“We gathered a large series of specimens of this common bird with the purpose of determining whether more than one species occurred in the Philippines. It is our decided opinion, after carefully examining a large series of specimens from all parts of the Archipelago, that there is no ground whatever for attempting to separate the birds from different islands. There is a great deal of individual variation in color, but all the various phases may be found in the birds of any one locality, the coloring changing greatly with the season, as well as with age, and frequently a good deal of variation occurs even among fully adult birds shot at a given time.
“If it be granted that we are dealing with but a single species, and we fail to see how anyone can doubt it who will look over a good series of specimens, it only remains to decide what name belongs to it. Sharpe states, Catalogue of Birds (1879), 4, 276, that as the white belly is the character by which the two species are distinguished, and as this is shown clearly in Daubenton’s plate of H. azurea, he has adopted that title for the Indian bird, in spite of the fact that the plate is professedly founded on the ‘Goubemouches bleu des Philippines.’ In other words, since the bird figured shows a white belly, Doctor Sharpe thinks it must have come from India and not from the Philippines. Now, while in some of our Philippine birds the belly is washed with blue, and in two specimens is decidedly bluish, in the majority of the specimens it is pure white. We are in no position to go into the question as to whether the Indian and Philippine birds are really distinct, not having the necessary material from India for comparison, but there is most certainly no reason for thinking that the subject of Daubenton’s plate did not come from the Philippines because it has a white belly. We therefore retain his title for the Philippine bird. It is one of the commonest birds in the islands.
“Ten males average: Length, 156; wing, 69; tail, 71; culmen, 15; tarsus, 15; middle toe with claw, 14. Five females, length, 147; wing, 67; tail, 67; culmen, 14; tarsus, 15; middle toe with claw, 14. Bill blue in male, but often black in female; legs and feet bluish, nails black.” (Bourns and Worcester MS.)
A nest of the black-naped flycatcher, containing three eggs, was found in Mindoro in April, it was composed of green moss and soft bits of dry bamboo leaves, and lined with fine blackish fibers. The outside was decorated with cotton-like substance from one of the fulgorid insects. The eggs were white, marked with dots of reddish brown.
A nest and two eggs found by Whitehead near Cape Engaño, Luzon, on May 24, 1895, are described as follows:
“Shape rounded ovate. Ground-color pure white, thickly speckled, especially round the larger end, with small spots and dots of brown-lake and with a few pale lilac under-markings. In general character these eggs resemble those of the tits (Paridæ). Measurements 17 mm. by 14 mm.
“Nest cup-shaped, generally placed in a forked branch among the lower growth in old forests. The structure is made of moss firmly bound together with white spider’s-web and lined with fine brown fibers.” (Grant and Whitehead.)
The black-naped flycatcher is one of the commonest of Philippine birds and is found wherever there are thickets or forest. It is more or less solitary in habits.
Genus CAMIGUINIA McGregor, 1907.
Bill moderately flattened as in Cyanomyias; culmen less than tarsus and equal to middle toe with claw; rictal bristles longer than bill from nostril; first primary little more than one-half of second, the latter much less than third; fifth longest and slightly longer than fourth and sixth; tail about equal to wing and slightly graduated; feathers of chin, lores, and forehead short, soft, and pile-like; feathers of crown more or less scale-like; occipital crest soft and full.