Appendices 
149 
Museum at a more recent date, in 1833, by M. de Nivoy, and 
two specimens in spirits sent to the Museum, in 1839, by M. 
Desjardins . . . 
The so-called Huppe du Cap, henceforth constituting the type 
of a genus, the genus Fregilupus , its specific name must be formed 
by the addition of the generic name of the epithet varius , which 
has been employed since 1783 by Boddaert, and which has 
besides the advantage of not consecrating a manifest error like 
the epithets capensis or madagascariensis employed later by 
Gmelin and by Shaw. The name of Fregilupus borbonicus pro¬ 
posed by M. Vinson would be evidently preferable, but the 
rigorous laws of priority oppose its adoption . . . 
The presence of the Fregilupus in lie Bourbon is, besides, 
attested by other authors : thus Levaillant mentions his having 
learnt from an inhabitant of the island that this species (the 
Merops huppe) lived in large flocks at Bourbon, where it fre¬ 
quented damp places and marshes, and caused much damage to 
the coffee-trees. On the other hand, we find in the Relation , 
already quoted, of the Voyage of Dubois , the following mention 
concerning the Oiseaux de terre : 1 Huppes ou Callendres , ayant 
un bouquet blanc sur la teste, le reste du plumage blanc et gris, 
le bee et les pieds comme un oyseau de rapine; ils sont un peu 
plus gros que les Pigeonnaux; e’est encore un bon gibier quand 
il est gras.’ The Huppes of which mention is made in this 
passage are evidently the Fregilupus , the same as those of which 
du Quesne speaks in a Report from which Leguat has given an 
extract ... 
The authors attribute the extinction of the Fregilupus in Bour¬ 
bon to the Mynas (Acridotferes tristis) introduced by Poivre 
in 1755. 1 They also refer to Professor Newton’s indication 
of a possible allusion to a Fregilupus in the ‘ Relation de File 
Rodrigues’ of 1760, given in the appendix of Leguat’s Voyage. 
1 This is most likely an error, for Fregilupus was wholly a forest bird, 
which Acridotheres is not. 
