THE CONDOR I VoL VI Pass),x t from the Colorado Desert(Cohuilla Valley, Walters, New River, Pilot Knob, Cameron Lake, Vallecito, and Yuma), t3 from south-eastern Arizona (Tucson, Fort Lowell, and the Huachuca, and Santa Rita Mountains), and ? from Sonora, Mexico. Taking these up in regular order we will first consider the birds from the coast region of southern California, which should represent the subspecies brfanti. In Anthony's original description of brfanti (Auk XI, x894, ?to)the distinguishing features of the race are not made at all clear, but from the accom- panying text it is evident that one great point of difference between brfanli aud brunneicapillus is that in the former all the rectrices but the middle pair are more or less perfectly barred with white, while in the latter the outer tail feathers only are barred on the inner web. Besides this strking feature Dr. Mearns ascribes to bryanli a back broadly striped with white. In the series of twenty-two southern California skins before me there is just oue with a perfectly barred tail. This is a juvenile male taken at San Gorgonio Pass, the edge of the desert; and I do not think that great importauce can be attached to it, as the juveniles from all parts show more white markings on the tail feathers than do the adults, and in the post-juvenal moult, which takes Place in September, the rectrices are lost with the rest of the juvenal plumage. Of the remainder of the series there are one or two with not even the outer feathers perfectly barred on the inner web; many of them have illy defined spots ou the second feather and one from San Bernardino has a few irregular white spots on all the feathers. As to the striped back, supposedly diagnostic of bryanti, I believe it is to some extent seasonal, being more apparent in breeding birds in rather woru plumage than in autmnnal specimens; but it is far more conspicuous in the desert birds at hand than in any of the California or Arizona specimens. Passing on to the Colorado Desert birds I find in the tail feathers exactly the same markings as in specimens from the coast region; one with the inner web of even the outer feather imperfectly marked, one with some white markings on all but the middle pair, and most of them with some slight marks on the second feather. As I before remarked the desert birds show a greater tendency to longi- tudinal stripes on the back (these markings being more broken up in the coast specimens) but the difference is not great nor constant enough to justify any sepa- ration of the races. One specimen, a male from the Cohuilla Valley (Coil. G. F. Morcom, April xS, ?886) is noteworthy as being conspicuously paler than any other bird in the entire series. The throat is sparsely marked with black, the back has broad longitudinal white stripes and the crown is very light colored, almost chestnut, in striking contrast with the dark brown pileurn of the rest of the specimens. In tail markings, however, it is like many others, the outer feathers perfectly barred, one or two white markings on the second, and just a trace of white on the third. A female in my collection taken at San Fernando, California (No. e?8?, October ?8, x9ot) is very similar to this bird in geueral appearance, the only differences being due to the one being in perfectly acquired autumnal plum- age, while the other has the plumage more worn and abraded. Of the Arizona specimens, I have some from the extreme southeastern corner of the territory that are absolutely indistinguishable from others taken within a few miles of the Pacific Ocean. In the tail markings they vary exactly as spec- imens from the other localities do. There is supposed to be some difference between arithoriff and bryanli in the character of the markings of the under parts, the spots in the former being smaller, more scattered, and linear in shape, while the latter is supposed to be heavily
