GENERIC CHARACTER. _Rostrum latum, valde depressum, lateribus aliquando dilatatis, culmine prominente, mandibulae superioris apice adunco, plerumque emarginato, marginibus mandibulae planae inferioris margines superplicantibus. Nares basales, membrana obtectae, apertura terminali, ovata, vibrissis longis armata._ _Ob. Pedes mediocres vel breves, digito exteriore ad medii articulum secundum annexo, interiore et medio ad basin modo annexis._ Bill broad, much depressed, the sides sometimes dilated, ridge prominent; tip of the upper mandible hooked, and mostly notched, the margins folding over those of the under mandible, which is flat; nostrils at the base of the bill covered by a membrane; the aperture terminal, oval, and defended by long stiff bristles. Ob. Feet moderate or short; the external toe united to the middle as far as the second joint, the inner and middle toes united only at their base. Generic Types (_Tem._) Todus plumbeus, Muscicapa borbonica, Flabellifera, &c. * * * * * SPECIFIC CHARACTER. _M. Supra olivacea, subtus fulva, aurea crista (maribus) insignis; jugulo albido; uropygio pallide flavo; cauda nigra._ Above olivaceous, beneath fulvous, (male,) with a golden yellow crest; throat whitish; rump pale yellow; tail black. Muscicapa barbata. _Gmelin._ i. 933. _Lath. In. Orn._ 2, _p._ 488. _n._ 86. _mas._ Whiskered Flycatcher (male). _Lath. Syn._ 364. * * * * * I once shot a pair of these little birds in the forest of Pitanga, about twenty leagues west of Bahia: this is the only instance which I know of their having been found in Brazil. The same bird appears, however, more frequent in Cayenne, according to the older ornithologists. But whether the bird described by them as the female be really such, admits of great doubt, because Dr. Latham (probably on the authority of Buffon) describes it as having a smaller bill, and a few short hairs, instead of long bristles, at the base; the crown with a spot of yellow, a longer tail, &c. None of these are, in general, sexual distinctions, and, moreover, are at complete variance with the female here figured. The sexes I ascertained by dissection. It follows, therefore, that either the bird found in Cayenne is a distinct species, or that the bird described as its female is not such in reality. This latter supposition I apprehend is nearest the truth.