THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. 
WLit, Whit,’ by imitating which it was possible to get the bird to approach, 
but when it had sighted the intruder it would stop calling and move away 
again, and then it could be brought back, but never would it answer when 
close to the caller.” 
The scientific history of this species began in 1825 when it received two 
names, one from Temminck, the other from Swainson. The name given by 
the former was accepted by custom until I indicated the fact that Swainson 
was the first to name the bird and since then Swainson’s name has been 
used. A little later Griffith and Pidgeon also named the species from Gray’s 
manuscript, so that it is even possible that Gray also differentiated it about 
the same time as Swainson. Gould later separated as a distinct species 
the bird living at Cape York solely on account of its smaller size. It was 
so obviously only a smaller form that the species was reduced to the 
rank of a variety almost at once and when I prepared my “ Reference List ” 
I differentiated three subspecies. 
As a synonym has been cited Pitta assimilis D’Albertis and the history of 
this name is worthy of note here. In the Ann. Mus. Civ. Stor. Nat Genova , 
(Vol. X., p. 1) is a paper by D’Albertis translated by Salvadori. This interested 
me and I read the introduction which stated that this was a translation by 
Salvadori of a paper by D’Albertis which had been written in English and 
published in the Sydney Mail for Saturday, Eeb. 24, 1877, p. 248, entitled 
“ Notes on some Birds collected during the Exploration of the Fly River.” 
There D’Albertis had written Pitta assimilis as occurring at the Fly River and 
commonly at Cape York and on the islands of Torres Straits. There is no 
description anywhere and it is not proposed as a new species, so the conclusion 
is that it was merely a mistake for simillima, Gould’s name for the Cape 
York Lesser Pitta. D’Albertis, writing a newspaper article with names more 
or less from memory, could easily write assimilis having Gould’s descriptive 
name in his mind. 
The three subspecies admitted in my “List” I still consider should 
be accepted, the differences in size being appreciable though there is little 
variation in colouring. 
14 
