Part 78

_Measurements._—Sex not indicated. Wing, 9.80–10.20; tail, 7.00–8.00; culmen, .80–.90; tarsus, 2.55–2.78; middle toe, 1.60–1.65.

[85] The type of _Craxirex_, GOULD (Voyage of Beagle, 1838, 22), is the _Buteo galapagoensis_, GOULD, a species strictly congeneric with _Buteo borealis_.

[86] _Falco unicinctus_, TEMM. Pl. Col. 313, 1820. _Morphnus unicinctus_, LESS. Man. Orn. I, 1828, 90. _Astur unicinctus_, CUV. Règ. An. (ed. 2), I, 1829, 332.—STRICKL. Orn. Syn. I, 221.—KAUP, Monog. Falc. 1850, p. 66. _Buteo unicinctus_, GRAY, List B. Brit. Mus. 18.—IB. Hand List, I, 7, No. 55. _Nisus unicinctus_, LESS. Tr. Orn. p. 61. _Hypomorphnus unicinctus_, TSCHUDI, Fauna Per. pp. 17, 85. _Spizageranus unicinctus_, KAUP, Ueb. Senck. 1845, 260. _Urubitinga unicincta_, LAFR. Rev. Zoöl. 1849, 99.—PELZ. Orn. Bras. I, 1868, 3, No. 10.—IB. IV, 1871, 394. _Polyborus tæniurus_, TSCHUDI, Av. Consp. Wiegm. Arch. 1844, 264.—IB. Fauna Per. pl. ii, _Juv._ It seems that the South American birds of this species never attain the simple tricolored plumage assumed by the adult of the North American form, Temminck’s figure (Pl. Col. 313) representing the nearest approach to it that I have seen, in a large series of adult specimens. The following descriptions show the average adult of var. _unicinctus_:—

_Adult male_ (No. 13,908, Chile; Lieutenant Gilliss). Resembling the immature of var. _harrisi_, as described on p. 1569 (No. 56,763). Primaries edged terminally with whitish; inner webs of tail-feathers mottled whitish for their basal half, not showing the regular transverse bars seen in the immature of var. _harrisi_; under surface of primaries almost wholly white, becoming ashy, barred with dusky, towards their ends. Wing, 12.00; tail, 8.30; tarsus, 2.90; middle toe, 1.60. _Adult female_ (No. 13,907, Chile; Lieutenant Gilliss). Similar to No. 13,908, but the tibiæ more strongly barred. Wing, 12.50; tail, 8.30.

_Specimens examined._—National Museum, 9; Philadelphia Academy, 9; Boston Society, 4; New York Museum, 1. Total, 23.

_Measurements._—♂. Wing, 11.65–13.15; tail, 9.00–10.10; culmen, .82–1.00; tarsus, 2.78–3.40; middle toe, 1.52–1.75. Specimens, 8. ♀. Wing, 12.50–14.60; tail, 9.20–10.50; culmen, .90–1.02; tarsus, 3.10–3.40; middle toe, 1.60–1.85. Specimens, 6.

[87] “Nest in oak-tree, in edge of wood, by lake.”

[88] “Nest twenty-five feet high, in oak-tree.”

[89] “Nest at top of broken poplar-tree near lake.”

[90] _Buteo borealis_, var. _costaricensis_, RIDGWAY. _Buteo borealis_ (all citations from Central America).

SP. CHAR. _Adult_ (No. 30,409, Costa Rica; Dr. A. von Frantzius). Head, neck, and upper parts continuous, unvariegated brownish-black; whole throat white, with a few cuneate spots of black; black of the neck meeting narrowly across the jugulum; pectoral area immaculate pure white; upper part of abdomen with an imperfect belt of distinct narrow lanceolate strips of black; whole posterior lower parts fine pinkish ochraceous, unvariegated; tibiæ deepest, inclining to delicate ochraceous-rufous; upper tail-coverts immaculate rufous. Tail as in var. _borealis_. Wing, 16.00; tail, 9.00; tarsus, 3.20; middle toe, 1.80. Bill very high, abruptly curved. Wing-formula, 4, 5, 3, 6, 2; first, shortest.

This very curious variety is that which departs furthest from the true _borealis_; not only the details, but in a measure the pattern, of coloration, being greatly modified. The perfectly continuous pure brownish-black of the whole head and neck, sharply contrasted with the white throat-patch, are features which distinguish it from every other variety of this group; while the deep rufous tibiæ, and almost utter absence of transverse bars beneath, are also very distinctive characters.

The second of the two Costa Rican specimens before me (No. 33,507; J. Carmiol) differs from the type in having the white of the pectoral area clouded by an encroachment of the blackish of the neck; and across the abdomen is a deep wash of the same. The tail-feathers exhibit indications of spots along the shafts, as in var. _calurus_; while the upper tail-coverts have a very few bars of blackish.

_Young_ (37,338, Tres Marias Islands, January; Col. A. J. Grayson). Similar to the adult in general appearance, but differing in the following particulars: Tail deep umber, with about twelve or thirteen narrow bands of black, and very narrowly tipped with whitish; lateral lower parts thickly spotted with blackish, and tibiæ spotted transversely with the same; lower tail-coverts with distant bars of blackish. Upper tail-coverts blackish-brown barred with white, this not touching the shaft.

HAB. Central America and Southwestern Mexico; Costa Rica, Veragua, and Tres Marias Islands (Mus. S. I.).

Localities: (?) Guatemala (SCL. Ibis, I, 217, _B. borealis_); Costa Rica (LAWR. IX, 133, “var. _montanus_”).

_List of Specimens Examined._—National Museum, 4.

Measurements much the same as in the other varieties.

[91] _Archibuteo lagopus_ (BRUNN.), GRAY. _Falco lagopus_, BRUNN. Orn. Bor. p. 4, sp. 15 (1764); PENN., GMEL., LATH., SIEMSS., DAUD., SHAW, NAUM., MEYER. _Buteo lagopus_, STEPH. et AUCT. _Butaëtes lagopus_, BONAP., GRAY, BAILLY, MORR., REICH. _Archibuteo lagopus_, GRAY, Gen. B. (ed. 2), p. 3; 1841, et AUCT. (Not of American writers, nor when used for the American bird!) _Hab._ North and Central Europe; Northern Africa.

A comparison of the American birds with series of sixteen European specimens shows constant differences in the birds of the two continents,—quite enough to establish a difference of race, although not of specific value. The European bird is much the darker beneath, the blackish-brown spots on jugulum and breast being blended, or suffused, so as to give the predominating tint to this region.

These differences, though constant and quite appreciable on comparison, are very slight, while the proportions are about the same. A young specimen of the European style differs from American in entire absence of rufous tinge to white of head, neck, and lower parts, less complete band across the abdomen, immaculate white ear-coverts, cheeks, and throat; the tibiæ and tarsi are also much more thickly spotted than in the American young; there is also more white on base of outer surface of primaries.

_List of Specimens examined._—Nat. Mus., 6; Philad. Acad., 8; Bost. Soc., 2. Total, 16.

_Measurements._—♂. Wing, 16.00; tail, 8.70; culmen, .80; tarsus, 2.30; middle toe, 1.30. Specimens, 1. ♀. Wing, 18.20; tail, 9.75; culmen, .95; tarsus, 2.60; middle toe, 1.50. Specimens, 1.

[92] _Aquila chrysaëtus_, var. _chrysaëtus_ (LINN.). _Aquila valeria_, ALBIN, B, II. pl. ii. _Aquila chrysaëtus_, BRISS. Orn. I, 431, et AUCT. _Falco chrysaëtus_, LINN. S. N. 1760, 125. _Aquila melanaëtus_, BRISS. Orn. I, 434. _Falco melanaëtus_, LINN. S. N. 124. _Aquila regia_, LESS. Tr. Orn. _Falco fulvus_, LINN. S. N. 1760, 125 (_young_).

_List of Specimens examined._—Nat. Mus., 4; Philad. Acad., 14; Bost. Soc., 2; Mus. Cambridge, 1; Mus. J. C. Sharp, Jr., 1. Total, 22.

_Measurements._—♂. Wing, 23.80–24.30; tail, 14.00–14.50; culmen, 1.68–1.70; tarsus, 3.40; middle toe, 2.40–2.45. Specimens, 2. ♀. Wing, 25.00–25.50; tail, 14.00–14.50; culmen, 1.80–1.85; tarsus, 3.80–4.10; middle toe, 2.85–3.10. Specimens, 3.

[93] _Haliaëtus pelagicus_ (PALL.). _Falco pelagicus_, PALLAS, Zoog. Ros. As. I, 343, pl. ix. _Aquila p._, KITTL., BOIE. _Haliaëtus p._, SIEB., GRAY, CASS. B. Cal. & Tex. I, pp. 31, 110, pi. vi (♀); IB. Birds N. Am. 1858, 42. _Thalassoaëtus_, KAUP, JARD. _Falco leucopterus_, TEMM. _Falco imperator_, KITTL. _Hab._ Northeastern Asia, Japan (SIEBOLD); Kamschatka.

[94] Established by Vigors, in 1825.

[95] From the _Vulturinæ_ are excluded the genera _Gypætus_ and _Neophron_, each of which probably constitutes a subfamily by itself.

[96] _Sarcorhamphus_, DUMÉRIL, 1806. (Type, _Vultur gryphus_, LINN.)

[97] _Cathartes_, ILLIGER, 1811. (Type, _Vultur papa_, LINN.) _Gypagus_, VIEILL. 1816. (Same type.) _Gyparchus_, GLOG. 1842. (Same type.) _Sarcorhamphus_, AUCT. (in part).

[98] _Rhinogryphus burrovianus_ (CASSIN). _Cathartes burrovianus_, CASS. P. A. N. S. II, 1845, 212.—IB. Birds Am. 1858, 1.—GRAY, Hand List, I, 1869, 3, No. 19.—COUES, Key, 1872, 222. _Cathartes urubitinga_, NATT. VON PELZELN, Sitz-ber. Wien. Ak. 1861, 7.—GURNEY, Cat. Rapt. B. 1864, 46.—SCL. & SALV. P. Z. S. 1867, 589 (Amazon).—PELZ. Orn. Bras. I, 1868, 1 (Brazil).—ELLIOT, Illustr. Birds N. Am. II.—GRAY, Hand List, I, 1869, 3, No. 20.

SP. CHAR. Very similar to _R. aura_, but neck feathered behind up to the occiput, and the plumage uniformly black, the feathers of the back and wings without brown borders. _Adult_ (34,984, Brazil; NATTERER). Bill white; naked skin of the head and throat reddish. Wing-formula, 3, 2, 4=1. Wing, 18.50; tail, 9.00; culmen, .90; cere above, 1.20; tarsus, 2.10; middle toe, 2.25; outer, 1.35; inner, 1.10; posterior, .80. _Hab._ Eastern Tropical America. Brazil (PELZELN & NATTERER); Amazon (SCL. & SALV.); ?? Jamaica (SHARPE); ?? Vera Cruz, Mexico (CASSIN).

[99] _Columba fasciata_, var. _albilinea_. _Columba albilinea_, “GRAY,” BONAP. Consp. VI, 1857, 51. _Chlorœnas a._ =Cab.= J. 1869, 211.

[100] _Columba araucana_, LESS. Voy. de la Coq. Ois. t. 40. _Columba denisea_, TEMM. Pl. Col. 502. _C. meridionalis_, KING.

[101] _Columba caribæa_, GMELIN, S. N. 1788, 773.—GOSSE, B. Jam. 291.—MARCH, P. A. N. S. Philad. 1863, 301. _Patagiœnas c._ SCL. P. Z. S. 1861, 80.—REICH. Handb. 65, tab. 230, _b_, f. 3362.

[102] _Columba rufina_, (TEMM.) REICH. Handb. 62, tab. 222, f. 2583, 2584.—LAWR. Ann. N. Y. Lyc. 1861, VII, 333, No. 281 (Panama).—SCL. & SALV. P. Z. S. 1866, 198 (Amazon).—IB. 1867, 590.—SCL. Ibis, I, 222 (Guatemala).—SALV. P. Z. S. 1867, 159 (Veragua).—IB. 1870, 115 (Costa Rica).—REINH. Vid. Med. Nat. For. 1870, 59 (Brazil).

[103] _Columba corensis_, GMEL. S. N. I, 1878, 783.—SALLÉ, P. Z. S. 1857, 235 (Santo Domingo).—NEWTON, Ibis I, 252 (Santa Cruz).—CAB. J. IV, 108 (Cuba).—TAYLOR, Ibis, 1864, 171 (St. Thomas). _Patagiænas c._ REICHENB. Handb. tab. 222, f. 2581.

[104] _Columba inornata_, VIGORS, Pr. Zoöl. Soc. 1847, 37.—DE LA SAGRA, Voy. l’Ile de Cuba, Ois. t. 28.—CAB. J. IV, 106 (Cuba).—SCL. P. Z. S. 1861, 80.—REICHENB. Handb. 62, tab. 222, f. 2582.—GUNDL. Repert. Cub. I, 1866, 298.—MARCH, P. A. N. S. 1863, 301 (Jamaica). _C. rufina_, GOSSE, B. Jam. (not _C. rufina_ of TEMMINCK!).

[105] _Columba solitaria_, MCCALL, Pr. A. N. Sc. Phila. III, July, 1847, 233. “Length, 13 inches 9 lines, etc. Alar extent, 23 inches. Wing, from the flexure, 7 inches 5 lines. Tarsus, 1 inch; middle toe, 1 inch 2 lines; first toe, 9 lines, and longer than the third; nails light flesh-color; feet and legs deep red. Iris dark orange. Bill above, 1 inch 1 line, but feathered to within 5 lines of the tip; reddish near the base, whitish near the tip. Head chocolate-blue. Throat chocolate-white. Neck and breast bluish-chocolate with brilliant reflections. Back, belly, flanks, under wing-coverts, and greater exterior wing-coverts, light red color, the last faintly bordered with white. Lesser wing-coverts chocolate-red, forming a bright shoulder-spot of elliptical shape. Quill-feathers dusky, tinged with lead-color on the outer vanes. Third primary longest. Upper and under tail-coverts bluish lead-color. Tail, 5 inches, slightly rounded, of twelve feathers; dusky.”

[106] _Zenaida hypoleuca_, “GRAY,” BONAP. Consp. II, 1857, 83.

[107] _Zenaidura yucatanensis_, LAWR. Ann. N. Y. IX, 1869. This bird is so exactly intermediate between the _Z. carolinensis_ and _Zenaida amabilis_, as to lead us to strongly suspect it is a hybrid between the two. With the _Z. carolinensis_ it agrees only in possessing fourteen tail-feathers; the coloration and size and shape of the bill being exactly those of _Z. amabilis_, while the tail-feathers are intermediate in length and shape between those of the two species. The colors differ from those of _Z. amabilis_ only in being of a just appreciably lighter shade, there being the same broad white tip to the secondaries, brilliant steel-blue sub-auricular spot, and deep reddish crissum, characterizing the _Z. amabilis_, as distinguished from _Z. carolinensis_.

[108] _Zenaidura graysoni_, LAWR. Ann. N. Y. Lyc. February, 1871, 17. A very distinct species, remarkable for its large, very long, and much depressed bill, and deep ferruginous, instead of pinkish-vinaceous, lower parts. The specimens are unfortunately all young birds, though they are fully grown.

[109] _Scardafella squamosa._ _Columba squamosa_, TEMM. Pig. et Gal. I, 59. A specimen of this species from Venezuela has the black bars everywhere twice as broad as in Brazilian examples.

[110] _Chamæpelia griseola_, SPIX, Av. Bras. t. 75, a, f. 2.—REINH. Vid. Med. Nat. For. 1870, 56 (Brazil).

[111] _Oreopeleia montana._ _Columba montana_, LINN. S. N. 1758.

[112] Messrs. Sclater and Salvin distinguish the allied species as follows:—

_O. poliocephala_, Wagler. Brownish-olive; the head plumbeous, lighter beneath; the feathers of the throat darker, and marked with gray; middle of belly milky-white; the flanks and crissum tinged with rufous; tail bronzed-green, the five lateral feathers broadly tipped with buff. Length, 24.00; wing, 10.50; tail, 11.50; tarsus, 3.20. _Hab._ Table-land of Mexico to west coast (Manzanillo, etc.).

_O. vetula_, Wagler. Brownish-olive; the head plumbeous, lighter beneath; the middle of the belly tinged with ochraceous or rusty; tail, bronzed green; the five lateral feathers tipped with white or buff. Length, 21.00; wing, 7.70; tail, 9.00; tarsus, 2.50. _Hab._ Texas to Honduras, on east side of Mexico.

A near ally to _O. vetula_ is the _O. leucogastra_, Gould (S. & S. p. 539) from Pacific coast of Central America. This differs in pure white of under parts. The size also is considerably less.

[113] _Meleagris ocellatus_, TEMM., CABOT, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. I, 73.

[114] As with nearly all the animals which have been brought under domestication by man, the true origin of the common barnyard Turkey was for a long time a matter of uncertainty. As a well-known writer (Martin) observes: “So involved in obscurity is the early history of the Turkey, and so ignorant do the writers of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries appear to have been about it, that they have regarded it as a bird known to the ancients by the name of _Meleagris_ (really the Guinea-fowl or Pintado), a mistake which was not cleared up till the middle of the eighteenth century. The appellation of “turkey,” which this bird bears in England, arose from the supposition that it came originally from the country of that name,—an idea entirely erroneous, as it owes its origin to the New World. Mexico was first discovered by Grigalva in 1518. Oviedo speaks of the Turkey as a kind of Peacock abounding in New Spain, which had already in 1526 been transported in a domestic state to the West India Islands and the _Spanish Main_, where it was kept by the Christian colonists.”

It is reported to have been introduced into England in 1541. In 1573 it had become the Christmas fare of the farmer.

Among the luxuries belonging to the high condition of civilization exhibited by the Mexican nation at the time of the Spanish conquest was the possession by Montezuma of one of the most extensive zoölogical gardens on record, numbering nearly all the animals of that country, with others brought at much expense from great distances, and it is stated that Turkeys were supplied as food in large numbers daily to the beasts of prey in the menagerie of the Mexican emperor. No idea can be formed at the present day of the date when this bird was first reclaimed in Mexico from its wild condition, although probably it had been known in a domestic state for many centuries. There can, however, be no question of the fact that it was habitually reared by the Mexicans at the time of the conquest, and introduced from Mexico or New Spain into Europe early in the sixteenth century, either directly or from the West India Islands, into which it had been previously carried.

It has, however, always been a matter of surprise that the Wild Turkey of eastern North America did not assimilate more closely to the domestic bird in color, habits, and by interbreeding, although until recently no suspicion was entertained that they might belong to different species. Such, however, now appears to be the fact, as I will endeavor to show.

The proposition I present is, that there are two species, or at least races, of Wild Turkey in North America,—one confined to the more eastern and southern United States, the other to the southern Rocky Mountains and adjacent part of Texas, New Mexico, Colorado, and Arizona; that the latter extends along Eastern Mexico as far south at least as Orizaba, and that it is from this Mexican species, and not from that of eastern North America, that this domestic Turkey is derived.

In the Proceedings of the Zoölogical Society of London for 1856 (page 61), Mr. Gould characterizes as new a Wild Turkey from the mines of Real del Norte, in Mexico, under the name of _Meleagris mexicana_, and is the first to suggest that it is derived from the domesticated bird, and not from the common Wild Turkey of eastern North America, on which he retains the name of _M. gallopavo_, of Linnæus. He stated that the peculiarities of the new species consist chiefly in the creamy-white tips of the tail-feathers and of the upper tail-coverts, with some other points of minor importance. I suggest that the Wild Turkey of New Mexico, as referred to by various writers, belongs to this new species, and not to the _M. gallopavo_.

In 1858, in the Report on the birds collected by the Pacific Railroad Expedition (Vol. IX, p. 618, of the series of Pacific Railroad Reports), I referred to this subject, and established the existence in North America of two species of Wild Turkey,—one belonging to eastern, the other to middle, North America. Much additional material has since corroborated this view, and while the _M. gallopavo_ is found along the Missouri River and eastward, and extends into Eastern Texas, the other is now known to belong to the Llano Estacado and other parts of Western Texas, to New Mexico, and to Arizona.

The recent acquisition of a fine male Turkey by the Smithsonian Institution from the vicinity of Mount Orizaba, in Mexico, and its comparison with a skin from Santa Fé, enables me to assert the positive identity of our Western and the Mexican species, and one readily separable from the better known wild bird of the eastern United States. There is now little reason to doubt that the true origin of the barnyard Turkey is to be sought for in the Mexican species, and not in the North American,—an hypothesis which explains the fact of the difficulty in establishing a cross between our wild and tame birds.

The presumed differences between the two species may be briefly indicated as consisting principally in the creamy or fulvous white of the tips of the tail-feathers and of the feathers overlying the base of the tail and of the hinder part of the back of the Mexican and typical barnyard birds, as compared with the decided chestnut-brown of the same parts in the eastern Wild Turkey. There are other differences, but they are less evident, and those indicated will readily serve to distinguish the two species.

The true wild bird of eastern North America always has the tips of the tail-feathers and upper tail-covert of a chestnut-brown color; the Mexican species and its descendant of the barnyard never exhibit this feature.

Sometimes this domesticated bird is exactly like its wild original, differing only in rather greater development of the fatty lobes of the head and neck; and of this an example may be seen in the Museum of the Smithsonian Institution.

There is a variety of the domestic bird which is entirely black, sometimes even including the larger quills, which in both species are naturally banded with white, and in this there may be little or no trace of any bands at the end of the tail and of its upper coverts; but whatever may be the asseverations of the sportsman, the poultry-dealer, or the farmer, as to the “wildness” of any particular bird, or what the circumstances attendant upon its capture or death by trapping, shooting, or otherwise, implicit confidence may be placed in the test above indicated, namely: if the tips of tail and tail-covert are chestnut-brown, the specimen belongs to the _M. gallopavo_ or “Wild Turkey”; if the same part is either entirely black or any shade of whitish or light fulvous, then it is a “barnyard” fowl.

The following extract from a letter written by Dr. Sartorius, the accomplished naturalist, to whom the Smithsonian Institution owes the specimen of the wild Mexican bird referred to above, will be read with interest.

“MIRADOR, STATE OF VERA CRUZ, January 20, 1867.

“I am entirely of your opinion in regard to the origin of the domestic Turkey, as our wild bird differs from the tame only in the less amount of development of the fatty lobes of the head and neck.

“_Meleagris mexicana_ is tolerably abundant in this neighborhood, belonging more especially to the sparsely overgrown savannas between the region of the oaks and the coast, the Tierra Caliente or ‘warm region’ proper. It is a very shy bird, living in families like the wild Geese, and keeping sentinels on the watch whenever the flock is feeding in the vicinity of threatened danger. It derives its nourishment from plants and insects on the ground, and scratches with its feet to aid in the search for food. In running, the swiftest dog cannot overtake it. It is not very fond of taking to flight, but its powers in this respect are not behind those of any of the allied forms. Its breeding-season is in March or April, when the hens separate from the males to reunite into families again in September. Their general habits during this season are much as with the domestic bird, although I cannot say whether they inflate and swell themselves out in the same manner. I am, however, inclined to doubt it, as the specimen I have handled did not have the tips of the wing-feathers worn away as in the barn-yard breed. The female lays from three to twelve brownish-red, spotted eggs in the high grain, and hatches them out in thirty days, as is the case with the tame Turkey. The flesh of the wild bird is dry, but very sweet, like the tame fowl, and like the latter is dark on the back and legs, and white on the breast and wings.

“The white meat of the flesh on the breast of the Mexican and the tame Turkey, as compared with the darker meat of the common North American wild bird, is a fact of importance to be taken into consideration.

“The exact distribution of the Mexican Wild Turkey southward and westward is not ascertained, nor is it known that it occupies the western portion of the Mexican country. In Yucatan and Northern Guatemala it is replaced by a third species, the Ocellated Turkey (_Meleagris ocellata_), rather less in size, but far more striking in appearance, being marked in the tail with spots somewhat like the ‘eyes’ of the tail of the Peacock. The three species thus belong to Mexico and northern parts of Central America.

“Very truly yours,

“C. SARTORIUS.”

[115] _Ortyx virginianus_, var. _cubanensis_. _Ortyx cubanensis_, “GOULD.”—GRAY & MITCH. Gen. III, 514. _Ortyx_, sp. 2.—GOULD, Mon. Odont.

[116] The Florida bird has been lately characterized as var. _floridanus_ by Dr. Coues, in his Key to North American Birds.

[117] _Cyrtonyx ocellatus_, GOULD, P. Z. S. IV, p. 78.—IB. MONOG. Odont.

[118] This specimen is the type of _C. ochrocephalus_, AIKEN, Am. Nat. VII, April, 1873, p. 236.

* * * * *

Transcriber’s Notes

Variant spelling and hyphenation are preserved as printed. Simple typographical errors were corrected.