8 Allen, The A. O. U. Chech-Lis.t. \^^ 



The Committee has, of course, no absolute power ; it can only 

 suggest or recommend, or give its opinion. But to the rank and 

 file of the A. O. U. its opinion has fortunately the force of law. 



Let us suppose, now, that after the publication of the first Check- 

 List, the Committee had been permanently discontinued and 

 things ornithological had been allowed to drift, and each one left 

 to form his own opinion as to the merits of new forms or proposed 

 emendations of nomenclature. Where would have been our 

 hoped-for uniformity of nomenclature } While a Committee of five, 

 or seven, members selected from the more experienc/ed and best 

 informed workers in technical ornithology may not be infallible in 

 its rulings, its combined opinion is certainly entitled to respect, 

 and may be considered as a rather important balance wheel in the 

 ornithological machine, and it is generally welcomed as affording a 

 tangible hitching-post for current opinion on matters where only 

 experts are competent to decide. Its function of arbitrator is not 

 always an agreeable duty, and is certainly undertaken with the 

 utmost conscientiousness. Its labors are not limited to the few 

 days or weeks spent in annual or semiannual sessions; its work is 

 apportioned in advance among subcommittees who often spend 

 weeks in careful investigation of the work assigned them. Material 

 is assembled from all available sources, including the types of 

 the new forms involved, and also as much as possible of the 

 original material used by the describer of the forms. In many 

 cases the material required is not available, or at least not avail- 

 able ill sufficient quantity for a satisfactory decision, and the case 

 is then deferred for final action later. 



We have seen how much the Check-List has been modified by 

 changes and additions. We may now consider how many pro- 

 posed changes and proposed additions the Committee has declined 

 to approve. First, as to proposed additions which have been dis- 

 approved. These number i genus, ii species, and 48 subspecies, 

 of which two-thirds have been proposed within the last six vears. 

 Second, proposed changes in nomenclature and in the status of 

 species and subspecies disapproved. These include 13 names of 

 genera, 21 names of species, 10 names of subspecies and 28 pro- 

 posed changes of status, or about half as many as have been 

 adopted. Besides this, the cases deferred and still pending in- 



