146 Notes and News. \j^ 



In city yards where wild birds are rare and cats abundant the destruction 

 of transients which happen to pause there during their migration is very 

 great as any one knows who makes a study of city bird-life. 



This subject is by no means an old one and has been agitated frequently 

 before but apparently with no definite action. 



Is it not time that the sportsmen, the Department of Agriculture and the 

 Audubon Societies join forces in giving the cat question serious attention? 



In the November number of 'British Birds' Mr. H. F. Witherby states 

 that he received a letter from Mr. A. C. Theron dated from "Riet Vallei, 

 District Lindley, Orange Free State, " stating that a Swallow had been 

 captured bearing a ring with his name and address. As Mr. Theron gave 

 neither the number of the ring nor the date of capture he asked him for 

 these particulars and received a reply and the ring itself. The ring is 

 number E937, and Mr. Theron stated that the bird was captiu-ed at Riet 

 Vallei on March 16th, 1913, and adds, "I do not know when it arrived." 

 This ring was placed on a nestling Swallow by Mr. R. O. Blyth at Skel- 

 morUe, Ayrshire, Scotland, on July 27th, 1912. 



In a recent number of the Austral Avian Record (Vol. II, p. 61) Mr. 

 Gregory M. Mathews brings up a question of nomenclature which is 

 perhaps the most serious that remains to be settled, i. e., the so called 'one- 

 letter difference ' ' . He says, " It is well known that the code of the American 

 Ornithologists' Union differs from the International Code, in that the latter 

 would compel the usage of 'one letterism' in differentiating valid generic 

 names whereas the former does not." He goes on to say that the A. O. U. 

 "have subscribed to the International Commission's Opinions while not 

 observing the Code," and that they hope to amend it to agree with their 

 own, adhering in the interval to their own rules. He fm-ther adds that 

 while the result is quite speculative "the trend is in favor of the Ameri- 

 cans." 



The above is quite unintentionally a little nlisleading, due to the ambigu- 

 ity or indefiniteness of the International Code upon the point in question. 

 It is touched upon in the recommendations to Article 36 as follows, "It is 

 well to avoid the introduction of new generic names which differ from 

 generic names already in use only in termination or in a slight variation 

 in spelling which might lead to confusion. But when once introduced 

 such names are not to be rejected on this account." "The same recom- 

 mendation applies to new specific names" etc. The latter clause of the 

 first sentence sounds like a rule but I am informed by the Secretary of the 

 Commission that it "is a recommendation not a rule." In other words 

 the Commission has not yet been able to come to a final vote on this matter, 

 although as Mr. Matthews further states in his article quoted above, the 

 recent Opinions of the Commission "suggest that ' one-letterism ' will be 

 abolished," that is to say that names differing only in termination and 

 ■other slight variations in spelling shall be regarded as identical. 



