| OCR Text |
Show 1867.] LETTER FROM DR. G. HARTLAUB, 821 1 Fruit-Pigeon (Carpophaga cenea). Presented by the Babu Rajendra Mullick, C.M.Z.S. 1 Fruit-Pigeon (Treron sphenura). Presented by the Babu Rajendra Mullick, C.M.Z.S. 1 Entellus Monkey (Semnopithecus entellus). Presented by the Babu Rajendra Mullick, C.M.Z.S. 1 Panolia Deer (Cervus eldi). Presented by A. Grote, Esq., F.Z.S. 1 Slow Loris (Nycticebus tardigradus). Presented bv A. Grote, Esq., F.Z.S. I Hemipode (Turnix pugnax). Presented by A. Grote, Esq., F.Z.S. 1 Indian Badger (Arctonyx collaris). Presented by Dr. J. Anderson. 1 Slow Loris (Nycticebus tardigradus). Presented by Dr. J. Anderson. 8 Water-Tortoises (Emys, sp. var.). Presented by Dr. J. Anderson. The total number of animals brought home by Mr. Bartlett amounted to upwards of thirty, and their value was estimated at about £760. The Secretary read the following communication from Mr. Edward Newton with reference to a misprint in the last published part of the Society's ' Proceedings:'- " A singular and somewhat important error was introduced into my recent paper (P. Z. S. 1867, p. 344) during its passage through the press. "I had stated that prior to m y visit to the Seychelles only five species of land-birds were known to inhabit those islands, and I then proceeded to give their names. " The word ' five,' which stood rightly enough in the proof, has now been altered into ' six,' the corrector of the press apparently not having understood that I intended to quote Nectarinia seychellensis as a svnonym of N. dussumieri. A reference to the authorities I have cited both in this passage and in my longer paper ' O n the Land-birds of the Seychelles Archipelago ' (Ibis, 1867, pp. 336, 337) will show the necessity of these corrections." The following communication was read from Dr. G. Hartlaub, For. M e m b . :- •• In the Society's ' Proceedings' for 1866, p. 421, Prof. Schlegel writes, ' that Semiophorus vexillarius of Gould is based upon specimens (of Caprimulgus longipennis) freshly moulted, when part of the long quills has not yet been used.' Now all this is merely and foolishly theoretical. If Prof. Schlegel had ever compared specimens of Macrodipteryx longipennis and of Semiophorus vexillarius, he would have convinced himself, even primo aspectu, of the enormous difference between these two birds. This difference does not only consist in the very different size and the very different colouring of the two birds, but is structural. In Macrodipteryx longipennis |
