g8 American View of the R. A. O.U." Check-list:' [xsf"oct. 



The reviewer is fearful that with the adoption of the R.A.O.U. 

 " Check-hst " the " progress of ornithology in Australia has been 

 to some extent hindered," and gratuitously commends instead 

 Mr. G. M. Mathews' " Reference-hst " as an "admirable check- 

 list of Australian birds on advanced lines." The fear is rather 

 that Mr. Mathews' "advanced lines" will lead students into 

 ornithological chaos, which the adoption of the R.A.O.U. "Check- 

 list " happily avoids. Take two examples among many : — 

 I. The White-bellied Robin of south-western Australia. In his 

 " Hand-list " (Emu, vol. vii., p. 86, 1908) Mr. Mathews classes it as 

 Eopsaltria ; in his " Reference-list " {ISlov. Zool., xviii., p. 317, 

 January, 1912) as Pachycephala ; and not twelve months after, in 

 this American-recommended " Reference-hst," he consigns the 

 species to a new genus, Quoyornis {Austral Avian Record, vol. i., 

 p. Ill, December, 1912). 2 The Yellow-plumed Honey-eater 

 {Ptilotis ornata). Gould regarded the bird collected by him in the 

 " belts of the Murray " as identical with the species Gilbert 

 obtained in Western Australia, yet Mr. Mathews subdivides the 

 species into five, and in some instances from localities not 100 miles 

 apart. There are Ptilotis ornata ornata (W.A.), P. 0. weslcydalei 

 (W.A., inland), P. 0. muna (Stirlings), P. 0. tailemi (Tailem Bend, 

 S.A.), and P. 0. underhooli (Mallee, Vic.) — Vide " Reference-list," 

 p. 410, and Austral Avian Record, vol., ii., p. 10. If we had 

 adopted Mr. Mathews' conclusions, what guarantee would we have 

 had that they were final ? 



There is a complaint that the "Check-list" Committee "fails 

 to comprehend the true nature of a sub-species," and the instance 

 is cited of the Tasmanian Swamp-Quail {Synoicus, not Synornis). 

 No doubt, generally, on the question of sub-species and 

 geographical races and varieties, there seems to be much confusion 

 (even amongst Australians) caused by treating sub-species, variety, 

 and race as identical. The great Darwin, in his " Origin of 

 Species," states : — " Certainly no clear line of demarcation has yet 

 been drawn between species and sub-species — ^that is, the forms 

 which in the opinion of some naturalists come very near to, but not 

 quite arriving at the rank of species ; or, again, between sub-species 

 and well-marked varieties, or between lesser varieties and individual 

 differences. These differences blend into each other in an insensible 

 series." 



It is stated in the R.A.O.U. list that every geographical race is 

 not a sub-species, though many are, and where they are sufficiently 

 distinctive they have been raised to that rank. Mr. Mathews 

 apparently draws no distinction between sub-species and variety. 

 Adverting again to Synoicus diemenensis, the "cabinet" ornithol- 

 ogist terms it "a very questionable geographical race." 



Mr. A. J. North, C.M.Z.S., &c., professional ornithologist of the 

 Australian Museum, in part 2, vol. iv., p. 181, of his " Nests and 

 Eggs," recently issued, states (regarding S. diemenensis) that- — 



" In six adult specimens now before me the distinguishing 

 characters of this species pointed out by Gould are constant. The 



