244 Correspondence. [isf April 



Correspondence. 



" BIRDS OF ROCKINGHAM BAY," BY A. J. CAMPBELL AND H. G. 

 BARNARD, MS.R.A.O.U. {Evill, Vol. xvii., pp. 2-38). 



To the Editors of " The Emu." 



Dear Sirs, — On behalf of Mr. Barnard and myself, kindly permit 

 me to make a brief rejoinder to Mr. G. M. Mathews's letter, which 

 he was good enough to forward for the previous (January) Emu, 



P- 157- 



Mr. Mathews, in a somewhat patronizing criticism of our paper, 

 states we " fully confirmed the majority of the sub-specific dis- 

 tinctions bestowed" by him, in the district we collected ; but where 

 we ventured to disagree with that author, Mr. Mathews imputes it 

 to our "ignorance" — " such ignorance," "lack of knowledge," &c. 

 We bracketed Mr. Mathews's names with those of the R.A.O.U. 

 " Check-list " in a complimentary sense, not because we agreed 

 with all his. Our readers know the bird we are dealing with at 

 once by using the Union's " Check-list " ; the same, 1 am afraid, 

 cannot be said had we used Mr. Mathews's nomenclature only. 

 Therefore it is the Mathewsian " technicalities of nomenclature " 

 that are confusing. Even his last " 1913 List" (which he wished 

 the Union to espouse) is " in liquidation," as a student aptly 

 put it. Moreover, Campbell and Barnard's paper of " petty and 

 querulous items " was not written especially for " extra- 

 Australian scientific workers," but, with singleness of aim, purely 

 in the interests of Australian ornithology. 



We shall get to business and narrow our " little queries " to 

 four particularly cited in Mr. Mathews's letter : — 



I. — Almost all ornithological authorities (including Mr. Mathews 

 himself in his " larger undertaking," " The Birds of Australia," 

 which he states we " have not considered "), use Castiarius 

 australis (Wall) for the Australian Cassowary. Now he revokes 

 on his subscribers, requiring them to deface his fine plate by 

 altering the name australis to johnsonii. It was the Hon. W^alter 

 Rothschild who first suggested that johnsonii should take 

 precedence, because an ancient (a.d. 1792) popular miscellany,* 

 edited by one Shaw, called the Emu the " Southern Cassowary." 

 Therefore, as "'Southern Cassowary " signifies Casnarius australis 

 in technical terms, and as that name (although by inference only) 

 was once previously and erroneously attributed to the Emu, it 

 is unavailable for the Cassowary. If that be a sample of the 

 operative laws of nomenclature or of priority, save Australian 

 ornithology from such laws and from such " confusion worse 

 confounded." I defy Mr. Mathews or any other authority to 

 say that there is anything scientifically or ornithologically wrong 

 in the use of the term Casuarius australis for the Cassowary. 



* " The Naturalist's Miscellany" (of Shaw and Nodder). It contains 

 figures of more than 280 birds, but very poorly executed.- — " Encyclopaedia 

 Britannica." 



