THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. 
I have said five species, though the Catalogue of the Birds in the British 
Museum^ Vol. XXVI., only admitted four, but there are obvious contradictions 
on pp. 411-414 under Plotus rufus. This name is worthy of record as an 
instance of the “furor prioritatis ” that overwhelpied O^vie-Grant in the 
preparation of this Catalogue. The species Plotus levaillantii had borne this 
name with scarcely a disputant when Ogilvie-Grant brought into use Phtus 
rufus, a name previously absolutely unknown. Thus a name of seventy-five 
years’ standing was superseded by an absolutely “ new ” name. I agree with 
Ogilvie-Grant that he adopted the correct course, and by the acceptance of 
the undoubtedly right name in his work secured the recognition of it by 
workers universally. I have seen no refutation of his action, yet at the 
present time Ogilvie-Grant has endorsed a policy of “ N.C. ” — a direct 
incentive to slovenly w'ork — on the score of inconvenience. His own work 
in the Catalogue of Birds provides a full reply to his own arguments, and 
it is displeasing to see such a retrograde movement. 
194 
