ÖM I0 MT8 Y I R I D I S .
ORIOLUS VIRIDIS.
New South Wales Oriole.
Brmila ririiis, Lath,lad. Orn, ^ . , p v xxvm—SHaw, Gen. Zc01,,;vob »a. p. 4 73,
£oriot, Temm. Man. d’Om., 2nd Edit. p. liv.
Orem Orakk, Lath. Gen. Syn. Sapp, vol. I p. 12».-Ib. Gen. H ist.,g ffl® . p. 168,
isirraciae sagittate, Lath. Ind. Om. Sapp, p. H H f l H H D 400v
Striated Roller, Lath. Geh. Syn. Supp., vol. h. j|3 2 2 .—Ib. Gen. Hist., voL m. p. 83.
Streaked Roller, Lath. Gen. Hist, foL in. p. 84, young.
Mímeles viridis, King, Survey of Intertropical Goast of Australia, vol. ii. p. 419. .
Mmeta viridis, Vig. and Horsffjg Linn. Tran», vol. xv. p, 3 2 6 - Jard. and Selh,Bl,-.Orn, vol. n. pi. Bls.-G. R.
Gray, List of Gen. of Birds, 2nd Edit. p. 38.
Meruloides, Vig. and Horsf. in Linn. Trans., vol. xv. p. 327, young. | H H |
Oriolm viridii, Weill., 2nd Edit, da Nouy. Diet. d’Hist. Nat, tom. xviii. p . 1 9 7 - -» . Ency. Mfth. Om, part...
p. 697. I „ , , , , r\ I
variegates, Vieill, 2ndEdit. daNouv. Diet. d’Hist.Nat, tom. xviii. p. - l « r # Buey. Méth. Om, part u.
p. 696.
T h is bird was first described by Latham, by whom it was placed in the genus Gracula, but it agrees in no
respect with the members o f that genus, aud 1 in fact,” says Captain King, | the genus O rw lasis that to
which it bears the closest resemblance in its general appearance. I would at once refefllt to that genus,
but that I have some reason to think that it belongs to the melipl.agous birds. . ■ . Of the tongue or- mode
of feeding I can myself say nothing decisively; but general opinion places this bird among the groups t at
feed by suction, and as I have a second'species hitherto undescribedwhich is closely allied to it,.I prefer
forming both provisionally into a new genus" (M im e t eM to referring them thr one» from which although
they agree with it in external appearance, they may be totally remote in consequence o f their internal anatomy
and habits of life. If the tongue he found to accord with that o f the Orioles and not of tha Ho neysuckm,
my group of course must fall.” Messrs. Jardine and Selby took the same view o f the subject when describing,
and figuring the bird in their “ Illustrations of Ornithology,” and have given a description o f the
: structure of the tongue, which certainly offers a slight resemblance to that o f the true mel.phagous birds;
but my own observations o f the bird in a state o f nature enable me to affirm that in appearance, habits,
economy, and in the nature of its food it is truly an Oriole, to which group of birds it was correctly assigned
by M. Vieillot in the second edition of the “ Dictionnaire d’Histoire Naturelle,” and that consequently Captain
Kind’s generic term Mimetes must sink into a synonym of Oriolus.
The true and probably the restricted habitat of this species is New South Walps, where, m the months of
summer it is tolerably plentiful in every part of the colony. I frequently observed it m the Botanic Garden
at Sydney, aud in all the gardens of the settlers where there were trees of sufficient size to afford it shelter;
the brushes of the country, the sides of brooks aud all similar situations are equally inhabited by it. I did
not find it in South Australia, neither has it been observed to the westward of that part of the country.
That its range extends pretty far to the northward I have no doubt, as its numbers rather increased than
diminished in the neighbourhood of the rivers Peel and Namoi; and many persons would, I feel assured,
assign to it a much more extended range by considering it identical with the bird of the same form found at
Port Essington,—an opinion in which I cannot mySelf-coincide, believing as I do that the latter bird is a
distinct species, although at a hasty glance it would appear to he one, and the same R the general colouring
of the two birds is, it is true, very similar, but the &lidwing differences exist and are found to be constant
— The Port Essington bird (for which the specific term affinis would be an %ropna te appellation) is
smaller in the body, has a shorter wing, a much larger bill, and the. white spots at the tip of the lateral
tail-feathers considerably smaller than the bird inhabiting New South Wales; in other respects they are so
precisely alike that it will not be necessary to figure both.
The following notes descriptive of their habits and economy are equally applicable to the, one and the
other. . . . -.1
The bird observed by me in New South Wales was bold and active, and was often seen in company with
the Regent, Satin and Cat Birds, feeding in the same trees and H | similar berries?and fruits, particularly
the small wild fig. It possesses a loud pleasing: whistling note, which is poured forth ^ while the bird is
perched on a lofty branch. I often observed it capturing insects on the wing and flying very high, fre-
quently above the tops of the loftiest trees.
Mr. Gilbert states that the Port Essington bird is “ abundant in every part of the peninsula and the