WHITE COCKATOO. 
A curious note appears in the same volume, p. 269, by Hill : “ Cacatua 
galerita were fairly numerous about the Drysdale River and on Augustus 
Island. On the island C. galerita and C. gymnopis were in company. I did 
not notice a perceptible difference in size between the mainland birds of North 
Kimberley and those of South-west Australia and Victoria, but the small size 
of the island form is very noticeable.” 
Apparently, however, he did not collect any specimens, and this species 
does not occur in South-west Australia, so his note must be reconsidered later. 
Probably the first indication of subspecies of this bird is that given by 
Gould in the Introduction to the “ Birds of Australia,” 8vo ed., p. 70, 1848, 
where he wrote : “ There are evidently several varieties or races of this species 
in Australia, each possessing a modification in the form of the bill doubtless 
given for some specific purpose ; the Van Diemen’s Land bird is the largest, 
and has the upper mandible attenuated, while the Port Essington bird is alto- 
gether smaller, and has a much more arched bill.” A couple of years later, 
Bonaparte separated the Tasmanian race as a species with the name 
licmetorhyncha. 
In his Handbook in 1865 Gould did not accept this, writing : “If we 
regard the White Cockatoo of Tasmania and that of the adjacent continent 
as mere varieties of each other, this species has a very extensive range. On 
a close examination of specimens from different parts of Australia, a decided 
variation is observable in the form of the bill, but of too trivial a character, in 
my opinion, to warrant their being considered as distinct. 
“ The Tasmanian bird is the largest in every respect, and has the bill, par- 
ticularly the upper mandible, less abruptly curved, exhibiting a tendency to 
the form of that organ in the genus Licmetis ; the bill of the north-western 
bird is much rounder than that of the White Cockatoo of Tasmania.” 
Ramsay followed Gould in his non-recognition of forms, and in the 
Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum , Vol. XX., p. 116, 1891, Salvadori 
lumped, writing : “I have not been able to examine specimens from Tasmania, 
which, on account of some little differences in the shape of the bill, have been 
specifically separated as C. licmetorhyncha (Bp.) . . .” On p. 118 however, 
he recognized Cacatua triton as a separate species with the diagnosis : “ Like 
C. galerita, from which it differs in having the naked skin round the eyes blue, 
and also in the dimensions, which are generally smaller.” As range of the 
latter was given : “ The Papuan Islands, New Guinea. . . . Louiciade Isl., ” 
with a note, “ The specimens from the Western Papuan Islands (Waigiou, 
Salwatty, and My sol), and especially from the Aru Islands, are generally smaller 
than those from the mainland, and have even been separated specifically as 
C. macrolopha, Rosenb. ; but I do not think that we are justified in accepting 
179 
