^°'' fjs"'] Monthly Conversaziones of R. A. O.U. 145 



named {i.e., scientifically), except for the so-called law of priority, 

 should be re-named. He endeavoured to prove that nomen- 

 clature was not a science, but a system merely, and that orni- 

 thological science should not revolve around nomenclature. He 

 stated that the so-called law of priority cannot stand, being 

 arbitrary and inconsistent in itself. He gave instances where 

 ornithologists sought to resurrect ancient and obsolete names and 

 to bury living present-day ones, and asked what scientific 

 purpose is served by digging out prior names, some of which 

 perpetuated egregious error. He went on to say that after much 

 dispute between British and American scientists the loth edition 

 of Linne was accepted, and that nomenclature prior to this should 

 be excluded. Australian ornithologists were not represented on 

 this International Zoological Conference, and therefore were not 

 bound by its findings. This being so, he asked, " What has the 

 Linnean law of priority to do with Australian ornithology, the 

 nomenclature of which is almost entirely of post-Linnean authors ? " 

 The so-called law of priority does not say where Australian orni- 

 thologists should begin — with Gould, or any other author, or at 

 any specified time ; therefore it is not inconsistent with the law 

 of priority to use any Gouldian name if it be ornithologically 

 correct. 



Mr. Alexander pointed out that the rules of nomenclature that 

 Mr. Campbell objected to were those arrived at by the Inter- 

 national Conference of Zoologists, and that Australia was repre- 

 sented thereupon, in that the leading naturalists of Australia 

 were members of the chief scientific societies of the Empire — 

 the Ro^'al, Linnean, and Zoological Societies and the British Orni- 

 thologists' Union — and these societies were represented. More- 

 over, the agreement was reached in regard to all scientific names 

 in all branches of zoology, and it would be absurd to create a 

 special rule for Australian birds different from that prevalent in 

 all other countries for birds, and in all countries for mammals, 

 fish, insects, and other groups of animals. The reason why the 

 law of priority did not extend to authors ante-Linnean was that 

 Linnaeus was the originator of binomial nomenclature ; this, 

 however, did not apply here, as no Australian birds were known 

 to Linnaeus. Therefore, the first name given to an Australian bird 

 was the correct one. Gould himself was a thorough believer in 

 priority, and in his " Handbook " altered many of the names 

 given in his " Birds of Australia " in favour of those given to the 

 same species by earlier authors. Mr. Alexander instanced three 

 different classes of names in the present R.A.O.LT. " Check-list " 

 that he considered required alteration^(i) certain generic names, 

 e.g., Phalacrocorax, covering birds showing considerable differences 

 of structure, which could be grouped in several genera with 

 advantage ; (2) distinct specific names applied to certain birds 

 closely related to those of other countries, e.g., Strix delicatula, 

 the Australian representative for the European Barn Owl ; (3) 

 specific names which had been shown to be incorrect, t'.g., Fregata 



10 



