172 Mxth^v^s, Second Edition of " Official Check-list."- [isf'jan 



of my work, but wish to emphasize the fact that the numerous 

 emendations I have made in connection with the nomenclature 

 and classification of Australian birds have all been towards the 

 one end : the accurate and exact nomination of our study without 

 prejudice in any manner. Consequently, my views have altered 

 as I have found facts to disagree with accepted theories. It must 

 be acknowledged that the student of ornithology must at first 

 be guided by the work of his predecessor, and it is only by perse- 

 verance and thought that he can improve upon that work. 



The one big point with regard to unanimity in generic names 

 now outstanding is " one-letterism," and here I wish to explain 

 my position, as it seems to be misunderstood. Reference to my 

 writings will show that I now accept a view entirely opposite to 

 my earliest one, and this is due to the one fact that I wish to 

 accede to the wishes of the majority. A few historical notes may 

 show the necessity of my action. 



When the British Association Code for the adjustment of 

 nomenclatural troubles was promulgated some 75 years ago, 

 natural science was in its infancy, and the rules there proposed 

 were not constructed with a view to posterity. The makers were 

 all students of many phases, and could scarcely be called 

 specialists. The Code admitted the correction of " supposed " 

 grammatical erroneous construction of names, and consequently 

 this was taken advantage of. This Code was known as the 

 " Stricklandian " Code, as a clever man called "Strickland" 

 was the secretary and compiler of the code. Strickland himself 

 was far-sighted enough to see the danger in this matter, but, as 

 the majority of workers disliked the idea of " inaccurate " 

 nomination, he commonly indulged in the proposed correction of 

 names. Thus, to cite the case of " Meliphaga v. Melophagtis," 

 we will suppose the former was constructed from two Greek words 

 • — nielos and phagos, meaning honey and sucker. The first com- 

 bination is either wrongly or rightly formed, according to the 

 grammatical rules governing the transliteration of Greek words 

 into Latin and also the combination of words. The Stricklandian 

 Code admitted, or rather advised, the emendation of such 

 incorrectly formed or wrongly transliterated words. Thus, which- 

 ever were the earliest in date, it invalidated any later combination, 

 as all the combinations were amenable to alteration until they 

 agreed. I have cited an instance of such emendation, and here 

 again give it. A worker proposed a name, Chroicocephalus. 

 Working with the Stricklandian Code, various writers indicating 

 errors of transHteration and combination suggested Kroicocephalus, 

 Kroikocephaliis, Chroiocephalus, Chro'ecocephalns, and Chroocephalus. 

 It was subsequently proved that the first proposer had correctly 

 formed the word, and it needed no alteration at all. I suggest 

 that it would be impossible to maintain the preceding half a 

 dozen combinations with any accuracy, considering the students 

 who are interested in ornithology. I make this statement, as it has 

 been argued that chemists not only utilize such similarly-formed 



