94 Mathews, Ibis Lacepede and Egatheus Bittberp. Ljan' 



This is too broad a definition for exact work, so that it is satis- 

 factory to have more data given almost simultaneously by Daudin. 

 An edition of Buffon was apparently printed oft" by Plassan in 1799 

 and not issued completely; it was then taken over and issued by 

 Didot. The full history of this complex transaction has been un- 

 ravelled by Sherborn (loc. eit.) and Richmond (Auk, 1S99, pp. 325- 

 329: also Auk, 1900, pp. 166-167). According to the latter the 

 XlVth volume of the Quadrupedes was not issued until 1S02, and 

 included in that volume were Tableaux des Mammif eres . . . . et 

 Oiseaux. 



Tin- latter is entitled " Tableau | des | Sous-Classes, Divisions, 

 | Sous-Divisions, Ordres | et Genres | Des Oiseaux, | par le O en 

 Lacepede; | Avee Vindication, de toutes les especes | decrites par 

 Buffon, et leur distribution | dans chaeun des genres, | par F. M. 

 Daudin.' 3 



On p. 334, we find the genus Ibis and thereunder are included: 



XIV, 1S2 



XV, 188 

 193 

 212 

 222 

 225 

 228 

 227 

 221 



XV. 219 

 204 

 206 

 208 

 210 



The reference is to the volume of Birds where the bird is described 

 under the vernaculars given. 



From among these then I conclude a type of Ibis Lacepede must 

 be selected. It may be that the better reference would be to Ibis 

 Daudin but it matters little. 



It will be at once noted that aethiopica Latham is missing and 

 consequently so far Richmond's conjecture is correct and Ibis 

 Lacepede (or Daudin) cannot be used any longer in the general 

 acceptance of that name. 



