) in uniting the Pucrasia cas~ 
tanea, Gould, with P. duvauceli^ Temm. Now, before reply¬ 
ing to this, it will first be necessary for me to say a few 
words about the last-named species, which, from his remarks, 
I should judge to be entirely unknown to Mr. Hume. He 
says Pretre^s drawing in the ^ Planches Coloriees Ms a vile 
thing, a wretched picture,^^ and that, barring the tail, it is 
equally unlike every species of the genus (quite true), and 
condemns it in toto, so far as I can see, because it does not re¬ 
semble P. macrolopha. Now I would state, in j ustice to Pretre, 
that, although his drawing does not equal one of Mr. Wolfes, 
yet it is a very faithful representation ofP. duvaucelij Temm. 
I have no hesitation in saying this; for I am perfectly 
conversant with his type (the original of the plate in the 
^ Planches Coloriees ^), as the specimen is still, and always has 
