THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. 
very improbable. I here transcribe Mr. Bnller’s description (of A. gracilis 
BuUer, Ibis 1869, pp. 41-2) for the benefit of our readers, trusting should 
any of them meet with the bird in the flesh, they whl not fail to record 
the full 'particulars of its capture in our Proceedings. * Ibis 1869, note 
pp. 42, 380 ; also Ibis 1870, p. 459.” 
Later Ramsay recognised the two species and admitted both in the 
Tabular List in 1888. The differences between the two species was, 
however, not clearly defined, although it was due to Sclater’s notes on 
Australian birds in the Zoological Gardens, London, that the two were 
commonly admitted. 
When Salvadori monographed the Ducks in the Catalogue of the 
Birds in the British Museum, Vol. XXVII., he admitted his inability to 
define the two species, recognising on p. 252 Nettion castaneuin with a 
range of Australia, New Zealand, and New Caledonia (?) and as a straggler 
in Celebes and Java, and on p. 254 {Nettion gibberifrons) he wrote ; 
“ This species is absolutely similar to the supposed female of N. 
castanewn, both in colour and dimensions, so that I am utterly unable 
to distinguish it ; still it seems quite certain that they are not identical, 
as birds in the plumage of Anas gibberifrons have bred, and, perhaps, are 
still breeding, in the Zoological Gardens of London. ... We must wait 
for additional information in order to settle the question of the specific 
differences between N. castanemn and N. gibberifrons. Hob. Celebes, Java, 
Timor, Flores, Sumba, and if N. castanemn be not distinct, also Southern 
New Guinea, Australia, New Zealand and New Caledonia.” 
Such admission from such an accurate investigator as Count Salvadori 
shows how difficult a subject this is to deal with from examination of 
skins. As will be later noted, one Australian ornithologist solved the 
problem by weighing the dead birds, but this method cannot be applied 
to bird skins ! 
Hall, in his Key, quoted Salvadori’s first remark without any comment. 
Campbell commented {Nests and Eggs, p. 1039) : “ Field observers 
and collectors now have no doubt about the existence of this second 
variety of Teal in Australia. Some systematists appear to entertain a 
doubt.” Then he quoted Count Salvadori’s remarks and added: “Mr. 
G. A. Heartland, having weighed two species of Teal in the flesh, has 
kindly furnished me with the average results : — Chestnut Teal : male 1 lb. 
9 oz. ; female 1 lb. 8 oz. Grey Teal : male 1 lb. 2 oz. ; female 1 lb. 
1 oz. This is evidence that seems to speak for itself. The Count could 
find no difference between the females. According to the above figures 
lliere is nearly a third difference in the weights.” 
108 
