444 Recent Literature. [july 



In discussing the Skuas. Mr. Mathews contends that the Pomerine 

 Jaeger is much more closely allied to the true Skuas than to the other 

 Jaegers, but as all three Jaegers differ from one another he proposes to 

 place each in a genus of its own while he uses Catharacta Brunnich for the 

 Skuas. Stercorarius is restricted to include only S. parasiticus; Coprotheres 

 Reichenbach is used for S. pomerinus and Atalolestris gen. aov. is erected 

 for S. longicaudus. Catharacta lonnbergi darkei from the South Orkneys 

 is described as new (p. 194), also C. /. intercedens from Kerguelen [si. vp. 

 49 I and (\ maccormicki wUsoni from Weddell Sea (p. 195 



Mr. Mathew's rejection oi Brisson's genera enables him to use Catha- 

 racta for the Skuas which would otherwise be untenable on account oi the 

 earlier Catarractes. We cannot agree with his attitude in the Brisson con- 

 troversy. This is one of a number oi mooted questions upon which the 

 International Code may be differently interpreted and if we reject the 

 vote of the Commission in these ease- and insist on our personal views we 

 might as Logically do *o in regard to the code itself. Uniformity is hopeless 

 unless the vote of the Commission on such eases is accepted. Under the 

 Charadritformes we find a number of new generic names proposed viz.: 

 Afribex, type VaneUus lateralis Smith (p. IP: Rogibyx, type Xiphidiop- 

 terus cucuUatus (Temm.) (p. 41); Pagoa, type Charadrius geoffroyi Wagl. 

 (p. 82 ; EupodeUa, type Charadrius veredus (p. 83) PagoUa, type Chara- 

 drius wilsonia Ord. (p. 83) {Octhodramus being untenable on account oi 

 the prior Odhedromus l.e Conte); Afroxyechus, type Charadrius iricoUaris 

 Yieill. (p. 124); Elseya, type Charadrius melanops Yieill. (p. 125 ; 

 Zarapita, type Numenius tenuirostris Vieill. (p. 168); Vetola, type 

 Scolopax lapponica 1.. (p. 191 



Also in spite of the fact that Mr. Mathews repeatedly states that he 



does not use subgenera we find three new names oi this rank proposed on p. 



ill: Pernettyva, type Charadrius falklandicus; Helencegialus, Lath, type 



ilitis saitdahihiur Harting and Paroxyechus, type /Egialiiis placida 



Cray and on p. 12 Prohamatopus, type Hamatopus guoyi Brab. & Chubb. 



There is considerable discussion of exotic species under each generic 

 heading and the history of generic subdivisions is given at length. 



We find /Egiaiitis mongolus referred to a distinct genus Cirrepidesmus 

 Bonap., while the Curlews are divided and Numenius hudsonicus and .V. 

 borealis are referred to Pha 



We note but one new subspecies Hypsibates leucocephalus timorensis 

 E.Timor (p. 150). 



Mr. Mathews' extreme views upon generic subdivision bring into use 

 many names usually relegated to synonymy and these together with the 

 new ones which he proposes will provide names for almost, if not quite 

 all the groups oi Charadriiformes that can possibly be differentiated 

 Whether his nomenclature will be followed by others is open to question. 

 His aim to be consistent in the amount oi differentiation necessary for the 

 recognition of a separate genus is praiseworthy, but consistency in judging 

 questions oi degree oi difference involves the personal equation and can 

 only be settled by the vote oi a committee. 



