(3) 



Throngb an apparent oversiglit he then rejected Gray's name, though obviously 

 it had priority. 



Moreover, on p. 134 he had stated that Reichenbach first proposed the name 

 Rnllina in his Si/nopsis Avium vol. iii. Hasores, fam. llalliiKie, which agrees with 

 his quotation on p. 132. 



Reference to Gray's Genera Birds iii. settled the matter, for on p. 595 Gray 

 introduced " Corethrura Reich.," naming thirty-one species but designating no 

 type. A footnote reads: "Established by M. Reichenbach in 184 ? liallina of 

 the same author is synonymous." 



The second species, however, is thus treated : — 



"2. C.fasciuta (Raffl.), Linn. Trans, xiii. p. 328; Gallinula euryzona Temni., 

 PI. col. 417; Rallus nificeps Cav. — type oi Rallina Reich. 1845." 



This was dated November 1846. Hence we have de6nitely : — 



Rallina (Reich.) Gray 1^46 — type It. fasciata Raffl., as R. ruficeps Cuv. = 

 R. fasciata Rafti. 



All quotations as to Rallina and its type are somewhat after this style {^Cat. 

 Birds xxiii. p. 74) : — 



Rallina Relchenl). Handh. Falicar. p. xxi. (1846). 



This reference is apparently incorrect as to the date, but I cannot get to 

 the truth regarding Reichenbach's works. According to Meyer in his Index zu 

 L. Reichenbach'' s Ornith. Werken, published in 1879, the date of the publication of 

 the family Rallinae was December 30, 1840, and of the synopsis Natatores, etc. 

 1848. If these be accurate then Rallina must be quoted as of Gray's introduction. 

 Even if Rallina was published prior to Gray's use, no type was designated anterior 

 to Gray's selection. 



The type selections, both for Corethrura and Rallina, given by Stejneger and 

 Witmer Stone, are inaccurate, the type of Corethrura Reichenbach having been 

 fixed by Reichenbach himself in the Nat. S>/st. Vuyel p. xxiii. Is52 as jardinii 

 A. Smith, which is one of the species originally included by Gray. 



Page 14 : Species 68. Aptenodytes patagonica Miller, Var. Sub). Nat. Hist. pt. iv. 

 pi. 23 (1778) 

 replaces A.forsteri Gray. 



The latter species has not yet been recorded from Australia, whereas the former 

 has recently been noted from Tasmania. 



When I reviewed the nomenclature of the Penguins {Xoc. Zool. vol. xvii. 

 p. 495, 1910) I indicated the existence of the Millerian plates but questioned their 

 publication. While the paper was in the j)ress I noted their quotation by Boddaert, 

 and since then I have seen that Richmond has dated the entrance oi Aptenodytes 

 from Miller 1778 {Proc. U. S. Xat. Mus. vol. xxxv. p. 590, 1908), and that Riley 

 {Auh, p. 269, 1908) has given details of these Millerian plates. Their recognition 

 will give stability to the genus Aptenodytes as generally accepted. Therefore 

 Ajitenndyles will date from Miller (1778), and the type (by monotyiiy) Aptenodytes 

 patayonica Miller.* 



* It is worthy of remark that tliese plates of Tenguins (fur others were issued later) seem to be the 

 ones fi-ora which the iUuslnitions were made that appear in Forster's paper. The original drawings of 

 Geo. Forster in the Dritish Museum show that they were the source of both J. It. Forster's and Miller's 

 plates. They have, in Geo. Forster's handwriting, " I'ublished by J. F. Miller," and also reference to J, R. 

 Forster's paper in L'ljmment. Gotting. 



