58 Correspondence. \ i^'^ 



July 



over from one supposed genus to the other by intermediate ones. 

 There is no other course than to unite them. 



Erolia, as I use it, includes Pelidna, Pisohia {Limonites), 

 Ancylocheiliis, and Hetcropygia of the Cat. Birds, xxiv. 



The species here united are distinguished from the genus Tringa 

 (above) chiefly by the entire or almost entire absence of con- 

 necting webs between the anterior toes, and in life a more flexible, 

 softer bill. 



On account of slight differences in the comparative length of 

 the bills and feet, or legs, shape of the bill, and colouration, the 

 birds obviously belonging to this genus have been placed in four 

 different genera — a proceeding which only adds to the difficulty 

 of their study, and has no advantage whatever. 



Of course, colour cannot be considered as of generic value, or 

 else what will one do with an albino ? — I am, &c., 



GREGORY M. MATHEWS. 



Langley Mount, Watford, Herts., England, 7/4/11. 



[Australian authors have been following the British Museum 

 Catalogues. Are they wrong in doing so ? It is interesting to 

 note Mr. Mathews' conversion from the binomial to the trinomial 

 system since the publication of his " Hand-list " {Emu, Suppl., 

 vol. vii., igo8). In the interests of Mr. Mathews' new and im- 

 portant work on " The Birds of Australia " (the initial parts of 

 which, however, although in subscribers' hands, have not yet 

 reached the editors of The Emu for notice), and of an Australian 

 " Check-list " of birds, now being compiled by the R.A.O.U., 

 Mr. Mathews' letter is published at length.— Eds.] 



THE BIRDS OF LORD HOWE AND NORFOLK ISLANDS. 



To flic Editors, of " The Emit." 

 Sirs, — In his " Alterations in the Nomenclature of ' Hand-list 

 of the Birds of Australia,' "* Mr. Gregory M. Mathews, with 

 ruthless pen, strikes 21 species from his " Hand-list," and gives 

 this curt note in his explanatory remarks : — " I do not include the 

 avifaunas of Norfolk and Lord Howe Islands, as these certainly 

 are not Australian." 



Why this sudden and remarkable change of opinion on the part 

 of Mr. Mathews ? So far as I can ascertain from my small col- 

 lection of avithors, Mr. Mathews was the first to incorporate, 

 without any reservation, the birds of these two islands in a 

 " Hand-list "t that purported to relate exclusively to the " Birds 

 of Australasia" (not "Australia," as quoted in the recent 

 " Alterations "). 



Gould says J : — " I think it will be well to append an account 



* T/ic Emu, voL x., p. 318. 



f The Emu, voL vii. (Jan., 1908). 



J " Handbook Birds Aust." (1865), App., p. 523. 



