THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. 
strain has struck me I can be sure of hearing the same strain repeated over 
and over again. Although the tail is sometimes 4 perked up 7 when singing, 
yet in many cases it is held down in a line with the body, and the little songster 
will generally retain his perch while one passes within a few yards, still uttering 
his ditty, although he swings about a good deal, as if excited when one is close.” 
The systematic account of this species is somewhat peculiar ; on account 
of the long hind-claw and striped appearance it was called Anthus fuliginosus 
by Vigors and Horsfield, and was said to be from Van Diemen’s Land, collected 
by Mr. Robert Brown in 1804. As it seemed of interest I looked up the MSS. 
of birds collected by Mr. Robert Brown, and found the species described under 
Alauda, the locality, however, being only Van Diemen’s Land, the date April, 
1804. I might here record that I was much impressed with the number of 
birds secured by Mr. Robert Brown, all of them carefully described in minute 
detail with data, and at that date nearly every one of them an unnamed species. 
A series was presented to the British Museum, and an acknowledgment is 
preserved, yet none of them were ever named or described. This was fortunate 
for Gould, as many of his novelties appear therein, though Vigors and Horsfield 
described most of theirs from the same collector’s material. 
Almost simultaneously with Gould’s proposal of a new genus Calamanthus 
for this species, Swainson described it as a new species and genus. As 
Swainson selected an invalid name, Gould’s genus name, though of later date, 
has absolute usage. Vigors and Horsfield’s specific name is also at present 
unchallenged, but the subspecific names are not exactly settled. As both 
Vigors’ and Horsfield’s and Swainson’ s names refer to Tasmanian birds they 
have generally been considered synonymic. In 1902 North separated the 
bird of the mainland as a distinct species, which he called albiloris on account 
of the white lores. A discussion arose as to whether this was a valid character, 
but it was admitted as subspecific. However, the following year a good form 
was named by Milligan from the Stirling Ranges, West Australia, as C. 
montanellus, while North, in his “Nests and Eggs,” described a bird from 
Waratah, North Tasmania, and, noting differences, provided for it the name 
G. diemenensis. In my Reference List in 1912 I accepted all these as sub- 
.specifically separable and added a fifth : 
Calamanthus fuliginosus carteri Mathews. 
44 Differs from C. f. montanellus in having the top of the head almost 
uniform reddish, contrasting with the colour of the back, and forming a cap. 
Underneath the abdomen and lower breast are darker and more richly coloured. 
The eye-stripe is more pronounced and the ear-coverts are rich reddish-brown. 
Broome Hill, West Australia.” 
These five were maintained in my 1913 “ List,” but Carter has written : 
286 
