1852.] O14 
with black bristles; from the base of the lower mandible two short stripes of 
white run downwards and backwards. Lores pitch black. Wings brown, infe- 
rior wing coverts, and edge of wing at flexure, white; primaries with three or four 
narrow spots of silky white on their outer margins, and all the quills with circular 
spots of white on their inner webs. Tail brown, narrowly tipped with white 
and crossed with two bands composed of spots of white, which are wanting on 
the outer webs of the two lateral feathers. Throat and upper part of the breast 
dark chesnut; all the under parts bright reddish yellow, tarsi and toes thickly 
covered with plumage of the same reddish yellow as the under parts. Bill and 
claws black, irides golden yellow. 
But two specimens of this bird have been taken to my knowledge; the first was 
captured Oct. 1821, and kept until winter when it made its escape; the second, and 
the one from which the above description was taken, flew into an open shop, July 
1852. It is strictly nocturnal, utters a low tremulous note, and is an active and ef- 
ficient mouser. Itis different from any other species yet known to inhabit North 
America, and appears to have some general resemblance in color to IV. Harrisiv. 
Cassin, but not sufficient to render it necessary to state their difference. 
[have named this species, as a slight tribute of respect to that zealous Natura]- 
ist, Prof. Jared P. Kirtland, of Cleveland, Ohio. 
2. Bubo subarcticus, nobis. 
A large light colored species. Tail crossed by five bands, wings with the third 
primary longest, second shorter than the fourth, tooth or lobe of the upper mandi- 
ble remarkably developed. 
Total length 24 inches, wing from flexure 17, tail 94,and extends 34 beyond 
the folded wings, tarsus 23, bill over its convexity 1 5-12ths, egrets 3 inches. 
Above white and fawn color, zig-zagged and barred with brown, scapulars 
broadly marked on their outer webs with white. Tail bright fawn, crossed by 
five bars of brown, outer webs of the exterior and tips white, two central feathers 
colored similar to the back. Quills with seven bars of brown. 
Beneath white ; on the breast, sides and flanks, each feather crossed with bars 
and narrow Stripes of deep brown, forming on the breast a wide irregular band of 
the latter color. Lower tail coverts white, each feather with a single narrow 
band of brown. 
Face greyish white, lores tiped with black, egrets with their outer webs and 
tips black, inner webs white, bill dark horn color, lighter at the point, claws 
black, irides yellow. 
The specimen now described was shot in January 1851, near this city, and 
proved to bea female. I have seen two others which were precisely similar in 
their markings to the present. - This species does not agree in many essential 
points with Richardson’s description of the Arctic horned Owl], nor does it agree 
either in color or anatomically with the common great horned owl, whichis very 
abundant here, and of which I have kept living specimens for more than a year. 
Of the latter species I have 'seen some very dark colored specimens; which are 
mostly, but not invariably, male birds. 
Some of my reasons for considering the bird just described as distinct from the 
common species, are as follows: It differs, 1. In colorand markings. 2. In 
measurements; it has comparatively greater length of tail, and of wings. 3. Ana- 
tomically ; the cranium of a specimen in my possession, shows a greater develop- 
ment of the posterior lobes of the brain and other differences, and a more distinct 
tooth like lobe of the upper mandible. 4. I have seen three specimens all cor- 
responding in every particular, and all occurring only in the depth of winter, 
when the great Cinereous Owl, (Syrnmium cinereuwm,) the Hawk Owl, (Surnia 
funerea,) and the Snowy Owl, (S. xyctea,) were with us. My conclusion is, 
therefore, that it is like these species, an inhabitant of the Arctic regions of this 
continent, and one of the rarest of the winter visitants in the northern pasts of the 
United States, and in Wisconsin is much less common than either of the three 
species mentioned. 
The Committee to which had been referred Dr. Wetherill’s paper 
entitled ** An Analysis of the Cotton Plant and Seed,” &c., reported in 
