1 
UNIFORM SWIFTLET. 
which I at first associated with the preceding species. Later I saw the 
differences, but minimised them as subspecific only, writing : “ Differs from 
C. f{rancica) terrcereginoR (Ramsay) in lacking the whitish rump, in being 
darker below, and in having the bill bigger and broader.” For the purpose 
of this work it was necessary to closely criticise the genus when I found the 
shght characters noticed were specific and that this was an addition to the 
Australian List. I contributed an item to the Emu, pointing out the 
peculiarities of the form and the complexity of its nomination. I there gave 
details showing that these birds are very local, and consequently that the 
Australian killed specimen was probably representative of a subspecies. 
Nevertheless birds killed in South New Guinea might belong to this race, 
but no name had been given to these. Hence my subspecific name would 
still be vahd. The name used by recorders of the species from New Guinea 
was Collocalia fuciphaga vanikorensis based on Hirundo vanikorensis Quoy 
and Gaimard, given to a bird from the Island of Vanikoro, Santa Cruz group. 
Geographically this name was untenable, as no specimens were available 
from the type locality and the description was too meagre to determine the 
subspecies. Thus, Ogilvie-Grant, by no means a splitter, recognised three 
allied forms from South-west New Guinea, while two forms, at least, inhabit 
South-east New Guinea, and these differ from birds from the New Hebrides, 
which locality is nearer to the Santa Cruz group. With such facts the only 
scientific course is the recognition of the exact name and that happens in 
this case to be my own. 
Some workers have minimised the feathering of the tarsus, a feature 
of some species, apparently congeneric with the present one. However, it 
seems much more important in this group than would be considered at first 
sight, and consequently I restrict Oberholser’s name Aerodramus in a generic 
sense, and utilise Zoonava also generically. 
259 
