78 
Ridgway on the American Vultures. 
phidee (= Cathartidae of Huxley), and in the absence of any type 
cannot be referred to any particular genus. In Humboldt’s “ Voy- 
age,” however, five years later, Dumeril designated the Condor 
(S. gryphus) as Sarcoramphus cuntur , which, in the absence of rea- 
sons to the contrary, may be considered equivalent to the author’s 
limitation of his generic term to that species. 
The only method, however, by which the types of Sarcoramphus 
and Cathartes can be settled upon, and the proper names for the 
other Sarcorhamphine genera thereby determined, is the “ process 
of elimination.” Applying this method, we find that, in 1816, 
Vieillot established two genera of this family : Gypagus, including 
Vultur papa and V. gryphus (“ Roi des vautours, Buff. — Vultur 
gryffus, Lath.”), and Catharista, with the V. urubu, Vieill. 
(= “ atrata, Bartr.”), as type. Now, V. papa and V. gryplius 
having been already included in Dumeril’s genus Sarcoramphus , 
Gypagus is obviously a pure synonym of that name. In 1842, 
however, Gloger established for V. papa the genus Gyparchus, so 
that, excepting Gypagus , which can only be regarded as a pure 
synonym of Sarcorhamphus , we are able to designate a type for 
each of the species thus far mentioned : Sarcoramphus , with gryphus 
as type, by the elimination of aura (1811), papa (1842), and urubu 
(1816). The only generic type remaining is the Vultur calif orni- 
anus, Shaw, and for this no generic name appears to have been 
proposed prior to 1874, when the writer instituted Pseudogryphus 
for its special reception. 
In instituting (in 1874) the name Rhinogryphus for a genus, 
including only Vultur aura and its congeners, I was misled by Mr. 
G. R. Gray’s assumption that the type of Cathartes, llliger, was 
V. papa (see “ Hand-list,” I, p. 3). Considering, as I then did, 
Mr. Gray’s views on such points incontrovertible, I unfortunately 
deemed inquiry into the matter altogether unnecessary, and thus 
unwittingly added a synonym to a genus already provided with a 
name. Mr. Sharpe was evidently induced to propose, only a few 
months later, his name (Enops for the same group for exactly the 
same reasons, since he makes V. papa the type of Cathartes, llliger. 
Admitting then, that, by applying the “ process of elimination ” 
for the determination of its type, the name Cathartes can be re- 
tained for the genus under consideration, — notwithstanding the 
fact that no type is indicated, and that the diagnosis applies to the 
family in general, while V. papa heads the list of species enumer- 
