In his notes on Amytornis gigantura, Mr. Whitlock refers to my classing this species with A. macrurus, and says—"There is no reason for this." Mr. Whitlock has written me that "no" is a misprint for "more." As this puts a very different complexion on things, there is no need for comment.
As to the soundness of A. gigantura as a species there seems to be some doubt; several specimens from widely different localities have been obtained by myself and forwarded to Mr. North, with the verdict "macrurus." The matter, however, is sub judice, and I hope during the coming season to assist in the final settlement of this point.—I am, &c.,
Geological Survey, Kalgoorlie, W.A., 29/5/10,
[The editors have pleasure in publishing Mr. Gibson's letter. They have no desire to do injustice to anyone, but seek to record the scientific facts and history only of Australian birds, and in this connection any further notes on Amytornis gigantura or any other species by such a good field observer as Mr. Gibson will always be welcome.—Eds.]
To the Editors of "The Emu."
Sirs,—In the account of my recent collecting trip to the East Murchison, I find a misprint has crept in. Referring to Amytornis gigantura, on p. 203—ninth line from the bottom (excluding footnote)—should read "There is more reason for this." This error is unlucky, as I wished to convey the impression that my mind was an open one on the question of the identity or otherwise of A. gigantura and A. macrurus. Also, after re-reading my notes on Cinclosoma marginatum, in connection with the female skin collected by Mr. C. G. Gibson and forwarded to Mr. A. J. North, I fear I may have conveyed the impression that in my opinion Mr. Gibson had not the ability to make a good skin. It was simply lack of the necessary leisure on his part that was in my mind when I wrote. Having had some experience of the amount of work to be accomplished by the officers of our Geological Survey Department when examining our vast mineral belts, I know how little spare time there remains of the short winter's day when the field-work is done. When I have a Cinclosoma to skin I approach the task with a mind resigned to a tedious and discouraging operation. Despite the most delicate handling, the feathers of the rump and flanks will fall out. A Cinclosoma rivals a Dove in this respect. But, whatever the condition of Mr. Gibson's specimen may have been, I question if it afforded Mr. North sufficient evidence, unaccompanied as it was by a skin of the male, to enable him to determine its identity with absolute certainty.
