Ss eS SE Serra 
Sia Sa RES gel = 
ee ee = 
7 et er 
Pecan 2 > SSS 
SS ee eae 
wee 
‘ 
i 
if 
ie 4 
aa 4 
ra, 2 
ft) 
ane} 
4 
BP ia 
ne yt 
Ns 
do ed 
i 
' 
i; 
nee 
ia 
Pe 
eile 
i ti 
Peg 
Laie 
His ee 
he 
Hoe § 
i 
> f] 
H Gee | 
ie 
iG 
ik 
hake 
4 
By let | 
\ 
; 
| 
ia 
: 
i 
4 
be 
i 
‘sk 
ha cas 
Hi 
At 
vy 
i 




358 Mr. P. L. Sclater on Ornithological 
pally on Mount Arfak and in the islands of the Bay of Geel- 
vink, but also contains specimens from Dorey, Sorong, Sala- 
watti, Waigiou, and Koffiao. It contains 2644 skins, be- 
longing to 279 species, of which 34 only are not represented 
in Beccari’s collection. 
Thus the two collections together furnish the magnificent. 
series of upwards of 4600 specimens, referable to about 350 
species, of which no less than 58 are stated to be new to science, 
and are described in the present paper. Amongst them are 
representatives of five new forms proposed to be called Oreo- 
charis, Ramphocharis, Aidistoma, Melilestes, and Timeliopsis. 
Oreocharis isa new genus of Diceine ; Ramphocharis is allied 
to Melanocharis, and referable to the same group ; Melilestes 
‘and Cidistoma are two new forms of Meliphagide. There 
are also in the series many new species belonging to Austra- 
han genera, such as Grallina bruijni and Drymedus affinis. 
Taken together the two collections of Beccari and Bruijn . 
contain examples of almost all the species hitherto described 
from New Guinea and the Papuan Islands. All the Para- 
dise-birds yet known, with the exception of the recently dis- 
covered Diphyllodes gulelmi-tertiu and Epimachus ellioti, are 
represented in them; and the whole series of Paradisee con- 
tains nearly 800 individuals in various stages of plumage. 
Salvadori, in the present paper, separates the Pygmy Parrots 
of the islands of Geelvink Bay, which have been described by 
Schlegel as local varieties, as Nasiterna maforensis and N. 
misorensis, and gives a description of the female of his recently 
discovered N. bruijnt of the Arfak Mountains. Salvadori 
has compared Leucophantes brachyurus, Scl., with specimens 
of the genus Amaurodryas (i.e. Petroica), and does not agree 
with Meyer’s notion that they are congeneric. I may add 
that I am quite of Salvadori’s opinion. My Leucophantes is 
by no means the same as Petroica. Salvadori describes two 
new species of this genus as L. hypoxanthus and L. leucops 
from Mount Arfak. The Manucodia of Jobi is separated 
from M. chalybeia as M. jobiensis, upon somewhat slender 
grounds it appears to me, only one specimen from Jobi being 
in the collection. Count Salvadori will, I trust, forgive me if I 

