THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. 
“ Solenoglossus aterrimus macgillivrayi Mathews, N.Z., XVIII., p. 261, 
1912. Cape York. 
British Museum Wing. Tring Museum Wing. 
3 c? 355-368 mm. 
2 $ 335, 341 mm. 
“ Solenoglossus aterrimus goliath (Kuhl). New Guinea. 
British Museum. Tring Museum. 
8 c? 375-391 mm. 7 S 375-400 mm. 
6 $ 346-365 mm. 2 $ 350, 360 mm. 
“ Solenoglossus aterrimus alecto (Temm). 
“ Type locality restricted to the Western Papuan Islands and Aru Group 
[c/. Roths, and Hartert, N.Z., VIII., p. 77 (1901)]. 
British Museum. 
Aru 3 J 325-335 mm. 
„ 1 $ 313 mm. 
Misol [d] 355 mm. 
Tring Museum.. 
Aru 2 $ 325, 334 mm. 
„ 2 $ 310, 315 mm. 
Misol $ [<$] 341 mm. 
Salawatti J 340 mm. 
“ Messrs. Rothschild and Hartert [N.Z., VIII., p. 77 (1901)] restricted 
the name Eurhynchus alecto Lesson to the small race from the Western Papuan 
Islands. Subsequently Mr. Mathews [. N.Z . , XVIII., p. 261 (1912)] restricted 
the name Psittacus aterrimus Gmel. from * New Holland ’ to the bird found 
on the island of Salawatti, on which the name Solenoglossus aterrimus alecto 
(Less.) had already been bestowed, and re-named the Queensland bird 
Solenoglossus aterrimus macgillivrayi , but, as shown, this is a pure synonym 
of S. aterrimus (Gmel.). 
“ For the New Guinea bird, the largest of the three races, the name 
Psittacus goliath Kuhl seems to be the oldest available. Tire supposed new 
form from Humboldt Bay named M. a. stenolophus, by Dr. van Oort, appears 
to be based on examples with the crest feathers worn. We have such a 
specimen from his type-locality in the collection.” 
In the Ibis, April 1916, I recorded, p. 300 : “ Ogilvie-Grant has 
written : ‘ Solenoglossus aterrimus (Gmel.) [Type-locality, New Holland = 
Cape York],’ adding * Mr. Mathews . . . re-named the Queensland bird 
Solenoglossus aterrimus macgillivrayi, but, as shown, this is a pure 
synonym of S. aterrimus (Gmel.).’ If Mr. Ogilvie-Grant had been a diligent 
reader of ‘ The Ibis, 5 as well as a compendious contributor, he would not have 
erred in this matter, as in that Journal for January, 1915 (p. 79), I gave the 
true facts of the ‘ New Holland 5 citation by Gmelin. I am only dealing 
with facts in this place, and will fully debate all the points raised by 
88 
