Vol II 



1904 



:i -~l Correspondence. -AS 



SOME QUESTIONS re NOMENCLATURE. 

 The Editors of The Emu 



Sirs The mention of Calamanthus montanellus in my paper* 



leads' me to refer to the President's address read at the last Hobart 

 Congress of the Australasian Ornithologists' Union. Speaking 

 of the new species described by me for the year, he said that 

 Calamanthus montanellus appeared to be a sub-species of C. 

 fuliginosus " altered by climatic and topographical conditions." 

 As Col. Legge has not had the opportunity of comparing the two 

 forms, nothing further need be said. In the same address the 

 speaker said : — 



" Not a few Western Australian Passerines are so closely allied to 

 Eastern forms that they can scarcely rank beyond sub-species. My own 

 impression with regard to these close allies is that, originally, and perhaps 

 prior to the evolution of desert areas, consequent on a change of climate 

 in the southern region of Australia, these forms were one and the same ; 

 that the results of complete isolation from their fellows in Eastern 

 Australia has led to the creation of those differences in plumage, and 

 even structure as regards bills and legs, which now elevate them to the 

 position of sub-species." 



I must confess that I have not the same masterful grip of such 

 a comprehensive and recondite subject as our retiring President 

 has, but as many of the new species I have lately described and 

 a new one described in this issue are and will be necessarily 

 affected by the President's pregnant remarks, I shall be glad to 

 receive information on the following points :— 



(a.) When, approximately, did desert areas evolve consequent 

 on a change in climate in the southern region of Australia ; and 

 from what trustworthy data did the President receive the 

 impression that the Eastern and Western forms were at one time 

 identical ? 



(b.) Since the " identity " period mentioned, have or have not 

 the Eastern forms, or is it probable that they have, undergone 

 any modification ? If they have, how is it now possible to make 

 a true comparison between the two forms ? 



(e.) Why is it that the Western forms alone (as suggested) 

 have undergone modification ; and why should not " complete 

 isolation " be just as referable to Eastern Australia as to Western 

 Australia, and just as effective in producing in the Eastern forms 

 a departure from the hypothetical original species ? 



(d.) What difference exists at present in climate and rainfall 

 between the relative and corresponding parts of the southern 

 parts of Eastern and Western Australia ? 



(e.) Do not the desert areas impinge as well on Eastern Aus- 

 tralia as on Western Australia ? 



In the same address the President warns members of the Union 

 against creating new species on minor differences. If species are 

 not to be created on minor differences, then I ask upon what 



* See page 217. 



