2l8 Correspondence. [,sf"jan. 



Correspondence. 



NOMENXLATURE OF AUSTRALIAN AVIFAUNA. 



To the Editors of " The Emu." 



Sirs, — I was gratified to see Mr. Milligan's letter on this subject, 

 and after this reply it would seem, in the words of the newspaper 

 editor, " This discussion will now cease." For upon the points 

 at issue between Mr. Milligan and myself unanimity of absolute 

 thought may not have been reached, but uniformity of pro- 

 cedure must perforce be accepted. 



I sincerely regret that my comments should have seemed to 

 Mr. Milligan to savour of upbraiding ; but I wrote rather vigor- 

 ously, as I hoped thereby to stir up Australian ornithologists out 

 of the lethargy, as regards purely scientific work, into which they 

 appeared to have fallen. As I pointed out, I myself at the time 

 my '• Hand-list " was prepared, blindly followed the British Museum 

 authorities in its compilation. Further research convinced me 

 of the fallacy of such action, and I set myself the task of leading 

 the van as regards Australian ornithology, fully convinced of the 

 final success of ray cause. The sequel is perhaps as pleasing to 

 Australians as to myself. In the Nov. ZooL, vol. xvii., p. 492 

 (1910), concerning the matter Mr. Milligan firstly comments upon, 

 I wrote • — " It seems only a matter of time before British orni- 

 thologists fall in line with the rest of the scientific world." When 

 penning that sentence I fully understood the obstacles and their 

 certain removal, but did not anticipate such an early fulfilment 

 of my prediction as has followed. 



Mr. Milligan's letter was received in England on the nth 

 November, and three days previously the British Ornithologists' 

 Union had unanimously decided that " their adherence to the 

 I2th " (not 13th, as Mr. ^lilligan has inadvertently written) 

 edition was a " conservatism antagonistic to progress." That is 

 to say, though I cannot claim that I have convinced the British 

 Museum authorities, they have been convinced, and now the whole 

 ornithological world of science is unanimous in the acceptance 

 of the loth edition of Linne's " Systema Naturse," and also in 

 the use of trinomials for sub-species, and " Australia must per- 

 force fall into line," for at the same meeting of the British Orni- 

 thologists' Union the question of the use of trinomials was also 

 discussed, and here again was uniformity of procedure adopted 



" But, whatever the merits or demerits of either system may 

 be, I, as a member of the Check-list Committee, intend (quite 

 regardless of my personal feelings) to give loyal adherence to the 

 system presently adopted by the national authority on orni- 

 thology within the British dominions — namely, the British 

 Museum." Thus writes Mr. Milligan, and this is a most important 

 statement, as it at once enrols him absolutely on my side in every 

 matter of any importance, as at the present time the British Museum 

 ornithologists all follow the loth edition of Linne's " Systema 



