THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. 
the owls. It differs from other falcons in having no aftershaft, in its some- 
what peculiar tensores, patagii, and deep plantar tendons . . . whatever 
may be thought about Pandion. ...” 
I do not get much help from such conclusions as the above, and referring 
to Pycraft [Proc. Zool. Soc. (Lond.), 1902, p. 315) am no further advanced 
by his admission. “With regard to Pandion, though I felt certain it had 
nothing to do with the Striges, I had not yet discovered any further clue as 
to its real affinities.” He then added Suschkin’s views, which he accepted, 
thus : “In the Perninse, Pemis, Baza, Elanoides, Leptodon and Pandion. 
But from views he expressed in conversation he would, I suspect, probably 
make a separate sub-family for Pandion — Pandioninac, and most, I think, will 
feel this advisable.” 
The relationship of Pandion to Pernis does not seem to have been 
demonstrated, and it so obviously differs superficially that I do not accept 
this grouping. Beddard makes no comment on its position as recorded above, 
while Pycraft states that he had discovered no clue to its affinities, so that 
it appears reasonable, in view of its known pecuHarities, to allow it to remain 
where Sharpe placed it. The monotypic genus is widely distributed with ‘ 
scarcely any superficial differentiation, so that it must be an ancient form. 
It is probable therefore that study of nestlings would give valuable assistance 
in solving the problem of its relationship, as it is obvious that we do not at 
present know much about them. 
294 
