I 28 Reviews. \ El ™ 



J L ist Oct. 



seeing living specimens an opportunity of observing how closely 

 these species resemble each other in everything but the fact that 

 the yellow in the second species replaces the red in the first. 



The fifth part of this work should prove of exceptional interest 

 to members of the Aust. O.U., since all the 15 species dealt with 

 are from Australia. There are four fine coloured plates, depicting 

 Barnard's, Bauer's (Port Lincoln), and the Many-coloured Parra- 

 keets, from the pencil of Mr. Goodchild ; Yellow-vented and Red- 

 vented " Blue Bonnets " (Gronvold) ; and the Golden-shouldered 

 Parrakeet (Renault). The text is, as usual, well worth perusal ; 

 but it is questionable whether the Red-backed Rosella (Platycercus 

 erythropeplus) should have been included in Mr. Seth-Smith's 

 book. Is it a valid species ? It is certainly not known to Aus- 

 tralian ornithologists. Mr. Seth-Smith mentions a pair as having 

 bred in Britain, and Count Salvadori described a pair in the 

 Zoological Gardens (London), but the probabilities are that it 

 is a hybrid, as the species of the family to which it belongs are 

 known to occasionally interbreed, and, the species being so closely 

 related, hybrids between these birds would most likely prove 

 fertile. 



Correspondence. 



AUST. O.U. OR AUSTRAL. O.U. ? 

 To the Editors of " The Emu." 



SIRS, — The use of Aust. O.U. (Australasian Ornithologists' Union) 

 so as to distinguish the abbreviation for our Union from the 

 A.O.U. adopted by the American Ornithologists' Union, has led 

 some of my friends to ask does Aust. O.U. mean " Austrian " 

 Ornithologists' Union. Since Aust. O.U. is liable to be thus 

 misconstrued, I would suggest that Austral. O.U. be a happier 

 use of the abbreviation. — Yours, &c, 



A. MATTINGLEY. 

 Melbourne, 6/7/03. 



VERNACULAR NAMES. 



To the Editors of " The Emu." 

 SIRS, — With regard to a footnote in The Emu, vol. ii., No. 3, 

 and the paper on vernacular names in last issue, I would like to 

 make a few remarks. 



It is obviously essential that we should all use the same 

 systematic names, but so long as we do so, is it of very great 

 importance what English names we use ? What difference can it 

 make if I speak of the Waxbill instead of the Red-browed Finch, 

 or the Tomtit instead of the Yellow-rumped Tit, or the Red Lory 

 instead of the Crimson Parrakeet, if I give the scientific names 

 also ; always supposing that the name has not been widely applied 

 to any other Australian bird ? And in the case of birds which 

 are generally known by a particular name, of what use is it to 



