THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. 
Itie tail is very long and wedge-shaped, composed of ten broad, but a little 
pointed, feathers. 
The legs are stout, the tarsus with six scutes anteriorly, bilaminate 
poster! oily, the inner toe shorter than the outer, both with claws subequal 
with middle-toe alone, hind-claw long and curved, hind-toe and claw about 
equal to middle-toe and claw. 
The genus name Amytis was invalid, as before Lesson selected it Savigny 
had made use of it. This was long known, but it was not until 1899 that 
Oberholser proposed as substitute Diaphorillas. 
In 1903 Sharpe rejected Diaphorillas for Amytornis , which was claimed 
to have been proposed for Amytis years before by Stejneger. There is no 
doubt that Stejneger introduced the name, but he gave no indication of its 
use as the extract quoted will show : “ Amytornis textilis, with two allied 
species, also from Australia, belong here, wren-like birds of brown plumage, 
with curious whitish longitudinal streaks.” This is certainly not determinable 
with accuracy from this quotation, as a Wren has a short tail, while these birds 
have long tails. Consequently I use the correct name Diaphorillas. 
The confusion in Gould’s mind is apparent through his statement that 
the figure given by Lesson in his Atlas to his Traite was clearly taken from a 
specimen of Gould s striatus. As Gould’s striatus was unknown to Lesson 
and the only specimen at that time known was the unique textilis, it is obvious 
that Lesson’s figure could only have been from that source. It may be a poor 
attempt, but nevertheless it is only .textilis and not striatus as Gould suggested. 
When I prepared my “ Reference List ” I was lumping genera and 
therefore classed all the Grass-Wrens in the genus Diaphorillas, but the 
differences seen in the species were so striking that I wrote : “Note. — From 
the point of view of the genus splitter this is a heterogeneous genus. The 
two species, D. woodwardi (Hartert) and D. housei (Milligan) are altogether apart 
from the preceding species which agree with the type of the genus, D. textilis 
(Q. & G.), while D. goyderi (Gould) is also easily separable. Most authors 
will certainty wish to separate these last three species from the typical forms 
of the genus ; for their use I provide the genera Magnamytis nov. with type 
A. woodwardi Hartert, and Eyramytis nov. with type A. goyderi (Gould). 
These are certainly more worthy of generic recognition than the majority of 
the lately introduced genera.” 
I later adopted the genus -splitting method as being productive of better 
results and this instance absolutely confirms it. In a genus-lumping scheme 
no care at all is necessary to place a bird, only the most casual glance is needed, 
and the why and the wherefore is absolutely neglected. Thus anyone can tell 
a Grass-Wren because of the streaked appearance and no more consideration 
166 
