Vol. XIII, 

 1913 



1 Correspondence. IO3 



The steamer which conveyed ^Ir. MiHigan to Tasmania arrived 

 very late, and that gentleman had time only to go very hurriedly 

 through the list, put it to the meeting, and dash off to catch the 

 boat again lor Melbourne. No one had a chance to grasp the 

 outline even of the " Check-list." Mr. Milligan says that there 

 was only one dissentient, by which he means myself. I must 

 say that I feel very proud to have moved that more time be given 

 for consideration, and that the list be referred back to the com- 

 mittee. I was pleased that Dr. G. Home, of Melbourne, supported 

 me in this, because I spoke on behalf of progressive ornithology. 



In reference to Zosterops halmatitrina, I will mix King Island 

 birds with specimens from the mainland, and will defy any 

 ornithologist, even Mr. Milligan, to pick them out. The Petroica 

 campbelli can be manufactured out of any P. leggii when skinning 

 the bird simply by stretching the skin under the white frontal 

 spot. This all goes to show that there was not nearly enough 

 material at the disposal of the " Check-list " Committee to enable 

 it to form a fair idea of the work. Mr. Milligan told us at the 

 session all about the American "Check-list" falling to pieces 

 through trinomials, or, in his words. " trinomials were pulling it to 

 pieces with their own weight," and that Mr. Ogilvie Grant, of 

 England, would not use trinomials. How strange that the 

 American ornithologists are stronger than ever on trinomials, and 

 the latest works of Mr. Ogilvie Grant plainly show that he is 

 using trinomials ! 



In conclusion, I say that Mr. Milligan is entirely wrong in 

 stating that I attacked the " Check-list" Committee. If he thinks 

 that I have attacked him, he has no right to speak for the other 

 members. I feel that I have a perfect right to criticise the 

 •' Check-hst." I say again that the R.A.O.U. "Check-list" will not 

 be considered scientific by the ornithological world. — I am, &c., 



Quorn (S.A.), 30/7/13. S. A. WHITE. 



IS THE MAGPIE A SONGSTER ? 



To the Editors of " The Em 11." 



Sirs, — Dr. Bancroft wants to know " whether many members " 

 of our Union agree with Dr. J. A. Leach in {inter alia) his remarks 

 upon the Magpie. Dr. Leach says, " That glorious songster the 

 Magpie " ; Dr. Bancroft says, " The Magpie is not a songster at 

 all." Well, I, for one, am wholly in agreement with Dr. Leach. 

 There is a very old saying, " De gtistibiis non disputanduin," and 

 if Dr. Bancroft considers that the lovely morning carol of the 

 Magpie is " a harsh, guttural sound," all I can say is that I am 

 sorry for him. In my garden there are several large pines and 

 elms, in which a colony of Magpies roosts, and the music of these 

 birds in the morning is a never-failing source of delight to me. 

 Possibly the Magpies in Queensland do not carol ; I have had no 

 experience of them. Possibly, again, Dr. Bancroft has no ear 



