The Naming of the Bird

Letter to the Editor MY attention has been drawn to a let ter in your January issue entitled “Why McNicoll?”, relating to the naming of a Bird of Paradise. It is one of those attacks, so easy to make, to which the person at whom they are directed has no opportunity of replying.

It is only natural that one should wonder at the naming of the bird “Mc- NicoH’’, when it was discovered by Mr.

Taylor. But may I point out, at the risk of incurring parental displeasure, that my father strenuously opposed the nam ing of the bird after himself, both to the discoverer and the Museum authori ties.

However, it was Mr. Taylor’s bird, and his wishes as to its name were respected.

As you point out in your editorial note, it was a very gracious gesture in recog nition of unflagging interest in a most outstanding patrol.

A leading Sydney ornithologist tells me that the new discovery has created great interest in bird circles throughout the world. The discovery of a new spe cies is a rare occurrence, these days, and the search for new species of Bird of Paradise has been carried out fruit lessly for many years.

It might interest New Guinea readers who are curious about the bird to know that there is a full-page coloured plate in “The Zoologist” (current issue).

I am, etc.,

David R. Mcnicoll.

Rose Bay, Sydney, 22/1/1940.