Jaa., 1921 SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THE SYSTEMA AVIUM 17 
seum of Natural History and in the National Herbarium at Kew. iy . 
Another factor in developing a cosmopolitan interest among British ornith- 
ologists has been the Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum. In this 
enormous work all of the specimens of each species in the British Museum were 
listed, and so its title is justified; but fortunately the catalogue not only lists 
the specimens of birds in the British Museum, but also gives synonymies and 
descriptions of all known species. This series of volumes must have been a 
- great influence in attracting donations of specimens to the British Museum. 
The publication of the Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum un- 
avoidably took many years—the first volume was out of date and out of print 
before the final volume was issued. Sharpe’s Hand-lst remedies this to a cer- 
tain extent. With the aid of the Zoological Record and other review publica- 
tions it is now reasonably easy to keep posted on the new genera and species 
as they are described. In this connection the reviews in the leading ornitholog- 
ical journals are important, and it should not be forgotten that the review sec- 
tion of the Auk is one of the most accurate in recording new generic and spe- 
cific names. | 
Sharpe’s Hand-list, through motives of economy perhaps, is not nearly so 
useful as it might be. Here is a list reduced to almost its lowest terms so far 
as information goes. With better typographical arrangement it could have 
been printed on fewer pages with no loss in clearness. Its gravest defect is the 
lack of primary references. For nine-tenths of the generic and specific names 
Sharpe gives no other reference than the Catalogue of Birds; for names of 
more recent date, the original references are given. To add to the difficulty 
of locating the subject of search in the index, each volume has separate pagin- 
ation. Dubois produced a two-volume list with continuous pagination and 
primary citations for species. In spite of these advantages the large page of 
the Synopsis Avium has probably prevented its more general use. Aside from 
Sharpe and Dubois, no one has attempted a world list in recent years. 
If such a work is to be printed, it should be completed and placed on sale 
with reasonable expedition so that it can be used. It is impossible to get a 
list of this sort so that it will suit everyone. Probably we shall never agree as 
to the limits of Larus, Charadrius, Ochthodromus, Anas, Tringa, Ammodramus. 
Lanius, Ptilopus, and dozens of other genera. Let the committee steer a middle 
course and neither a lumper nor a splitter be, for in this way will the need of 
the greatest number be served. 
An international committee might take such a list as Sharpe’s, revise the 
nomenclature and distribution notes, add synonymies and new species, and 
thus produce something that all the world could use. 
Of course such a list would be imperfect and would contain many mistakes, 
out it would give us some confidence in the names accepted, which cannot be 
said of some of the numerous genera and Subspecies that have been described 
m various publications. I do not mean that I object to the discussion and de- 
seription of new genera and species. However, it is often impossible to judge 
of the validity of these new forms. Here is where a committee on nomencla- 
ture has its field of action. If I have the necessary specimens, I can satisfy my- 
self as to the validity of the new forms proposed and will accept or reject the 
names as I think best. _ As the matter stands, however, one author unites sev- 
eral genera that have been long recognized, and another Separates them again 
and creates a few new generic names. In such a ease, lacking suitable material 
