158 
Reviezvs 
["The Emu 
L 1st Oct. 
region as the Ethiopian Region. Though he refers to the A.O.U. 
and B.O.U. committees, yet such different names are used in 
these lists for so many birds common to the two lists that it is 
evident that much investigation and consultation will be neces¬ 
sary before the same name can be used for the same bird on 
both lists. (Australians when beginning the work of preparing 
the Second Edition of the Official Check-list made the use of 
the same name for the same bird their basic principle.) The 
classification of the two lists under notice, too, differs. Sclater 
adopts the classification used by Mr. A. H. Evans in the volume 
on Birds in the Cambridge Natural series; while the B.O.U. list 
is based on the classification of the Handlist of Birds, by the 
late Dr. Bowdler Sharpe, though beginning with the highly- 
developed Crows and ending with the more primitive Quails— 
the reverse of Dr. Sharpe's arrangement which was used in the 
Official Check-list of the R.A.O.U. 
Though Mr. Sclater in the B.O.U. list apparently accepted 
one genus for the Sandpiper group of wading birds, yet in his 
African list he used several genera for the same birds. 
The R.A.O.U. Check-list committee in particular found profit 
and interest in the study of these valuable lists. They feel encour¬ 
aged to publish their list at an early date as a contribution that 
will probably help forward the search for finality of name and 
uniformity of standard. 
The R.A.O.U. designedly adopted a “lumping" standard as 
regards genera. The B.O.U. List confirms that by placing the 
White Egrets in one genus. Likewise the White-browed Alba¬ 
tross—a casual on the B.O.U. List—is placed in the typical genus 
Diomedea. The lumping of the Sandpipers in one genus by the 
B.O.U. committee indicates a growing and spreading desire for 
still larger genera—a demand also strongly expressed in America. 
Both lists group the Kestrel with the typical Falcons; our Brown 
Hawk being intermediate would necessarily be included in the 
genus Falco. 
It is noted that both lists adopt the practice of the American 
ornithologists of considering such generic names as differ only 
in gender endings as being identical. Thus Erismatura is used 
instead of Oxyura (not Oxyurus) on the African list. Both 
A.O.U. and B.O.U. committees have adopted that limited phase 
of one-letterism. Some ornithologists would go further and 
discard Limicula because of a prior Limicola, and Meliphaga 
because of a prior Melophagus. 
It is noteworthy that both lists follow the International Code, 
though Sclater adds, “as nearly as possible, but there is a certain 
amount of ambiguity in the application of some of the rules 
which leaves the correct name for certain species still in doubt." 
The R.A.O.U. has likewise a few doubtful cases. 
Australians regret that no list that has appeared recently sup¬ 
ports the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature 
in trying to stabilise nomenclature by accepting- certain well 1 
