THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. 
nine different genera. When it is pointed out that the same worker will only 
admit two genera for the eight Australian species, which differ as much as or 
more among themselves than the British ones do, his inconsistent— not to 
use a stronger word — action is obvious. When the osteology, etc., of 'the 
Australian birds becomes known, it is probable that all the species will prove 
generically distinct, using the same standard as has been used for British 
Owls. 
The ear apertures have been one item in the differentiation of the Owl 
genera of northern climes ; these have not been studied in the Australian 
forms. In this place I admit many genera, and I would record that Kaup, 
from his monographic study of the Order, determined more genera than I 
recognise at present. I am not at aU satisfied that Kaup is not right in all 
his conclusions. It may be observed that Kaup was a genus-splitter who 
critically examined all his birds and, carefully observing the skins, recognised 
the differences and created generic names to display these results. He 
was, however, too clever ' to be misled by his own conclusions and was 
always very careful to observe that the “ generic ” differences would be 
better considered as “ subgeneric ” only. Nevertheless, his caution was 
not considered, but most of his names were relegated to synonymy 
without due regard to his facts. More recently, and years after his death, 
the cold and dispassionate comparison of bird skins and facts has compelled 
the admission, as valid, of the majority of his “ useless and ill-advised 
synonyms.” 
In the present instance, three out of the six generic names used in 
this place are credited to Kaup, and he also gave two other names to 
two species which I do not separate generically at present. I propose the 
reconsideration of these two latter, and almost certainly the recognition of one, 
if not both, of Kaup’s divisions. To which reference will be made later. 
It might be as well to indicate generally the superficial features of Owls, 
though these are very well known, probably on account of their night-flying 
habits. Thus the members, hidden by day, and hunting by night, with 
peculiar call notes, have excited more interest than the normal day-flying 
birds. This interest was continued when the strange night bird was captured, 
as it proved to have a round face with eyes of large size looking forward, and 
peculiar and beautiful soft plumage and more or less feathered legs and feet. 
Always rare, and with these strange night habits, weird tales were woven around 
the Northern birds in ancient times. As far as I know, we have no myths to 
record in connection with Austral forms : the only interesting item I shall note 
later was the recognition by the ignorant early colonists of the common species 
as the Cuckoo on account of its call. 
304 
