branches of the scrub under which the bird had eluded us was about 20in. high, thus affording a means of approximately determining its height.,” I should have supposed that this merely proved that the bird was less than 20in. high, and did not, even approximately, determine how much less; but Mr. Park's ideas of evidence are peculiar. Having now no doubt whatever on the matter, he goes on to say, “The Notornis remained in the vicinity of the camp during our stay at this place, being evidently more curious than alarmed at our presence. He generally sallied forth at dusk and retired at daybreak.” With regard to the assumed nocturnal habits of the takahe, I may say that what little evidence there is on the subject is all against the assumption. At least two of the three specimens caught alive were found and run down in broad daylight. Mr. Park's next experience occurred a few days later, when camped on the Matukituki with the same party. Shortly after dusk they “heard the note of a Notornis” (this assumption of certainty runs through the whole article), and this time they disturbed the bird, though they did not see it; but they saw the “shallow hole in the dry sand” where the bird had been dusting itself. The following evening Mr. Park was more fortunate, and, looking cautiously over the bank, actually caught a passing view of the bird, though we are not informed at what distance. He admits that “in the uncertain starlight” he could “only make out its general outline,” and that “it must be remembered that it was only in sight a few seconds;” but the “impression it left on” his “mind at the time was that its colour was very dark and its height about that of a full-grown turkey.” As to this, I need only say that, as Mr. Park was quite certain he was about to see a takahe, and then saw something under the very untrustworthy conditions he describes, it would have been strange if the impression left on his mind had been anything else. Mr. Park then relates how, seven years later (in January of last year), he was in Dusky Sound, and heard “the Notornis” on several occasions—so often, indeed, that, if the mysterious notes had really been due to takahes, these birds must be about as common on the West Coast as kiwis. He was, however, never again fortunate enough to see one. The next piece of evidence is that of Mr. Park's “field-hand,” who also “heard a takahe in the bush,” and recognised the booming note at once, as he had been “one of the party of rabbiters who caught the takahe near Lake Te Anau in 1880,” and had there often heard the note. Mr. Park sublimely adds, “I considered this evidence conclusive that this was indeed the Notornis.” This conclusive evidence is, however, a little