PHALACROCOEAX. 
the British Museum, VoL XXVI., p. 331, 1898, as being the type in this place 
while correctly citing the species punctatus as type of the earlier introduction. 
Under his new genus Urile Bonaparte noted two sections, Urile and Leucocarbo, 
while after “ Halioem Bp. ex 111.,” he noted “ {Microcarbo si videbitur).” 
Corrections to this — probably at that time unpublished — classification were 
made by Bonaparte in the Comptes Rendus Sci. (Paris), Vol. XLIII., 
September, 1856, where Urile is noted with P. urile as type ; Sticticarbo is 
dismissed, as S. gairmrdi should be referred to Graculus, while S. punctatus 
would fall into Urile. He further raises Leucocarbo to generic rank for the 
American species of Hypoleucus, classing it near Urile. On p. 577, Microcarbo 
is fuUy proposed for Haliceus Rchb. nec 111., and P. pygmceus is definitely 
named as type. Here again this is not the type given by Ogilvie-Grant in 
the Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum, Vol. XXVI., p. 331, 1898, 
where P. melanoleucus is named. 
Bonaparte’s dismissal of Sticticarbo cannot be recognised, as that would 
accurately mean the replacement of Urile by that name. 
Salvador! in the Ornith. Papua, e Mol.^ Vol. III., 1882, genericaUy used 
Microcarbo and Hypoleucus, but in the former he placed C. sulcirostris Brandt. 
This species is separated at sight from typical Microcarbo by its short tail, 
and many other minor differences exist. 
Since Ogilvie-Grant’s retrograde treatment of this group in the 
Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum, Vol. XXVI., 1898, no interest 
has been evinced with regard to its systematic classification, though in the 
American Ornithological Union’s Checklist, 3rd ed., 1910, under the genus name 
Phalacrocorax, three sub genera are admitted. 
163 
