example, his decision against the recognition of Halcyon vagans was based "on two specimens only." His subsequent "examination of a large series" has satisfied him that his conclusions in this instence were erroneous.
Nestor esslingii, Souancè.
This "most magnificent of parrots," as Mr. Gould termed it, has fually dropped ont of our list, although it held its place there as a recognized species for many years. It is one of the numerous "varieties" of Nestor meridionalis, of which full descriptions are given at pp, 40–45 of my book, and a very beautiful life-size drawing of it is to be found in the supplement to Gould's "Birds of Australia." I do not think it is quite fair, however, to fix upon Dr. Haast the responsibility of its retention on Dr. Finsch's previous lists. As pointed ont by myself, in a paper written several years ago (New Zealand Trans. N.Z. Inst., III., p. 49), the published descriptions of Nestor esslingii were so much at variance in their details that it was impossible to know the bird without seeing it; but I then ventured to express a belief that it would prove to be a mere variety of our highly variable Nestor meridionalis. This conclusion was fully verified by my examination afterwards of the type specimen in the British Museum, and I published the result in Part I. of my "Birds,"
Dr Finsch had previously enjoyed the opportunity of examining this specimen, and wrote as follows respecting it in his "Monograph" (Die Papageien):—"This species approaches, in its uniform colour, nearest to Nestor meridionalis, but differs from the latter satisfactorily by the broad yellowish white bands across the under part of the body, so that there can be no doubt of the specific individuality of the bird." Dr. Haast was not in any way responsible for this decision.
Prince D'Essling's bird was of unknown locality, and the mistaken reference to the species in Haast's paper (Verhandel des Zool. Bot. Ver. zu Wien, 1863, p. 116) was, of conse, apparent evidence of the existence of such a bird in New Zealand, but nothing more.
While I mention this circumstance, I must however bear testimony to the extreme care and accuracy in the determination of species which is manifest on every page of the valuable "Monograph" I have quoted.
Nestor occidentalis, Buller.
Till we know something more of this bird, the distinctness of Nestor occidentalis as a species must, I submit, be considered sub judice. No collector has since penetrated to the remote district whence Dr. Hector's specimens (now in the Colonial Museum) were obtained.
Platycercus forsteri, Finsch.
I am glad to find that Dr. Finsch has agreed to sink this species. I ventured to challenge it in 1868 (Trans. N.Z. Inst., Vol, II, p. 109); and after
