Go to National Library of New Zealand Te Puna Mātauranga o Aotearoa
Volume 7, 1874
This text is also available in PDF
(874 KB) Opens in new window
– 226 –

Art. XXXI.–Preliminary Remarks on some New Zealand Birds.

[Read before the Otago Institute, 11th June, 1874. *]

Since the publication of my Revision of the Birds of New Zealand (Journ. für Orn. 1872, pp. 81–112, 162–188, and 241–274) I have had the pleasure of again examining a good many New Zealand birds, having received a valuable collection from my excellent friend Dr. Haast, and many rare and important species through the kindness of Captain Hutton, Dr. Hector, Mr. Kirk, and Mr. Purdie. The New Zealand Institute forwarded to me, with incomparable liberality, a most valuable collection of rare types for comparison, which has been very useful to me in my researches on New Zealand ornithology, and it is with great pleasure that I pay my heartiest thanks to all my friends who have assisted me so effectually in my labours. I now beg leave to offer the results of my investigations, which, although short, contain useful notices on many New Zealand birds, and are an abstract of a more extensive paper that will shortly appear in the Journal für Ornithologie, under the title of Corrections and Additions to my Revision of the Birds of New Zealand.

This paper may be regarded as the forerunner of my Synopsis of the Birds of New Zealand, which I hope to be able to offer to my scientific friends in New Zealand in a short time. This little book, which will be printed in English, will contain descriptions and a brief history of all the native birds of New Zealand, which number at present about 156 species, a subject on which I have been working zealously and with great care for more than seven years.

No. 1, p. 87. Falco novœ-zealandiœ, Gml.

The question whether there are two or one species of Falcon in New Zealand has not yet been settled satisfactorily. Dr. Buller, in accordance with Dr. Haast and Mr. Gurney (Ibis 1872, p. 332), expresses his belief that there are two–a larger and a smaller; but he does not give, even in his large work, sufficient characters to distinguish them. The valuable remarks by Captain Hutton (Ibis, 1873, p. 100), and Mr. Sharpe (ib., p. 328), prove also that further researches are required to settle the question.

No. 2, p. 92. Instead of Circus assimilis, Jard., put C. approximans, Peale.

As it is impossible to make out the C. assimilis, of Jardine and Selby without comparison with the type, and as it will most probably turn out to be the young of C. jardinii, as stated by Lord Walden (Trans. Z.S. VIII., 1872,

[Footnote] * Dated at Bremen 5th April, 1874.

[Footnote] † The numbers relate to my Revision der Vögel Neuseelands, as cited above.

– 227 –

p. 37), the name given by Peale, who undoubtedly described the New Zealand Harrier, must stand for our bird. I lately received, through the kindness of Dr. Haast, an old male, and I am convinced that the New Zealand bird corresponds altogether with those from Australia and the Fiji Islands.

No. 4, p. 95. Sceloglaux albifacies, Gray.

Having, through the kindness of Dr. Hector and Mr. Purdie examined two specimens of this rare Owl, I have no doubt of the validity of its generic position.

No. 5, p. 96. Stringops habroptilus, Gray.

Dr. Buller declares that Str. greyi is but an accidental variety of this bird, which may be right. But as the single specimen in the British Museum, which I examined carefully many years ago, exhibits striking peculiarities, I do not feel quite sure about it, and think it possible that Str. greyi may be some day rediscovered.

P. 98. After Platycercus auriceps must follow–

Platycerus alpinus, Buller, which is not the young of Pl. auriceps, as repeatedly maintained by me, but a good species. I received old and young specimens of both through Dr. Hector, which convinced me that I was wrong.

No. 12, p. 104. Chrysococcyx lucidus, Gml.

Chry. plagosus, Hutton, Ibis, 1872, p. 246.

Captain Hutton says that the Chatham Island Bronze Cuckoo is not the same as the New Zealand one, but is Chr. plagosus of Australia, in which opinion I do not agree, after having compared a specimen from the Chathams lent me by the N.Z. Institute. The under parts show a little broader gold green crossbands, and the second tail-feather instead of two well defined rusty bands has only indications of them, but there is no other difference, and I see no reason to separate the Chatham Island bird from the New Zealand Chr. lucidus.

P. 105. The Fam. Upupidœ must be omitted, as the genus Heteralocha is not a Upupine form at all, but belongs to the family Glaucopidœ.

No. 17, p. 107. Anthornis melanocephala, Gray.

I received specimens of this excellent species through the kindness of Dr. Hector.

P. 109. The Fam. Certhiadœ does not occur in New Zealand, as the genera Acanthisitta and Xenicus really belong to the Fam. Troglodytinidœ, being most nearly allied to Tesia and Pnöepyga.

No. 20, p. 109. Acanthisitta chloris, Sparrm.

Among a series of specimens forwarded to me by Dr. Haast I find two

– 228 –

which apparently belong to a second species, hitherto overlooked, which will turn out to be Acanthisitta citrina, Gml.

The colours are nearly the same as in the specimen described by me in the Jour. für Orn. 1870, p. 252, but the feathers on the whole of the upper parts are pale brownish, with narrow black lateral margins and the quills, legs, and hind toe are considerably longer, as will be seen by the following measurements, given in decimal parts of an inch:–

Al. Caud. Rostr. a front. Tars. Dig. med. Dig. post.
A. citrina 2.15 .87–.98 .43 .82 .55 .4
A. chloris (12 spec.) 1.67–1.8 .7–.87 .35–.43 .66–.75 .4–.55 .27–.31

I recommend my ornithological friends in New Zealand to keep watch for this stouter form in order to ascertain if it is a true species.

No. 21, p. 109. Xenicus longipes, Gml.

The figure in the Voyage of the Erebus and Terror (t.3, f.1), copied from an original drawing of Forster, is totally incorrect and cannot be taken in comparison. I have, therefore, no doubt but that Dr. Buller is quite right in uniting X. stokesii with longipes.

No. 23, p. 109. Xenicus gilviventris, Pelz

Through the kindness of Dr. Hector I received the type of X. haasti, Buller, which is undoubtedly synonymous with the above-named species.

No. 24, p. 110. Instead of Orthonyx write Clitonyx ochrocephalus, Gml.

On the systematical position of this bird see my extensive paper “Ueber die systematische Stellung der Neuseeländischen Gattungen Clitonyx Reichb. und Phyllodytes, Finsch” (Jour. f. Orn. 1873, p. 393).

P. 110. Before No. 25 place Fam. Paridœ, and instead of Orthonyx write Phyllodytes albicilla, Less.; Finsch, Jour. f. Orn. 1873, p. 398.

Having had the pleasure of becoming acquainted with this species through the kindness of Captain Hutton, I was at once convinced that it is by no means the northern representative of the foregoing species, as Dr. Buller says, but that they belong to totally different families.

No. 26, p. 110. Certhiparus must become Phyllodytes novœ-zealandiœ, Gml.; Finsch, Jour. f. Orn. 1875, p. 397.

No. 27, p. 111. Sphenœacus punctatus, Quoy.

I have examined specimens from the Rakaia, received through the kind assistance of Dr. Haast.

No. 29, p. 112. Sphenœacus rufescens, Bull.

This is not the same as Sph. fulvus, Gray, as suggested by me, but is a very good species. I received specimens from the Chatham Islands through Dr. Hector.

– 229 –

No. 30, p. 112. Myioscopus longipes, Less.

A careful examination of the types brought home by the French expedition will be necessary to make out the true Muscicapa longipes, Lesson. Turdus australis, Sparrm. (= T. albifrons var. b, Gml.), will probably turn out to be the northern species, which I have not yet had the pleasure of examining.

No. 32, p. 161. Gerygone flaviventris, Gray.

My friend Dr. von Pelzeln, with his usual kindness, sent me the type of his G. aucklandica (Novara-Reise, 1865, p. 65) for comparison, and I have not the slightest doubt but that it is the young of G. flaviventris.

No. 33, p. 162. Gerygone igata, Quoy.

Dr. Buller had no right to expunge this species from the list of New Zealand Birds, as there is no reason to doubt the statement of the French travellers that they procured their type near Tasman Bay. Notwithstanding certain differences between G. flaventris and the description and figure in the Voyage of the Astrolabe, I should not wonder if the true igata turned out to be that species, but this can only be settled by comparing the type.

No. 34, p. 162. Gerygone albofrontata, Gray.

Of this remarkable species I received a specimen for comparison by the kind assistance of Dr. Hector, from the Colonial Museum in Wellington.

Gerygone sylvestris, Potts, Trans. N. Z. Inst. V., p. 176.

This is certainly not identical with the foregoing species, as Dr. Buller expresses his belief, but seems to be a good species.

No. 37, p. 163. Myiomoira macrocephala, Gml.

Having again examined a large series of this species, amongst them typical specimens of M. dieffenbachii, Hutt., and one from the Chatham Islands, I feel quite sure that dieffenbachii cannot be separated specifically, as there exist all phases in the amount of bright orange on the breast. Captain Hutton is certainly wrong in referring the orange-breasted specimens to M. dieffenbachii, as these just form the true macrocephala. It does not occur in the North Island as I wrongly noticed.

No. 38, p. 164. Myiomoira toitoi, Less.

This North Island species I got for examination through the Colonial Museum at Wellington.

Myiomoira traversi, Hutt.

This is an excellent species, forwarded to me through the kindness of Dr. Hector, but not congeneric with Myiomoira (Miro) longipes as Dr. Buller thinks.

No. 39, p. 164. Rhipidura flabellifera, Gml.

Dr. Hector kindly lent me a specimen from the Chatham Islands which agrees very well with those from New Zealand.

– 230 –

No. 39, p. 164. Rhipidura fulginosa, Gml.

Through Dr. Haast and Dr. Hector I got a good many specimens of this species, and among them some with white feathers above and below the eye; so there can be no doubt that the Rh. melanura is this species.

No. 273, p. 165. Colluricincla concinna, Hutt.

  • Graucalus concinnus, Hutt., Ibis 1872, p. 201

  • Graucalus concinnus, Hutt., Trans. V., p. 226.

is Graucalus parvirostris, Gould, as I can state positively, after having examined one of the typical specimens shot near Invercargill, forwarded to me through the kindness of Dr. Hector. The characters pointed out by Captain Hutton as being of specific value are only signs of a younger age, and may be observed also in other species of the genus. The few specimens observed in New Zealand are no doubt accidental stragglers from Tasmania.

P. 166. In place of Fam. Corvidœ put “Fam. Ptilorhynchinœ, Sundev.,” in which both species of the genus Keropia must be placed.

P. 167, before No. 45, put “Fam. Glaucopidœ–Callœadinœ, Sundev., Méth. Nat. Av., 1872, p. 40,” embracing the genera Glaucopis, Heteralocha, and Creadio. The characters of this family have been pointed out very exactly by Prof. Sundevall (l.e.)

P. 167. Sub-fam. Sturninœ must be expunged, as Creadio is not a Starling at all.

No. 48, p. 167. Creadio carunculatus, Gml.

Latham and Quoy (Voy. l'Astr., t.12) were acquainted with the young bird (Cr. cinereus, Buller).

No. 47, p. 167. Aplonis zealandicus, Quoy.

The French naturalist collected the singular bird described under the name of Lamprotornis zealandicus (Voy. l'Astr., t.9, f.l) near Tasman Bay, and nobody has any right to expunge it from the avifauna of New Zealand, although it has not been rediscovered since.

No. 51, p. 168. Charadrius fulvus, Gml.

The only specimen said to have been obtained in New Zealand, and which existed in any New Zealand Museum, I got for comparison from the Auckland Museum through the kindness of Mr. Kirk.

No. 24, p. 169. Thinornis novœ-zealandiœ, Gml.

I had the pleasure of receiving a specimen from the Chatham Islands through Dr. Hector, and consider Thinornis to be a valid genus. As we learn from Dr. Buller, Th. rossii, Gray, is certainly the young of this species.

No. 62, p. 172, Ardea sacra, Gml.

The fact that no white specimen of this species has yet been observed in

– 231 –

New Zealand, where it is generally rare, does not at all prove that the white bird must be a different species as Dr. Buller maintains. I have had ample opportunity of observing that in A. sacra the white variety is accidental as in the African A. gularis, Bosc., or in the American A. cœrulea, L., for dark and white ones breed together (vide Finsch, Jour. f. Orn. 1870, p. 136).

No. 66, p. 173. Instead of Limosa uropygialis, Gould, Gray's name of novœ-zealandiœ must stand in accordance with the rule of priority. L. baueri, Naum., used by Dr. Buller, is only a manuscript name without description, and has no claims to stand.

Himantopus spicatus, Potts, Trans. V., p. 198.

Although I have not seen the type, I consider this new species based upon a single specimen to be nothing else than H. novœ-zealandiœ in changed plumage.

No. 70, p. 174. Tringa canutus, L.

A New Zealand specimen kindly sent me by Dr. Hector agrees very well with European ones, and does not belong toCrassirostris as suggested by me (Trans. V., p. 209).

No. 71, p. 174. Gallinago aucklandica, Gray.

I have examined a pair from the Chatham Islands forwarded by Dr. Hector. Dr. Buller declares his G. pusilla to be the same.

No. 73, p. 174. Ocydromus troglodytes, Gml.

To this species belongs O. australis, Buller, Hist. Birds N. Z., p. 170, (e fig. opt.)

Ocydromus hectori, Hutton, Jour. für. Orn. 1873, p. 329.

This I consider to be a good species after having compared a typical specimen kindly lent me through the Colonial Museum at Wellington.

No. 74, p. 178. Ocydromus australis, Sparrm.; Hutt., Jour. f. Orn., 1873, p. 399; Finsch, ib., p. 402.

This is O. earli, Buller, Hist. B. N. Z., p. 165 (e fig. opt.)

No. 75, p. 179. Ocydromus earli (? Gray): Hutt., Jour. für Orn. 1873, p. 401; Finsch, ib., p. 404.

Dr. Buller, in his great work, unfortunately does not mention the typical specimen of O. earli, Gray, and not having compared it myself, I am unable to make out whether the true earli is indeed the bright cinnamon-red bird as Captain Hutton and I believe, or whether it is the same as O. australis figured under the name of earli by Dr. Buller.

No. 76, p. 180. Ocydromus fuscus, Du Bus.

I did not compare the type of Du Bus, as Dr. Buller seems to think, but only the figure, which in many respects differs from the description.

– 232 –

Ocydromus finschi, Hutt.; Jour. f. Orn. 1873, p. 400.

After having examined one of the type specimens kindly sent me by Dr. Hector I take it, at present, for a good species, but I have some suspicions that it will finally turn out to be a variety of the foregoing. At least we still require more material to become fully acquainted with the members of this genus.

No. 77, p. 181. Rallus pectoralis, Less.

The endeavour of Mr. Potts to protect his R. pictus as a good species (Trans. V., p. 199, pl. XVIII.) is without effect, and even the slight difference in the shape of the bill is not sufficient to convince me of the value of the species. On the variability of this species compare Finsch, Ornith. Centr. Polyn., p. 161; id. P.Z.S. 1871, p. 25; id. ib. 1872, p. 107; id. Jour. f. Orn. 1870, p. 136.

Rallus modestus, Hutt., Ibis 1872, p. 247.

As the type of this species was caught in the act of protecting its young, I cannot agree with Dr. Buller in considering with certainty R. modestus as the young of R. dieffenbachii.

No. 80, p. 182. Ortygometra fluminea, Gould, must be expunged from the list of New Zealand birds.

No. 88, p. 187. Rhynchaspis variegata, Gould.

is synonymous with rhyncotis, Lath. An old male received through Dr. Haast agrees in every respect with Australian specimens in the Bremen Museum.

No. 95, p. 241. Lestris catarractes, Ill.

Dr. Buller enumerates the Southern Skua under the name of antarcticus, Less., but unfortunately does not point out the specific characters.

No. 96, p. 241. Lestris longicaudus, Briss.

  • L. parasitica, Hutt., et Bull., B.N.Z., p. 268.

Mr. Saunders believes the New Zealand specimen to belong to a new species, but I have no doubt that it is only a young specimen of the above species.

No. 99, p. 248. Larus pomare, Bruch.

Through the kindness of Dr. Haast I received the type of L. bulleri, Potts, from the Canterbury Museum for comparison, and can state positively that it is a young bird of pomare. Dr. Buller declares L. bulleri (= melanorhynchus) to be different from pomare, after having seen the type in the museum at Mayence; but his comparison must have been very hasty, as I can state positively that L. pomare, Bruch (adult), is the true melanorhynchus of Buller = bulleri, Potts), whereas L. pomare, Bruch (young), belongs to

– 233 –

L. novœ-hollandiœ, as minutely explained by me (Jour. f. Orn. 1872, pp. 241–253) after having had the types of Bruch kindly lent me and studied most carefully.

No. 104, p. 254. Hydrochelidon leucoptera, Temm.

The single specimen shot in New Zealand was sent to me for comparison through the kindness of Dr. Hector. It certainly belongs to this species, and not to H. hybrida, as suggested by me (Trans. V., p. 210.)

No. 105, p. 254. Gygis alba, Sp.

is not satisfactorily known as visiting New Zealand, and must be challenged.

No. 112, p. 255. Procellaria parkinsoni, Gray.

This excellent species, apparently peculiar to New Zealand, I had the pleasure to see amongst the birds kindly lent me by the N. Z. Institute. The interesting notes by Captain Hutton on the breeding of this species * on the Little Barrier are not quoted in Buller's work.

No. 113, p. 255. Procellaria gouldi, Hutton.

I got the type specimen from the Auckland Museum for comparison, and am quite sure as to its specific distinctness.

No. 115, p. 255. Procellaria incerta, Schl.

said to come from New Zealand, according to a label in the Leyden Museum, must be omitted from our list.

No. 117, p. 255. Procellaria mollis, Gould.

Dr. Buller does not allow this species a place among New Zealand birds, but as the Novara Expedition collected specimens in lat. 35° S., long. 175° 5′ E., there can be no doubt in respect to its proper place among the avifauna of New Zealand.

No. 123, p. 256. Puffinus gavius, Forst.

Although Forster's description does not exactly agree I am convinced with Captain Hutton that his name must stand for this species. P. gavius, of which I received a specimen through the kindness of Dr. Hector, is an excellent species, most akin to our P. anglorum, and has nothing to do with P. opisthomelas, Coues, and P. dichrons, H. and Finsch (vide P. Z. S., 1872, p. 108.) To the latter Polynesian species belongs Pr. gavia var. ex. Ins. Oriadea, Forst., and P. tenebrosus, Natt. (Pelz., Ibis 1873, p. 47), as I can state after having examined the type specimen kindly lent me through the kindness of Dr. von Pelzeln.

No. 124, p. 256. Puffinus tristis, Forst.,

must become griscus, Gml. (ex Grey Petrel, Lath., III., p. 399).

[Footnote] * Trans. N. Z. Inst. III., p. 111.

– 234 –
  • P. major, Gray, Voy. Ereb. and Terr., p. 17.

  • P. fuliginosus, Homb. (nec Strick).

  • P. amaurosoma, Coues.

Of this fine species I got a specimen from the Chatham Islands from Dr. Hector for comparison.

P. 256. After No. 124 add Puffinus tenuirostris, Temm.

  • Proc. œquinoctialis, Pall. (nec L).

  • Proc. atlantica, Bull., N. Z. Exhibition, p. 256.

  • Puff. brevicaudus, id., Hist. B. N. Z., p. 315.

I received a specimen on loan from the Colonial Museum at Wellington' obtained in Cook Strait, which agrees exactly with the plate in Fauna Japonica (p. 131, t. 86). Pr. brevicaudus, Brandt, is a manuscript name only, and has no value.

P. 256, after No. 125 add Halodroma berardi, Quoy.

Brought from the Chatham Islands by Mr. H. Travers. (Hutt., Ibis 1872, p. 248.)

No. 126, p. 256. Prion vittatus, Gml.

To this most broad-billed species, of which I got specimens from the Chatham Islands through Dr. Hector, belongs Prion australis, Potts, Ibis 1873, p. 85.

No. 127, p. 256. Prion banksii, Smith.

  • Prion vittatus, Hutt., Cat. B. N. Z., 48.

No. 128, p. 257. Prion turtur, Sol.

  • Pr. banksii, Hutt., Cat. p. 48.

  • Pr. ariel, id., p. 80.

I received a pair of this species from the Chatham Islands through the kindness of Dr. Hector, and having examined other specimens, I have no doubt that Pr. ariel, Gould, cannot be separated.

No. 130, p. 257. Thalassidroma fregata, L. (nec Forst.)

  • Th. marina, Hutt., Ibis 1872, p. 249.

Chatham Island specimens were kindly forwarded to me by Dr. Hector.

No. 131, p. 257. Thalassidroma melanogastra, Gould.

I received on loan from the Auckland Museum, through the kindness of Mr. Kirk, a specimen of this bird from New Zealand.

No. 132, p. 257. Thalassidroma nereis, Gould.

The single specimen procured at the Chathams by Mr. H. Travers I had the pleasure of examining, it having been kindly lent me from the Colonial Museum by Dr. Hector.

– 235 –

No. 133, p. 257. Dysporus serrator, Banks.

Hutton's valuable notes on this species, observed by him on the Great Barrier Island, are not mentioned in Dr. Buller's work.

No. 134, p. 257. Graculus carbo, L.

Dr. Buller feels sure that Gr. carboides, from New Zealand and Australia, is specifically different, but unfortunately does not mention the distinguishing characters.

P. 258, after No. 134, add Graculus carunculatus, Gml.

This species has been doubted by me as regards its occurrence in New Zealand, but having examined a specimen from the Chatham Islands, forwarded by Dr. Hector, I have no longer any doubt about it. Gr. carunculatus may be easily distinguished from Gr. cirrhatus, Gml., from Magellan Straits, in having the sides of the head and neck dark, and by having a feathered stripe along the naked gular and chin regions, which parts are totally naked in cirrhatus.

No. 136, p. 258. Graculus (?) sulcirostris, Brandt.

Although omitted in Dr. Buller's work, there can be no doubt that Mr. Peale collected a shag in the Bay of Islands, which, like Gr. chalconotus, Gray, has not yet been observed since. This species, Gr. purpuragula, Peale, seems to be very near if not identical with Gr. stictocephalus, Bp. = sulcirostris, Br.

No. 138, p. 259, add—

  • Graculus featherstoni, Buller. Ibis 1873, p. 90.

  • Graculus, nov. sp., Finsch, Jour. f. Orn. 1872, p. 274 (July).

  • Gr. africanus, Hutt. (nec Gml.), Ibis 1872, p. 249 (July).

An excellent and most beautiful species, of which I received a specimen through the kindness of Dr. Hector.

No. 139, p. 259. Graculus brevirostris, Gould.

A fledgling, received from Dr. Haast, is of a black colour throughout. I still doubt whether the true Gr. melanoleucus, Vieill. (Bull., Hist. B. N. Z., p. 333), will occur in New Zealand if really different from brevirostris.

Tachypetes minor (Gml.) must be included in the avifauna of New Zealand. (Bull., Hist. B. N. Z., p. 342.)

No. 141, p. 260. Podiceps cristatus, L.

I received the type of P. hectori, Buller, from the Wellington Museum, and wonder how Dr. Buller could venture to distinguish his species “by the total absence of white on the shoulders and quills,” as the white on these parts is developed exactly as in our European cristatus. *

[Footnote] * See explanation in Buller's Notes on the Ornithology of New Zealand, Trans. N. Z. I., Vol. II., p. 388.—Ed.

– 236 –

No. 143, p. 261. Eudyptes pachyrhynchus, Gray.

I doubt very much whether Dr. Buller is right in uniting this species with Eu. chrysocomus, Forst., and nigrivestis, Gould.

No. 144, p. 262. Eudyptes chrysolophus, Brandt. is still doubtful as a New Zealand species, being only included by me on the authority of a label in the Leyden Museum.

No. 145, p. 262. Eudyptes antipodes, Hombr.

A specimen captured on the shores of New Zealand was sent me for comparison through the kindness of Dr. Hector.

No. 146, p. 262. Eudyptula minor, Gml.

Having examined more specimens, I am unable to distinguish Eu. undina as a good species. The blue hue of the upper part varies considerably in its intensity, as also does the stoutness of the bill. A specimen from the Chathams, lent me by the Colonial Museum, has a stouter and heavier bill, and shows the under parts strongly tinted with grey, but this hue disappeared after having the specimen carefully washed, and I see no reason to distinguish it as a variety.

Eudyptula albosignata, Finsch, nov. sp., P. Z. S. 1874.

Through my friend Dr. Haast I received two specimens of an Eudyptula, named minor, from Akaroa Heads, which I cannot unite with Eu. minor, and must separate specifically for the present.

Char.—Size and general colours as in minor, but the upper tail-coverts with a patch of white, and the flippers underneath wholly white; very conspicuously bordered along the anterior and posterior edges with white, leaving only a narrow blackish middle band along the upper surface of the flippers.

No. 147, p. 263. Apteryx australis, Shaw.

I repeat that I cannot consider A. mantelli to be more than a local variety of this species, and beg to refer to the minute comparison given by me (l.c. p. 265).

No. 149, p. 271. Apteryx haasti, Potts.

With extraordinary pleasure I received one of the type specimens of this species through the excellent liberality of Dr. Haast for comparison, and have no doubt as to its specific distinctness. With respect to colouration, A. haasti almost entirely agrees with A. oweni, and is by no means darker, as Dr. Buller says, except the feathers on the hind neck and nape, which are a little darker, and without pale cross lines. But it may easily be distinguished by its large size, which agrees with that of A. australis.

Apteryx mollis and A. fusca, Potts (Trans. N.Z. Inst., V., p. 196), are very doubtful species, and require further verification.