Aspidiotus Aurantii, Maskell. Aspidiotus coccineus, Gennadius (Risso, Hist. Nat. des Oranges). Aspidiotus citri, Comstock, Canadian Entomologist, vol. xiii., p. 8.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans. 1878, p. 199; ib., 1881, p. 217; ib., 1883, p. 120; ib., 1891, p. 12; ib., 1892, p. 206; ib., 1894, p. 40; Scale-Insects of N.Z., 1887, p. 40. Comstock, Ent. Rep. U.S. Dept. Agric., 1880, p. 293; 2nd Cornell University Ent. Rep., 1883, p. 59. Riley and Howard, “Insect Life,” passim. Royal Gardens, Kew, Bulletin, Sept., 1891, p. 221.

Hab. In Australia, New Zealand, Fiji, Sandwich Islands, Samoa, Tonga, New Caledonia, on Citrus. Occurs on the same trees in many other countries: in California and in Jamaica on Eucalyptus, Lignum-vitæ, &c.

Aspidiotus Bossieæ, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1891, p. 10.

Hab. In Australia, on Bossiea procumbens (Victoria).

Aspidiotus Budleiæ, Signoret.—Signoret, Ann. de la Soc. Ent. de France, 1868, p. 115. Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1878, p. 198; Scale-Insects of N.Z., 1887, p. 40.

Hab. In New Zealand, on Acacia sp. (Nelson).

Aspidiotus Camelliæ, Signoret. Aspidiotus rapax, Comstock, Ent. Rep. U.S. Dept. Agric., 1880, p. 307.—Signoret, Ann. de la Soc. Ent. de France, 1868, p. 117. Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1878, p. 200; ib., 1884, p. 21; ib., 1890, p. 3; ib., 1894, p. 39; Scale-Insects of N.Z., 1887, p. 41. Morgan, Ent. Mo. Mag., Aug., 1889, p. 351.

Hab. In New Zealand, on Camellia japonica, Euonymus japonicus, Salix babylonica (Christchurch; Wellington); in Europe, on Camellia; in North America, on Euonymus, Olea, and other plants.

Aspidiotus Carpodeti, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1884, p. 21; Scale-Insects of N.Z., 1887, p. 41.

Hab. In New Zealand, on Carpodetus serratus, Vitex littoralis (Wellington).

Aspidiotus Casuarinæ, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1893, p. 66.

Hab. In Australia, on Casuarina equisetifolia (New South Wales).

Aspidiotus Ceratus, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1894, p. 39.

Hab. In Australia, on Acacia stenophylla (South Australia).

Aspidiotus Cladii, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1890, p. 3; ib., 1892, p. 205; ib., 1893, p. 67; ib., 1894, p.

Hab. In Australia, on Cladium sp. (Victoria); on Lepido-sperma sp. (South Australia); on Xerotes sp. (New South Wales).

Aspidiotus Corokiæ, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1890, p. 2.

Hab. In New Zealand, on Corokia cotoneaster (Reefton).

Aspidiotus Cydoniæ, Comstock.—Comstock, Ent. Rep. U.S. Dept. Agric., 1880, p. 295. Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1891, p. 13.

Hab. In Samoa, on Citrus; in North America, on Cydonia vulgaris (Florida).

Aspidiotus Dysoxyli, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1878, p. 198; Scale-Insects of N.Z., 1887, p. 43.

Hab. In New Zealand, on Dysoxylon spectabile (Wellington).

Aspidiotus Epidendri, Bouché. Chermes epidendri, Boisduval.—Bouché, Ent. Zeit. Stett., 1844, p. 293. Boisduval, Ent. Hort., 1867, p. 339. Signoret, Ann. de la Soc. Ent. de France, 1868, p. 121. Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1878, p. 197; Scale-Insects of N.Z., 1887, p. 44.

Hab. In New Zealand, on Acacia sp. (Christchurch) in Europe, on hothouse orchids.

Aspidiotus. Eucalypti, Maskell.—Maskell, Trans. Roy. Soc. South Australia, vol. xi., 1887–88, p. 102; N.Z. Trans., 1891, p. 11; ib., 1892, p. 206.

Hab. In Australia, on Eucalyptus, var. sp. (South Australia); on Casuarina sp. (New South Wales).

Aspidiotus Extensus, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1894, p. 41.

Hab. In Australia, on Eucalyptus capitellata (New South Wales; Victoria).

Aspidiotus Ficûs, Comstock.—Comstock, Ent. Rep. U.S. Dept. Agric., 1880, p. 296. Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1894, p. 39.

Hab. In Australia, on various plants, probably Citrus, in Botanical Gardens, and elsewhere (New South Wales; Queensland).

Aspidiotus Fodiens, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1891, p. 10.

Hab. In Australia, on Acacia sp. (Victoria).

Aspidiotus Kennedyæ, Boisduval.-Boisduval, Ent. Hort.,

Mytilaspis Flava, Targioni-Tozzetti, var. hawaiiensis, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1894, p. 47. Targioni-Tozzetti, Catal., 1868, p. 44. Comstock, 2nd Corn. Univ. Rep., 1883, p. 123.

Hab. In Sandwich Islands, on “bark of shade trees.”

Mytilaspis Formosa, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1893, p. 68.

Hab. In Australia, on Eucalyptus orbifolia (Western Australia); on Eucalyptus corynocalyx (South Australia).

Mytilaspis Gloverii, Packard.—Comstock, Ent. Rep. U.S. Dept. Agric., 1880, p. 323. Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1890, p. 8.

Hab. In Australia, on Citrus (Victoria).

Mytilaspis Grandilobis, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1893, p. 70.

Hab. In Australia, on Banksia sp. (Victoria).

Mytilaspis Grisea, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1889, p. 133.

Hab. In Australia, on Eucalyptus, var. sp., and on Acacia, var. sp. (New South Wales).

Mytilaspis Intermedia, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1890, p. 7.

Hab. In New Zealand, on Leptospermum scoparium (Reefton).

Mytilaspis Lactea, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1894, p. 48.

Hab. In New Zealand, on Fuchsia excorticata (Wellington; Woodville).

Mytilaspis Leptospermi, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1881, p. 215; Scale-Insects of N.Z., 1887, p. 50.

Hab. In New Zealand, on Leptospermum scoparium (passim).

Mytilaspis Metrosideri, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1879, p. 293; Scale-Insects of N.Z., 1887, p. 50.

Hab. In New Zealand, on Metrosideros robusta (Wellington).

Mytilaspis Nivea, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1894, p. 46.

Hab. In Australia, on Melaleuca nodosa (New South Wales).

Mytilaspis Pallens, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1889, p. 134.

Hab. In Australia, on Xanthorrhea sp. (New South Wales).

Mytilaspis Pallida, Green, var. (?).—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1894, p. 46.

Hab. In Sandwich Islands, on Podocarpus sp.

Lecanium Baccatum, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1891, p. 20; ib., 1892, p. 217.

Hab. In Australia, on Acacia armata (South Australia), Acacia calamifolia, Acacia longifolia (Victoria).

Lecanium Cassiniæ, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1890, p. 15.

Hab. In New Zealand, on Cassinia leptophylla (Wellington).

Lecanium Filicum, Boisduval.—Boisduval, Ent. Hort., 1867, 336. Signoret, Ann. de la Soc. Ent. de France, 1873, p. 436. Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1892, p. 220.

Hab. In Australia, on Lomaria (?) sp. (New South Wales); in Europe, on hothouse fern, Pteris argirea.

Lecanium Frenchii, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1890, p. 17.

Hab. In Australia, on Banksia australis (Victoria).

Lecanium Hemisphæricum, Targioni-Tozzetti.—Targioni, Stud. sulle Coccineglie, 1867, p. 27. Signoret, Ann. de la Soc. Ent. de France, 1873, p. 436. Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1884, p. 29; ib., 1894, p. 59; Scale-Insects of N.Z., 1887 p. 80.

Hab. In New Zealand, on Camellia japonica (Wellington); in Europe, on Dracæna australis; in North America, on various greenhouse plants; in Australia, on hothouse plants (South Australia).

Lecanium Hesperidum, Linnæus.—Linnæus, Syst. Nat., 1735, ii., 739. Signoret, Ann. de la Soc. Ent. de France, 1873, p. 399. Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1878, p. 205; ib., 1892, p. 218; Scale-Insects of N.Z., 1887, p. 80.

Hab. In New Zealand, on Laurus, Ilex, Hedera, Citrus, Camellia, Myrtus, Buxus, &c.; in Australia, on Citrus, Laurus, &c.

Lecanium Hibernaculorum, Boisduval.—Boisduval, Ent. Hort., 1867, p. 337. Signoret, Ann. de la Soc. Ent. de France, 1873, p. 437. Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1878, p. 207; Scale-Insects of N.Z., 1887, p. 81.

Hab. In New Zealand, on various greenhouse plants (Canterbury); in Europe, on hothouse plants.

Lecanium Longulum, Douglas. Lecanium chirimoliæ, Maskell.—Douglas, Ent. Mo. Mag., 1887, p. 97. Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1889, p. 137; ib., 1890, p. 16; ib., 1892, p. 221.

Hab. In Fiji, on Annona tripetala; in Sandwich Islands, on Psidium, Bambusa, Citrus, Acacia, &c.; in Demerara, on Annona muricata, &c.

Lecanium Maculatum, Signoret.—Signoret, Ann. de la Soc. Ent. de France, 1873, p. 400. Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1878, p. 207; Scale-Insects of N.Z., 1887, p. 81.

Hab. In New Zealand, on Bavardia (Canterbury); in Europe, on Hedera.

Lecanium Mori, Signoret.—Signoret, Ann. de la Soc. Ent. de France, 1873, p. 407. Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1884, p. 29; ib., 1893, p. 75; Scale-Insects of N.Z., 1887, p. 82.

Hab. In New Zealand, on Alsophila colensoi, Nephrolepis cordifolia, Asplenium flaccidum, &c.; in Europe, on Morus albus.

Lecanium Nigrum, Nietner, var. depressum, Targioni-Tozzetti.—Nietner, “Enemies of the Coffee-tree,” 1861. Targioni, Stud. sulle Coccineglie, 1867, p. 29. Signoret, Ann. de la Soc. Ent. de France, 1873, p. 439. Douglas, Ent. Mo. Mag., 1887, p. 27. Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1878, p. 206; ib., 1892, p. 220; ib., 1893, p. 73; Scale-Insects of N.Z., 1887, p. 79.

Hab. In New Zealand, on various greenhouse plants; in Australia, on Hakea sp., and on “unnamed plant,” and on “cultivated vine” (New South Wales); in Sandwich Islands, on Psidium sp., Bambusa sp.

Lecanium Oleæ, Bernard.—Bernard, Mem. d'Hist. Nat. Acad., 1872, p. 108. Signoret, Ann. de la Soc. Ent. de France, 1873, p. 440. Comstock, Ent. Rep. U.S. Dept. Agric., 1880, p. 336. Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1884, p. 28; Scale-Insects of N.Z., 1887, p. 82.

Hab. In New Zealand, on Camellia japonica, and on “native trees” (Wellington; Hawke's Bay; Auckland); in Sandwich Islands, on Citrus, Psidium, &c.; in North America, on Citrus, Olea, &c.; in Europe, on Olea.

Lecanium Patersoniæ, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1894, p. 57.

Hab. In Australia, on Patersonia glabrata (New South Wales).

Lecanium Pingue, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1894, p. 58.

Hab. In Australia, on Dillwynia juniperina (New South Wales).

Lecanium Ribis, Fitch.—Fitch, Trans. New York Agric. Soc., 1856. Signoret, Ann. de la Soc. Ent. de France, 1876, p. 624. Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1890, p. 16; ib., 1891, p. 22.

Hab. In New Zealand, on Ribes sp. (gooseberries and currants); in North America, on the same.

Eriococcus confusus, Maskell.—-Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1891, p. 26.

Hab. In Australia, on Eucalyptus viminalis (Victoria).

Eriococcus Conspersus, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1892, p. 229.

Hab. In Australia, on Casuarina sp. (New South Wales).

Eriococcus Coriaceus, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1892, p. 229.

Hab. In Australia, on Eucalyptus sp. (New South Wales).

Eriococcus Danthoniae, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1890, p. 21.

Hab. In New Zealand, on Danthonia cunninghamii (Reefton).

Eriococcus Eucalypti, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1891, p. 27.

Hab. In Australia, on Eucalyptus diversicolor, Bursaria spinosa (South Australia; Victoria).

Eriococcus Fagicorticis, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1891, p. 27.

Hab. In New Zealand, on Fagus fusca (Reefton).

Eriococcus Hoheriae, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1879, p. 298; ib., 1890, p. 20; ib., 1891, p. 26; Scale-Insects of N.Z.,1887, p. 93.

Hab. In New Zealand, on Hoheria angustifolia (Canterbury).

Eriococcus Leptospermi, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1890, p. 22.

Hab. In Australia, on Leptospermum lcevigatum (Victoria).

Eriococcus Multispinus, Maskell. Acanthococcus multispinus, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1878, p. 217; ib., 1879, p. 292; ib., 1884, p. 29; Scale-Insects of N.Z., 1887, p. 94.

Hab. In New Zealand, on Rubus australis, Knightia excelsa, Cyathodes acerosa (Canterbury; Wellington).

Eriococcus Multispinus, Maskell, var. lacevigatus, Maskell.—-Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1890, p. 20.

Hab. In Australia, on Acacia armata (Victoria).

Eriococcus Palidus, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1884, p. 29; ib., 1890, p. 21; Scale-Insects of N.Z., 1887, p. 95.

Hab. In New Zealand, on Myoporum lcetum, Elceocarpus dentatus, Fagus menziesii, Atherosperma novce – zealandice (passim).

Bay; Canterbury; Stewart Island); in Fiji, on Saccharum officinarum (sugar-cane).

Dactylopius Cocotis, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1889, p. 149; ib., 1891, p. 34

Hab. In Fiji, on Cocos nucifera; in Laccadive Islands, on the same.

Dactylopius Ericicola, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1892, p. 232.

Hab. In Australia, on Erica autumnalis (Victoria); the plant is from the Cape of Good Hope).

Dactylopius Eucalypti, Maskell.—Maskell, N. Z. Trans., 1891, p. 35; ib., 1892, p. 233; ib., 1893, p. 90; ib., 1894, p. 65.

Hab. In Australia, on Eucalyptus rostrata, Eucalyptus robusta (South Australia; New South Wales).

Dactylopius Glaucus, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1878, p. 219; ib., 1884, p. 30; Scale-Insects of N.Z., 1887, p. 100.

Hab. In New Zealand, on Panax arboreum, Rubus australis, Coprosma var. sp., Pittosporum eugenioide, Piper excelsum, &c. (passim)

Dactylopius Globosus, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1891, p. 34.

Hab. In Australia, on Acacia armata, Acacia decurrens (South Australia; Victoria).

Dactylopius Herbicola, Maskell.—Maskell, Agric. Gaz., New South Wales, 1891, p. 352; N.Z. Trans., 1891, p. 36.

Hab. In Australia, on Aristida vagans (New South Wales).

Dactylopius Hibbertiæ, Maskell.—-Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1891, p. 32.

Hab. In Australia, on Hibbertia virgata, Hibbertia linearis (South Australia; Victoria).

Dactylopius Iceryoides, Maskell.—-Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1891, p. 33.

Hab. In New Zealand, on Fagus fusca (Reefton).

Dactylopius Liliacearum, Bouchá.—-Bouchá, Ent. Zeit. Stett., 1844, 293. Signoret, Ann. de la Soc. Ent. de France, 1874, p. 319.

Hab. In Europe, on Australian Liliacece, Crinum sp.

Dactylopius Lobulatus, Maskell.—Maskell, N.Z. Trans., 1893, p. 91.

Hab. In Australia, on Eucalyptus globulus (Victoria; the tree is Tasmanian).

Brachyscelis Citricola, Schrader.—Schrader, Trans. Ent. Soc. New South Wales, 1862, p. 3. Signoret, Ann. de la Soc. Ent. de France, 1876, p. 597.

Hab. In Australia, on (?).

Brachyscelis conica, Froggatt.—Froggatt, Proc. Linn. Soc. New South Wales, 1892, p. 365. Tepper, Trans. Roy. Soc. South Australia, 1893, p. 272.

Hab. In Australia, on Eucalyptus viminalis (New South Wales; Victoria).

Brachyscelis crispa, Olliff.—Oliff, MS.

Hab. In Australia, on Eucalyptus sp. (New South Wales).

Brachyscelis duplex, Schrader.—Schrader, Trans. Ent. Soc. New South Wales, 1862, p. 2. Signoret, Ann. de la Soc. Ent. de France, 1876, p. 596. Froggatt, Proc. Linn. Soc. New South Wales, 1892, p. 358. Tepper, Trans. Roy. Soc. South Australia, 1893, p. 272.

Hab. In Australia, on Eucalyptus sp. (New South Wales).

Brachyscelis ellipsoidalis, Tepper.—Tepper, Trans. Roy. Soc. South Australia, 1893, p. 272.

Hab. In Australia, on Eucalyptus sp. (Western Australia).

Brachyscelis glabra, Tepper.—Tepper, Trans. Roy. Soc. South Australia, 1893, p. 278.

Hab. In Australia, on Eucalyptus rostrata (South Australia).

This is probably identical with B. ovicola, Schrader.

Brachyscelis minor, Froggatt.—Froggatt, Proc. Linn. Soc. New South Wales, 1892, p. 363. Tepper, Trans. Roy. Soc. South Australia, 1893, p. 272.

Hab. In Australia, on Eucalyptus hamastoma (New South Wales).

Brachyscelis munita, Schrader.—Schrader, Trans. Ent. Soc. New South Wales, 1862, p. 2. Signoret, Ann. de la Soc. Ent. de France, 1876, p. 597. Froggatt, Proc. Linn. Soc. New South Wales, 1892, p. 359. Tepper, Trans. Roy. Soc. South Australia, 1893, p. 271; ‘ib., p. 273.

Hab. In Australia, on Eucalyptus robusta, Eucalyptus var. sp. (New South Wales; Victoria; South Australia).

Brachyscelis (?) Neumanni, Tepper.—Tepper, Trans. Roy. Soc. South Australia, 1893, p. 275.

Hab. In Australia, on Eucalyptus dumosa (South Australia).

Brachyscelis nux, Olliff.—Olliff, MS.

Hab. In Australia, on Eucalyptus sp. (New South Wales).

Brachyscelis ovicola, Schrader.—Schrader, Trans. Ent. Soc. New South Wales, 1862, p. 3. Signoret, Ann. de la Soc. Ent. de France, 1876, p. 596. Froggatt, Proc. Linn. Soc. New South Wales, 1892, p. 367. Tepper, Trans. Roy. Soc. South Australia, 1893, p. 272.

Hab. In Australia, on Eucalyptus hæmastoma, Eucalyptus gracilis, Eucalyptus leucoxylon (New South Wales; Victoria).

Brachyscelis ovicoloides, Tepper.—Tepper, Trans. Roy. Soc. South Australia, 1893, p. 277.

Hab. In Australia, on Eucalyptus incrassata, Eucalyptus odorata (South Australia).

Brachyscelis pharetrata, Schrader.—Schrader, Trans. Ent. Soc. New South Wales, 1862, p. 3. Signoret, Ann. de la Soc. Ent. de France, 1876, p. 595. Froggatt, Proc. Linn. Soc. New South Wales, 1892, p. 370.

Hab. In Australia, on Eucalyptus sieberiana, Eucalyptus corymbosa, Eucalyptus capitellata (New South Wales).

Brachyscelis pileata, Schrader.—Schrader, Trans. Ent. Soc. New South Wales, 1862, p. 3. Signoret, Ann. de la Soc. Ent. de France, 1876, p. 593. Froggatt, Proc. Linn. Soc. New South Wales, 1892, p. 362. Tepper, Trans. Roy. Soc. South Australia, 1893, p. 272.

Hab. In Australia, on Eucalyptus hæmastoma, Eucalyptus piperita, Eucalyptus sieberiana, Eucalyptus capitellata (New South Wales).

Brachyscelis pomiformis, Froggatt.—Froggatt, Proc. Linn. Soc. New South Wales, 1892, p. 367. Tepper, Trans. Roy. Soc. South Australia, 1893, p. 272.

Hab. In Australia, on Eucalyptus sp. (Queensland; Western Australia).

Brachyscelis Regularis, Tepper.—Tepper, Trans. Roy. Soc. South Australia, 1893, p. 273.

Hab. In Australia, on Eucalyptus rostrata (South Australia).

Brachyscelis Rugosa, Froggatt,—Froggatt, Proc. Linn. Soc. New South Wales, 1892, p. 369. Tepper, Trans. Roy. Soc. South Australia, 1893, p. 272.

Hab. In Australia, on Eucalyptus sp. (New South Wales).

Brachyscelis (?) Strombylosa, Tepper.—Tepper, Trans. Roy. Soc. South Australia, 1893, p. 277.

Hab. In Australia, on Eucalyptus incrassata (South Australia).

Probably not a Brachyscelis.

food-plant, conditions of life, are in this case ignored. Again, we all know how deceptive a thing colour is: what is green to one man may be blue or red to another. Ornithologists and lepidopterists have invented thousands of new “species” on account of some different colour in a feather or in a wing-spot. But many cases are known in Coccid study where, even on the same twig, amongst perhaps a hundred individuals, five different “species” could be so made because there may be five variations in colour. Again, in the case of climate and food-plant: if we were to imagine that an insect in a tropical country on, say, a palm, must necessarily be for that reason a different species from one in a temperate country on a Fagus, it would be the simplest thing in the world to bring up the number of Coccid species to that of the Hymenoptera, ransacking every dictionary in every language to find names for them. A friend of mine once wrote that he could not agree to make two Planchonice identical “because they lived on such widely-separated orders of plants as Coronilla and Bambusa.” But there are dozens of Coccids which are multivorous if not omnivorous: for example—Aspidiotus nerii, A. aurantii, Mytilaspis pomorum, Ctenochiton viridis, Lecanium hesperidum, Planchonia fimbriata, several Dactylopii, Icerya purchasi, &c. You cannot predicate that an insect living on one plant will not live equally well on another, or in another locality. Taking, therefore, these four points—size, colour, locality or climate, and food-plant—I would very seriously deprecate the notion that any of them (I will go so far as to say that all of them) should be sufficient to induce the erection of a new species. Convenience demands that they should be all mentioned in a description, as a guide to other students or as information to the public, so that anybody could know where at least to search for particular insects. Beyond that I look on them as of little or no value.

The following pages contain notes concerning many species already reported from various parts of the world, and also descriptions of more than twenty insects which, after full consideration, seem to be new. Some, such as the Australian form of Eriococcus buxi, or the Sandwich Island form of Chionaspis biclavis, I have set down as merely varieties of the original types. The others, although seeming to be quite distinct, do not present such extraordinary and interesting features as those reported in my former papers. But the discovery in Australia of representatives of the genus Ctenochiton (hitherto confined to New Zealand) seems to be not entirely unimportant in its bearing on the distribution of animal forms and the connection between the two countries.

With regard to Ceronema, the new genus which I am here proposing to establish, it may be remarked that, whilst the

long hairs of the abdominal extremity, partly simple and partly serrated, and the single pair of lobes, are so clear that the identity is manifest. I think, however, that there are six of the long simple hairs on each side, and not four as given by Mr. Morgan.

A minute, bright-red mite (seemingly Gamasid) was very active and numerous amongst these Sandwich Island specimens; and I found many of the Aspidioti which appeared to have been partly devoured, whether by this or some other parasite I could not determine.

Aspidiotus camelliae, Boisduval. A. rapax, Comstock.

This insect is still very prevalent in New Zealand on many plants. It has lately attacked Diosma in the gardens near Wellington. I have also had specimens sent to me by Mr. Froggatt, from Sydney, on Melaleuca nodosa, and by Mr. French, from Melbourne, on Rhododendron. The species seems to be omnivorous, and bids fair to be cosmopolitan.

Aspidiotus ficûus (Riley), Comstock. Comstock, Ent. Rep. U.S. Agric. Dept., 1880, p. 296.

This species, which in North America appears to be an injurious pest on orange-trees, has been sent to me during the last year from New South Wales (by Mr. Froggatt) and from Queensland (by Mr. Koebele). The characters by which A. subrubescens mihi (1891) differs from it will be found in vol. xxiv. of our Transactions, p. 9. The Australian plants on which my specimens of A. ficus came were not named by the senders; but I imagine them to be various kinds of Citrus.

Aspidiotus ceratus, sp. nov. Plate I., fig. 1.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Female puparium snowy-white, circular, convex; diameter about 1/22in. when separate; but numbers of puparia are usually so massed together that measurement is difficult. Texture solid and waxy; the two pellicles are central and of a faint yellow tinge, covered by a scale of white wax.

Male puparium white, smaller, and more elongated than that of the female.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Adult female orange – coloured, pegtop – shaped; length about 1/30in. Abdomen ending in two adjacent lobes with rounded emarginate ends; above them are two club-shaped organs. The abdominal margin is serratulate and bears some short spines: of these spines, one on each side, not far from the lobes, is widely forked. No groups of spinnerets.

Adult male unknown.

Hab. In Australia, on Acacia stenophylla. Mr. French sent me specimens from the banks of the Murray River, in South Australia.

This species may be distinguished by the white waxy puparia, and by the large forked spines on the abdominal margin.

Aspidiotus vitiensis, sp. nov. Plate I., fig. 2.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Female puparium greyish-white as a rule, but varying somewhat in colour according to the bark of the tree; form probably nearly circular, but so many are usually massed together that it is difficult to make out the outline; slightly convex. Diameter probably about 1/25 in. Pellicles subcentral, yellow.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Male puparium similar in colour to that of the female, but smaller and more elliptical. Length about 1/40 in.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Adult female brown, pegtop-shaped: length about 1/16in. Abdomen ending in two large median triangular lobes with serrated sides, not adjoining: on each side is a small cylindrical lobe, followed by a forked spine, and, after an interval, two smaller conical lobes and another forked spine: the abdominal margin bears also a few other spines. Four groups of spinnerets: upper groups 6–10 orifices, lower groups about 15.

Hab. In Fiji, on “several different forest-trees.” My specimens were sent by Mr. Koebele.

Aspidiotus unilobis, sp. nov. Plate I., fig. 3.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Female puparium really whitish, but generally covered by so much dense black fungus that it seems black, and is very difficult to distinguish. Form circular, sightly convex; pellicles orange, central, forming a minute boss. Diameter about 1/20in.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Male puparium white, elongated, not carinated. Length about 1/25in.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Adult female dark-orange, pegtop-shaped; length about 1/30in. Abdomen ending in one single median dome-shaped lobe, on each side of which are a few fine hairs. No groups of spinnerets. The margin of the abdomen is finely striated and minutely crenulated.

Adult male unknown.

Hab. In Australia, on Acacia sp. (tea-tree), Mount Victoria, New South Wales.

The single median lobe sufficiently distinguishes this species. A similar character is seen in Chionaspis quercus, Comstock.

Aspidiotus aurantii, Maskell.

I am constantly receiving specimens of this insect from many widely-separated localities, and on many different trees. It is not at all confined to the orange, and is, seemingly, ubiquitous in warm temperate countries. The colour varies a little, and lately I have had some from Honolulu, on a species

of Podocarpus from Japan, which are of a good deal deeper red than the type.

In the United States “Agricultural Bulletin,” No. 23, 1891, Mr. Coquillett mentions, under the name of “the yellow scale, Aspidiotus citrinus,” a form which, from careful examination of specimens sent to me by Mr. Ehrhorn, of Santa Clara County, California, I find are clearly only A. aurantii. Mr. Ehrhorn informs me that he and Professor Comstock and several others have come to the same conclusion. I am sorry that a distinction founded on so slight a character as mere colour should be so often suggested. No scientific description of this form has yet appeared, that I know of.

Aspidiotus extensus, sp. nov. Plate I., figs. 4, 5.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Female puparium of a dull dirty-yellow or brown colour, frequently obscured by black fungus, subcircular, convex, and usually somewhat conical; diameter, about 1/12in. at ful development. The larval pellicle is black, situated at the apex of the cone; the second pellicle is very inconspicuous, and it is difficult to make out its dimensions, but close examination shows that it occupies about half the puparium. The surface of the puparium is finely striated.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Male puparium subcircular, of a grey or bluish-grey colour, rather convex, but less so than that of the female. The pellicle is less black than in the female, and is not placed centrally. Diameter of puparium about 1/20in.

In all the specimens seen the female puparia were on the twigs, the male puparia on the leaves.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Adult female dark-brown, pegtop-shaped, with a distinct prolongation of the abdominal region, by which the abdominal margin is slightly concave. The size varies: specimens seen range in length from 1/30in. to 1/14in. The prolongation of the abdomen bears two median lobes, set so closely together as to look like one, their outer margins sloping, and minutely serratulate; beyond these the abdominal margin is irregular, and bears some rather strong spines and cylindrical processes blunt at the tips, and there is a longish spiny hair at the innermost point of the concavity of the margin. There are no groups of spinnerets.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Adult male dark-brown; form rather stout and thick; length (exclusive of spike) about 1/35in.; the spike is about as long as the abdomen. Antennae and feet normal. There. seem to be two dorsal eyes, two ventral, and two ocelli; but my specimens are not clear as to these.

Hab. In Australia, on Eucalyptus capitellata. My specimens were sent by Mr. Froggatt, from Bankstown, near Sydney; and I have also two, which seem to be quite similar, on the same plant from Victoria, sent by Mr. French.

scale of the orange” (which I take to mean also L. hesperidum); but Targioni refers the insect to Aspidiotus lauri, Bouche, which he first renamed Aonidia purpurea, and afterwards Aonidia lauri. However, in spite of this confusion and uncertainty, I think that it is quite convenient to accept the genus Aonidia on the main, and indeed sole, ground of the comparative size of the second pellicle.

No species of the genus has, I think, been described from 1868 till now; but Mr. Green has an insect in Ceylon which clearly belongs to it, and which he proposes to name Aonidia corniger; and I attach to the genus the Australian species which I am now about to describe.

Aonidia fusca, sp. nov. Plate I., figs. 6–9.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Female puparium regularly circular, very dark-brown or dull-black; slightly convex; diameter about 1/35in. The larval pellicle is very small, central: the second pellicle occupies nearly all the puparium, but is not to be made out until the puparium is overturned; it is larger than the adult female, and also more elongated. Dorsally the whole puparium appears black; but when overturned the second pellicle is seen to be yellow, being covered with a coating of black secretion. The margin of the puparium extends only a small distance beyond the pellicle all round; the pellicle has thus a length of about 1/40in.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Male puparium, dirty yellowish-grey, irregularly elliptical, the pellicle situated near one end; slightly convex. Length about 1/30in., being thus larger than that of the female.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Adult female regularly pegtop-shaped, orange-yellow; length about 1/65in., being therefore much smaller than the second pellicle. Abdomen ending in four lobes, of which the two median are the largest, and are rounded, with a small indentation on the outer margin; they are closely adjacent, and are separated from the two smaller lobes by a narrow rounded incision of the margin. Beyond the lobes are a few short fine hairs. There are no groups of spinnerets, but many small circular scattered single ones.

Adult male unknown. I possess a mounted specimen of a pupa in the puparium, presenting no special features.

Hab. In Australia, on peach (Persica vulgaris). Mr. French sent me the specimens, stating that they came from the garden of Mr. Benson, Bulga, New South Wales. I cannot discover any description of a Diaspid attacking peach-trees in Europe or America which answers to this insect. It is not Aspidiotus niger, Signoret; and for the present I must consider that it has migrated to Mr. Benson's fruit-trees from some native plants in the vicinity. In “Insect Life,” May, 1894, there is a description of Diaspis lanata, Morgan and

larger twigs; as indeed is usual in many cases. The size of Coccids is subject to much variation according to the foodplant, and cannot be considered as being a character of any importance.

Mytilaspis nivea, sp. nov. Plate I., fig. 10.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Female puparium elongated, usually straight, narrow, snowy-white. Pellicles terminal, yellow. The length may be about 1/20in.; but the puparia are usually so massed together, forming a snowy heap on the twig, that it is not easy to make them out separately.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Male puparium similar to that of the female, but smaller. Length about 1/30 Not carinated.

Adult female brown. Form normal. Abdomen ending with a small median depression, at each side of which is a pointed triangular lobe, and after an interval another similar lobe of the same size. Abdominal margin deeply serrated, and bearing at each side three or four rather strong spines. The groups of spinnerets are five: upper group with 3 or 4 orifices; upper laterals, 10 to 12; lower laterals, 16 to 24.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Adult male yellow; length about 1/40in. There are no characters specially distinguishing it from others of the genus.

Hab. In Australia, on Melaleuca nodosa. Specimens from Mr. Froggatt, from Bankstown, near Sydney.

A species by no means far removed from M. casuarinæ, Mask. (1892), but differing principally in the four conical lobes and in the stronger marginal spines. The puparia look exactly like snow on the twigs.

Mytilaspis pallida, Green (var.?).

I have received from Mr. Koebele a Mytilaspis on Podo-carpus sp., imported into Honolulu from Japan, which seems to me to be so close to a species in Ceylon to which Mr. Green proposes to give the name of M. pallida that I believe it to be identical. Mr. Green has not yet published a description of his insect. It is possible that it, and mine, may in the end turn out to be varieties of Mr. citricola, Packard, an insect which I find to infest not only Citrus but many other plants in warm countries. The puparium of M. pallida resembles much that of M. citricola, with a rather paler colour; the lobes and spines of the abdominal extremity are also nearly similar, but smaller and finer. I am not clear about the spinneret-groups, and the abdominal extremity seems more truncate than in M. citricola. But in any case the Cingalese and the Japanese forms appear to be very closely allied.

Mytilaspis flava, Targioni-Tozzetti, var. hawaiiensis, var. nov.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Female puparium really yellowish, but covered with a greyish-white secretion which makes it look grey and like the bark of the tree. Form mussel-shaped; length about 1/20in.; slightly curved; generally massed together in numbers.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Male puparium similar, but smaller and straighter. Length about 1/40in.

Adult female yellow, of normal elongate form, the segments usually distinct. Abdomen ending in two large median lobes, which are widely triangular, the outer edges minutely serrulate. Just above them are two club-shaped organs extending a little way within the body. At each side of the lobes are a few spines. Five groups of spinnerets: upper group with 3 orifices; upper laterals with 6; lower laterals, 4 to 6. The abdominal segments anterior to the pygidium seem to bear no spines.

Adult male unknown.

Hab. In the Sandwich Islands, on “bark of trees” at Kauai; plant-names not given. My specimens are from Mr. Koebele.

I can see nothing separating this from the European species (infesting Olea europæa) excepting the absence of spines from the anterior abdominal segments, and as to that I am not entirely positive. The club-shaped organs mentioned resemble those of Chionaspis biclavis, Comstock.

Mytilaspis striata, sp. nov. Plate I., figs. 11, 12.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Female puparium elongated, mussel-shaped, rather convex; length, about 1/23in. The secreted portion exhibits many transverse bands of silvery-white colour, separated by narrower bands of dark-grey. Pellicles orange.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Male puparium of similar form, and with similar bands, not carinated. Length, about 1/40in.

Adult female orange-coloured, darkening with age to brown. Form normal of the genus; the segments not prominent, but exhibiting faint striations which seem to correspond with those of the puparium. Abdomen ending in a semicircular curve broken by small serrations, with four sharply-pointed small triangular lobes rather widely separated. No groups of spinnerets; but a row of oval pores runs round the margin of the abdominal and thoracic regions, and on the abdominal dorsum there are a number of small circular single spinnerets.

Adult male unknown.

Hab. In Australia, on Casuarina sp. (very slender twigs). Mr. Froggatt sent me specimens from Sydney.

This species, in the absence of spinneret-groups, ap-

proaches M. convexa, Mask., 1893 (on Acacia); but the four terminal triangular lobes distinguish it. The transverse bands of the puparium would not, I think, by themselves denote more than a variety.

Mytilaspis lactea, sp. nov. Plate II., figs. 1, 2.

Female puparium of a delicate white colour, but frequently more or less covered by a very thin layer of bark-cells of the plant. Pellicles pale yellow. The puparium is broadly pyri-form; length, about ⅛in.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Male puparium snowy-white, semicylindrical; length, about 1/26in.; not at all carinated.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Adult female dull-pink in colour, darkening to brown at gestation. Form elongated, segmented; length about 1/16in. Abdomen ending with a small median depression, the sides of which form two lobes with rounded ends, which are minutely serrulated: separated from these by a spine, on each side, is a smaller rounded lobe followed by a spine, and, after a small interval, two other much smaller lobes. The margin beyond these lobes is irregular, and bears a few spines. Each segment of the body has also a few marginal spines. There are five groups of spinnerets: upper group with 6 to 8 orifices; upper laterals, 20 to 25; lower laterals, 25 to 35. There are also, on each side of the groups, three rows of large oval pores.

Adult male unknown.

Hab. In New Zealand, on bark of Fuchsia excorticata. My specimens were mostly collected in the neighbourhood of Wellington, but I have a few from Woodville.

Those who classify species according to colour would probably attach this insect to Chionaspis. But the absence of any trace of a keel on the male puparium is much more important, and according to my regular plan I place it in Mytilaspis. In the inclusion of bark-cells amongst the secretion of the female puparium it approaches M. leptospermi, Mask. (1881); but the characters of the abdomen separate it from that, and, I think, from all other, species: more especially the terminal median depression.

Mytilaspis citricola, Packard.

I have received specimens of this species from Mr. Quinn, on Croton sp. from a hothouse at Adelaide. No mention is made in his letter of any orange or other Citrus trees growing in the house, and it is stated indeed that the insect is “very destructive, and seems confined to Croton chiefly.” Specimens have also been sent to me on Banksia integrifolia from Melbourne, by Mr. French. These last are intelligible enough, as they might easily have spread from orange-trees; but I am not so

Male puparium unknown.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Adult female dark-brown, of normal elongated form; length, about 1/13in. Abdomen terminating, as in the type, with two largish median lobes, above which are two club-shaped organs; no groups of spinnerets; several strong marginal spines, which are also on the anterior abdominal segments.

Male unknown.

Hab. In Sandwich Islands, on “bark of shade-trees,” not named, at Kona. My specimens are from Mr. Koebele.

The difference between this and Comstock's American species (in conservatories at Washington) seems to consist only in the fact that the Sandwich Island form does not burrow, but lies exposed on the bark. The anatomical characters seem identical.

Chionaspis dysoxyli, Maskell. N.Z. Trans., vol. xvii., 1884, p.22.

This insect occurs on Hoheria angustifolia on the hills above the Town of Lyttelton, in this country. I found many specimens there in the autumn of this year, when searching for Eriococcus hoheria, which I failed to find. The puparia of the Chionaspis are narrower than those of the original type, as indeed is only natural, being on narrow twigs and leaves instead of on the broad ones of Dysoxylon; but I can detect no difference in the insect itself. These are the first specimens of the species reported from the Middle Island.

Chionaspis xerotidis, sp. nov. Plate II., figs. 6, 7.

Female puparium whitish, flattish, pyriform; length about ⅛in. Pellicles yellow, comparatively small. The form of the puparium is frequently obscured by masses of dirt and mud.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Male puparium whitish, elongated, narrow, carinated. Length about 1/20in.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Adult female yellow, elongated; length about 1/24in. The abdomen ends with a small median depression, the sides of which form small lobes, and at each side there are four equally small rounded lobes with three spines, and one spine a short distance along the margin. All the abdominal and thoracic segments bear marginal groups of rather strong spines. Five groups of spinnerets: upper group with 8–10 orifices; upper laterals about 20; lower laterals about 33: but it is not easy to separate the lateral groups, and the whole arrangement is very nearly an arch. There are a great many large oval pores marking the abdominal segments.

Adult male unknown.

Hab. In Australia, on an aquatic plant of the sedge family —Xerotes longifolia. My specimens were sent by Mr. Frog-

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Test of male pupa white, more glassy than that of the female the form is elongated-elliptical, the sides nearly parallel, the dorsum convex: the central region is formed of three plates, of which the two anterior are quadrangular with indented edges, and the posterior one triangular; surrounding these is a ring of rather large quadrangular plates, on the outer edges of which is a small fringe as in the female. Length of male test about 1/10in.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Adult female dark-brown. In the earlier state it is flattish, but at gestation becomes convex with a flattened margin. The form is broadly elliptical; length when fully developed about 1/7in. Antennæ of six joints: the first short, the second much the longest, with a “false joint” at about tworthirds its length, the third and fourth the shortest and equal, the fifth and sixth rather slender and equal: the second and third joints bear three or four hairs, the sixth has several. Feet rather long: the tarsus is about half as long as the tibia, and is somewhat thicker, having a rather swollen appearance: claw moderate; the digitules are slender: on the trochanter is a long hair, and on the inner edge of the tibia a few fine short spines. Abdominal cleft and lobes moderate. Rostrum small; mentum monomerous. On the margin, near the four thoracic spiracles, are four semicircular indentations formed by chitinous bands, each bearing three cylindrical spines. All round the margin is a row of numerous fine longish hairs. There do not seem to be any dorsal spinnerets.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Female of the second stage covered by a thin white waxy test of irregular segments, which are very brittle and frequently almost all broken off, so that the insect in this stage seems almost naked: the fringe is very small. Form elongate, regularly elliptical, the margin not wavy; length about 1/10in. Antennæ of six joints. Feet slender, the tarsus somewhat swollen as in the adult. Margin bearing numerous hairs; but in the spiracular indentations there is only one spine. Abdominal cleft and lobes normal.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Larva yellowish-brown, flattish, active, broadly elliptical. Length about 1/55in. Antennæ of six subequal joints, of which the last is the longest: this last joint is irregular and tapering to a slender tip, and bears several longish hairs. Feet with a slightly swollen tarsus: all the digitules are fine hairs. On the margin of the body are numerous hairs, of which the last six on each side of the abdominal cleft are much the longest. The abdominal lobes bear long setæ.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Adult male red in colour or sometimes brown. Length, including spike, about 1/16in. The wings are iridescent, and the-nervure deep-red. Antennæ rather long, with ten long slender joints, each bearing numerous hairs. Feet slender. The ab-

dominal spike is short, thick, and slightly curved. The insect emerges from the pupal test by lifting up the posterior triangular plate.

Hab. In Australia, on Eucalyptus siderophloia (large-leaved ironbark). Mr. Froggatt sent me specimens from Wallsend, Newcastle, N.S.W.

This is the first species of the genus Ctenochiton which has been reported outside New Zealand. It is evidently so near, in the characters of its tests, to the New Zealand species C. flavus and C. fuscus that I have not any doubt as to the genus. The marginal hairs, the form of the feet in the adult, the spiracular spines, the form of the second stage, and the marginal hairs of the larva are distinguishing characters. The median thick mass of wax on the adult female test approaches that of C. flavus; but the insect is clearly distinct. Some specimens also outwardly resemble the New Zealand C. dacrydii.

Ctenochiton rhizophoræ, sp. nov. Plate III., figs. 13–17.

Test of adult female (where observed) consisting, on the margin, of a flat greyish-white plate of wax, which on the median dorsal region rises up in a lofty pyramidal mass of irregularly-triangular form: this mass is slightly rough on the top, and at the sides exhibits many striations as if it were built up of successive layers; but no air-cells are apparent. At the margin the wax extends in a very fragmentary fringe.

Female of the second stage covered by yellowish-brown wax, which at the earliest period seems to be very thin and fragmentary, and becomes thicker as the insect grows, until at last it forms broad quadrangular plates round the margin, with a median longitudinal mass which is less elevated than in the adult. This test also extends in a small fringe, but the whole of it appears to be very brittle, so that amongst many specimens only one or two may exhibit it entire.

Adult female (where observed) of clearly Lecanid form, greyish-brown in colour; length about ⅛in. The specimen seen is acuminate anteriorly. Antennæ and feet not observed. Round the margin runs a row of rather long spines. Abdominal cleft and lobes normal. Probably the dorsal region would be considerably convex.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Female of the second stage yellowish-brown, flattish, elliptical; length from about 1/12in. in the early part of this stage to about 1/12in. later on. Antennæ of six joints, of which the third and sixth are the longest and bear a few hairs. Feet presenting no special character; the tibia is as usual shorter than the tarsus; the digitules seem to be fine hairs. Round the margin of the body is a row of long slender spines as in

essentially differs from that of Ctenochiton; yet one is conveniently denoted by the word “cotton,” the other by “wax.”

Ceronema banksiæ, sp. nov. Plate IV., figs. 1–13.

Adult female secreting dorsally a thick mass of white waxy threads, which, when closely examined, are short cylinders. These are produced from pores at or near the margins of the body, and not on the median region, so that the insect is only partially covered, the mass of wax curling thickly inwards from the edges, but leaving the median dorsum visible. At the edges the test spreads out all round in a much looser arrangement of threads, but there is no fringe properly so called. Beneath the insect the threads are pressed into a closer mass between it and the leaf, but the median ventral region is also clear. Thus the insect lies, as it were, in a ring of white threads flattened beneath and curling over above. Diameter of test averaging about ⅙in.

The second stage of the female and the larva have no tests.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

The male pupa is covered by a white, glassy test of the usual elliptical Lecanid form, composed of plates, the posterior plate hinged for egress. Length of test about 1/12in.

Adult female dark red-brown, of normal Lecanid form, flattish, very slightly convex, without dorsal carinæ. Length about ⅛in. Antennæ of six joints, of which the third is much the longest, next the first, the rest shorter and subequal. In the third there is a “false joint,” and on the sixth are some hairs. Feet small and rather slender: I have not been able to make out the digitules, but they appear to be all fine hairs. Abdominal cleft and lobes, and anal ring, normal. The four spiracular marginal depressions are semicircular, with a chitinous band bearing a few club-shaped spines. On the margin of the body is a row of short fine hairs. The dorsum, except on the median region, which is almost unmarked, bears great numbers of oval pores, the orifices of tubular canals, and close to the margin is a row of larger canals ending in larger pores, which are multilocular. The canals are smaller and more closely set as they approach the median region.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Female of the second stage yellowish – brown, flattish, elongated-elliptical, with a faintly-indicated longitudinal dorsal carina. Length about 1/25in. Antennæ and feet and abdominal cleft as in the adult. The dorsal pores are absent, but the marginal row of canals with multilocular orifices can be seen.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Larva brownish-yellow, flattish, elongated, narrowly elliptical, naked, active. Length about 1/40in. Abdominal lobes normal of Lecanidæ, the setæ rather long. Antennæ very long and slender, with six long joints, the sixth especially long.

Adult male unknown.

Hab. In Australia, on Patersonia glabrata. Mr. Froggatt sent me specimens from Sydney.

I think that this is a clearly distinct species, from the row of large pustules near the margin, and the numerous small oval dorsal spots. There is a species—L. pruinosum, Coquillett (“Insect Life,” June, 1891)—reported on apricot in California, which presents a thin covering of white powder as in L. patersoniæ; and Mr. Coquillett places his insect very close to L. caryæ, Fitch (although Signoret, in his description of the latter, makes no mention of the powder). But both of these are very convex, and do not seem to exhibit either spots or pustules.

L. patersoniæ appears to be frequently subject to attacks by parasitic fungi, and I possess specimens in which the fungus can be seen permeating the whole body of the insect, and especially infesting the pustules. The fungus consists of matted and jointed filaments, and does not seem to belong to the groups of Cordyceps or Empusa, but rather to be Hyphomycetous, like the fungi infesting Lecanids in New Zealand (see N.Z. Trans., 1883, vol. xvi., p. 1883, and Scale-Insects of N.Z., 1887, p. 22, and plate xxiii.).

Lecanium scrobiculatum, Maskell. N.Z. Trans., vol. xxv., 1892, p. 221.

I find, when examining an insect, which I am naming in this paper Lec. pingue (below), that I have omitted in my description of L. scrobiculatum to mention the longitudinal row of dorsal tubercles which are visible in that species, as well as in L. pingue. These tubercles, which are from four to six in number, are not at all noticeable in all specimens, but they are sufficiently constant to form a specific character.

Lecanium pingue, sp. nov. Plate V., figs. 4–7.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Adult female elliptical, convex; colour dark-brown, but with meandering raised yellowish or greyish ridges which divide the dorsum into many small pits: these ridges have a soft, moist, greasy appearance, and the whole dorsum frequently looks as if covered with some oily matter. The median dorsal region bears a longitudinal row of circular raised tubercles, generally six in number. Length of the insect about 1/10in. Antennæ very small and short: there seem to be six joints, of which the third is the longest, but they are not clearly defined; the sixth joint bears a few hairs. Feet entirely absent. Anal cleft and lobes normal. Rostrum small; mentum round, monomerous; setæ short. Epidermis covered with numbers of circular spinnerets which are the orifices of short cylindrical tubes.

few hairs. In all the specimens examined (ten), one of the antennæ was shorter and rather thicker than the other. Feet absent. Mentum monomerous. Anal tubercles very minute, each bearing a seta and a few spines; anal ring bearing several hairs, probably ten. Epidermis covered with large circular simple spinnerets, which are very numerous on the abdominal segments and less so on the thoracic: those on the cephalic segments bear tubular processes. On the abdominal segments there are two ventral rows of circular marks, larger than the spinnerets, each containing many minute orifices; but there seem to be none of these on the cephalic region.

Early stages and adult male not observed.

Hab. On Prosopis julifera, Arizona, North America. Mr. Koebele has furnished me with specimens.

This insect is clearly allied to P. dendrobii, Douglas (Ent. Mo. Mag., Aug., 1892, p. 207); but differs in a few particulars. The test is lighter-coloured, more circular, and, from the circular form, appearing a good deal larger than in that species; and the corrugations are much less distinct. The large round marks mentioned above (or, as Mr. Douglas calls them, the “perforated discs”) are absent from the anterior region; and I cannot see any trace of figure – of – eight spinnerets. I shall not object if it is proposed merely to consider this a large variety of P. dendrobii; but for the present leave it as distinct. I understand that Prosopis julifera is a South American tree.

Genus Planchonia, Sign. Asterolecanium, Targioni.

It seems now scarcely worth while to prolong a controversy which has continued for the past few years amongst students of Coccids regarding the exact status of the genus Planchonia. In my paper of 1893 I discussed this question, and expressed the opinion—first, that Asterolecanium was really only a synonym of Planchonia; and, second, that a large number of described species were really only Planchonia fimbriata or varieties of it. Some of my friends demur to these views, having apparently very much reverence for external colour or size. With regard to the first point, I am unable to depart an inch from the position taken up last year—namely, that no considerations whatsoever of a fancied “priority” ought to weigh with us as against clearness and common-sense. I agree entirely with a phrase of Mr. Douglas (in a letter to me of this year): “Far too many names have been admitted only on what is termed ‘prescriptive right,’ but we should not go on sinning with our eyes open.” Asterolecanium conveys an erroneous idea, and no fetish-worship of priority ought to make us adhere to it. Consequently, I persist in discarding it altogether in favour of Planchonia.

With regard to the second point, I am willing, in deference to the opinions of some of my friends, to withdraw somewhat from my position of last year, although not entirely; and the following series will represent what I believe to be the true relationships of the genus:—

Strictly speaking, I am still by no means satisfied that P. epacridis and P. stypheliæ ought to be considered as really more than varieties of P. fimbriata. But, on the whole, I will leave the genus as above. The separation or otherwise of the different species is, after all, a small matter: the most important point is that the absurd name Asterolecanium should be relegated to the limbo of oblivion.

Planchonia stypheliæ, Maskell. Maskell, N.Z. Trans., vol. xxiv., p. 24; vol. xxvi., p. 85.

The Rev. Mr. Thompson, of the Agricultural Department of Tasmania, has sent me specimens collected on a dwarf Melaleuca in North Tasmania which I cannot separate from P. stypheliæ, though perhaps the tests are rather greener in colour, and the fringes are less silvery-white, than in the type.

trochanter, nor any terminal spike on the tibia; the tarsal and claw digitules are all fine hairs. Anal ring compound, with six hairs; anal tubercles inconspicuous, setiferous. Mentum dimerous, with some hairs at the end. Margin of body bearing a few small conical spines wide apart (sometimes absent), which are in pairs or threes on the abdominal segments; and similar spines are very sparsely scattered on the dorsum, where there are also some scattered fine hairs. Epidermis bearing many circular spinnerets of two sizes; those on the dorsal surface being twice as large as those on the ventral.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Larva dark-red, flattish, elliptical, active. Length about 1/90in. Antennæ thick, with six joints, of which the last is the largest. Feet also rather thick; tarsus longer than the tibia; the digitules are all fine hairs. Anal tubercles normal, with moderate setae. Margin of body with only a few very small spines.

Male unknown.

Hab. In the Sandwich Islands, at Honolulu; but said to have been introduced from Japan: on Citrus and a great many other trees and plants. My specimens have been sent to me by Mr. Koebele.

This insect belongs to the same series of the genus as Dactylopius globosus, Mask., or D. graminis, Mask., in which the female is enclosed in a cottony sac. The species to which it seems most nearly allied is Dact. (Bergrothia) townshendi, Cockerell, described in Annals and Mag. of Nat. Hist., November, 1893, from New Mexico. I cannot by any means accept “Bergrothia”, but the species in question appears to be quite near to that from Honolulu. I have been particular in describing the antennæ and feet, in which the principal differences exist. In the New Mexico insect the comparative lengths of the antennal joints are somewhat different, the digitules of the claw have “large knobs,” and there is a long hair on the trochanter: there are also slight differences in the spinnerets and in the marginal spines. Mr. Cockerell does not describe the larva of D. townshendi, and merely says, regarding the cotton, “A small, oval species, covered by a white sac.” For the present I shall leave my insect as separate.

The name which I have attached to this insect seems to be appropriate, whether it should turn out hereafter to be distinct or only a variety. For Mr. Koebele in his first letter to me says, “It has been introduced from Japan within the last three years, and hundreds of trees have been destroyed by it in Honolulu.” And in a subsequent letter he says, “It is not confined to Citrus trees, but attacks almost any kind of shrubs and trees. For this reason no plants were allowed to leave Honolulu for the other islands for nearly two years. I

abnormal species of Tachardia, for the glands on these processes make them strongly resemble “lac-tubes”: but the absence of any “tail” and of the characteristic “spine” of that genus the globular form, and the hairless anal ring seem to place it clearly in Spharococcus.

Sphærococus leptospermi, Maskell. N. Z. Trans., vol. xxvi., 1893, p. 92.

I find that in my description of this species no locality for it is given. I rectify the omission now. My specimens were sent by Mr. Froggatt on Leptospermum lavigatum, from Sydney.

Sphærococus elevans, sp. nov. Plate VII., figs. 5–8.

Female insects burrowing under the bark of the plant, and raising the bark in a circular convex blister, the diameter of which averages about ⅛ in., and the upper surface seems to consist simply of the bark without secretion. The inner surface and the base of this “blister” are smooth, and seem almost as if plastered with very thin secretion. Some specimens of blisters reach ¼ in. in diameter.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Female insect circular, yellowish in colour, lying on the centre of the base of the blister: the dorsum is flattish, being sometimes very slightly convex, sometimes very slightly concave, with a small brownish central boss. Diameter of the insect (which looks, indeed, much like a small, flat, yellow cake) about 1/24in. The rostrum, beneath, is subcentral. Antennae almost obsolete, being reduced to very minute tubercles at the cephalic extremity, each bearing a few short fine hairs. Feet entirely absent. Mentum round, monomerous. Anal tubercles absent; anal ring simple, hairless. Epidermis apparently without spinneret-orifices. When the insect has been treated with potash and mounted, the dorsal boss is seen to contain a number of brown leaf-like segments or divisions, radiating from the apex and forming a rather elegant arrangement: these rays do not seem to actually meet at the centre, but I have not been able to detect any orifice on the boss of an untouched insect.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Female of the second stage not certainly observed; but in three of the very smallest blisters I have found minute globular insects, with a diameter not exceeding 1/100in., in which the only organs I could detect were very short thick feet, of which the tibia and tarsus were equal in length, and the claw very small. The colour at this stage was reddish-yellow.

Larva and male unknown. All the blisters which I received contained numbers of white eggs, and these seemed

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

swelling of the bark may be detected. In the middle of this swelling may be seen a very minute pustule with an orifice in it. Usually this pustule seems to have nothing in the orifice, or perhaps some particles of dust, or sometimes the exuviae of a larva; but sometimes the “tail” of the insect (described below) protrudes through it, and emerges to perhaps 1/100in., looking like a very minute soft yellowish finger with a red tip pushed through the bark. In the early adult state the insect is thus only just beneath the bark, but later it burrows much deeper, and the cavity in which the female at gestation lies is frequently hollowed out of the wood itself. In this latest state it requires close examination to detect the position of the insect, as the pustule has almost disappeared, and the swelling of the bark is scarcely noticeable.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Male pupa occupying a much more prominent gall than that of the female. This is a conspicuous excrescence on a twig, often congregated in bunches of half a dozen, more or less cylindrical, generally dark-coloured, hollow, with a terminal orifice, of which the lips are circular and thick. The height of this tubular gall frequently reaches 1/12in.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

If the bark round one of the small pustules above mentioned is carefully lifted and turned over, the adult female in its early state may be found lying on the wood (or sometimes will be lifted off with the bark). The body is subcircular; diameter, about 1/28in.; colour yellowish, or with a tinge of red. The ventral surface is slightly concave; the rostrum, which is very small, is central, and placed on a small boss; the rostral setaa are very short. The antennae and feet are entirely absent. The dorsal surface is very slightly convex, and from about the centre springs a subcylindrical process or “tail,” which fits into the short tube through the bark, and, as mentioned above, sometimes protrudes through the orifice. This tail is bluntly rounded at the end, and the extremity is usually of a red colour. After preparation, a small, simple, hairless, circular anal ring is seen near the end of the “tail,” and at the extreme tip there are two very minute short spines.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

The foregoing is the early adult stage, and the “tail” is doubtless protruded through the orifice in the bark to facilitate the access of the male. After impregnation the female, as stated above, burrows much deeper in the twig. At gestation the insect becomes dull-red in colour, and has increased a good deal in size, reaching 1/10in. in diameter. It then becomes nothing more than a bag full of eggs and larvae, and scores of the latter may be found crawling all about in the cavity. The “tail,” in several of the specimens observed, seems to have rotted or broken off, leaving a hole in the body through which the larvæ emerge; but in others it existed, although much reduced. The only organ visible is the rostrum, which is the

same as in the early state. The mentum is small, globular, and monomerous.

Between the female and the bark, both in the early and in the late adult state, there is a thin white waxy indusium, which is sometimes, fragmentary, but at others fairly complete, with a prolongation to cover the tail.

Second female stage not observed.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Larva greenish, or yellowish, or sometimes slightly red. Length, about 1/80in. Form broadly elliptical, distinctly segmented; margin minutely crenulated. Antennæ short, with six joints, of which the fourth and fifth are the shortest, the rest, subequal: on the last joint are several hairs, of which two are rather long. Feet moderate; the digitules are long, fine hairs. There are two very minute anal tubercles, with long setæ. The dorsum bears two longitudinal rows of large long-of-eight spinnerets.

The male pupa occupies the tube in the prominent gall above mentioned, but between it and the tube is a white, thin, elliptical, waxy test, which splits in half to permit the egress, of the adult. Often galls can be found containing only the twe empty halves of this test. The pupa appears to be elliptical, brown, and flattish; but the specimens observed were not in good order. Attached to one of them were the exuviæ of a larva, in which the antennæ had only four joints. Perhaps this may be a distinction between male and female larvæ.

[The section below cannot be correctly rendered as it contains complex formatting. See the image of the page for a more accurate rendering.]

Adult male brown, with iridescent wings. Length about 1/30in. The antennæ are short, with only eight joints, of which the first is short and round, the second longest, the rest diminishing gradually: on the last joint there are four knobbed hairs. Feet normal; anal spike short.

Hob. In Australia, on Casuarina sp. Mr. Froggatt has sent me many specimens from Thornleigh, near Sydney.

Although the very inconspicuous gall formed by this insect (which indeed is almost entirely subcortical) differs considerably from that of F. casuarina (1891), yet its generic position is very clearly defined by the “tail,” by the waxy indusium of the adult female, and by the figure-of-eight spinnerets of the larva. The male pupa forms a decided gall. The discovery; of this species is very satisfactory, as indicating the correctness of my view in 1893, when I decided that F. casuarin might fairly form the type of a new genus.

Many of the male galls of F. semiocculta contained numbers of fat, white, soft grubs, which I presume belong to some dipterous insect.

At the risk of wearisome repetition, I cannot help again asking the question: Can anybody suggest an explanation of the burrowing powers of insects such as this? Here is an

dential chair, in his inaugural address on the 14th June last, placed before the Society, in very picturesque language, views on this question of evolution which, in the light of modern science, I cannot but regard as unorthodox and, if I may use the term, pernicious. Major-General Schaw will not, I am sure, object to this personal reference, because in concluding his address he frankly admits that he has “thrown down the gauntlet and opened the door to criticism and discussion.” I will give just one quotation by way of illustration. The President says, in his address, “In connection with these beetles I would refer to one passage in the Manual, and employ it as my text in what I wish to say on evolution, as it is in accordance with the theories of evolution which are now very generally accepted. The passage I refer to is at page 23, where this swimming-beetle is said to be ‘only what a ground-beetle might naturally become if forced to lead an aquatic existence.’ Now, my imperfect observation leads me to believe that any ground-beetle now forced to lead an aquatic existence—i.e., being put into water—will not become a swimming-beetle, but, if it cannot get out, will inevitably become a dead beetle.” Now, it seems to me that such a passage as that is worthy of the Dark Ages of Science. At any rate, it shows that the author of it has utterly failed to appreciate the plan and method of Natural Selection, for his argument entirely ignores the necessary postulate of Time. It is true that, later on in his address, he says, “We may undoubtedly accept as a working hypothesis, which has very strong arguments in its favour, that the remarkable unity in structural design which we discern in the animate world has been brought about in some way through heredity, or natural descent, with variations”; and, in commenting on the complete correspondence in all essential features between the Scriptural account and the facts of nature, he acknowledges that “Science fills out the pictures with endless and wonderful details, and teaches us that the days of creation were not days of twenty-four hours, but of many thousands of years.” But here I fear his faith is weak; for, instead of limiting the Mosaic “days” to thousands of years, science claims space for vastly extended epochs of time. Sir Charles Lyell computes the age of the world, since the Cambrian period, at 270 millions of years, and in the opinion of most geologists this is a very moderate estimate. And Darwin says, “If the theory [as to the formation of the stratified rocks] be true, it is indisputable that before the lowest Cambrian stratum was deposited long periods elapsed, as long as, or probably far longer than, the whole interval from the Cambrian age to the present day, and that during these vast periods the world swarmed with living creatures.

Before proceeding to my subject, I may refer incidentally,

also, to a paper by one of our members, Mr. Coleman Phillips, “On a Common Vital Force,” which appears in the last volume of our “Transactions.” This essay affords pleasant and amusing reading, but it is impossible to take it seriously. For example, when a writer, professing to deal scientifically with his subject, brackets together the Moa and our domestic fowl—a Ratite bird with a Carinate—as “one species alone of living things,” there is an end to any attempt at rational discussion. Mr. Coleman Phillips, in this paper, admits that he has not yet finished reading Darwin's “Origin of Species,” but says, “What I have read has filled me with pain,” and he proceeds to treat in a slighting spirit a book which, in the vigorous language of Professor Newton, “has effected the greatest revolution of human thought in this or perhaps in any other century.”^* For my own part, I regret, as well for the author's sake as for the credit of the Society, that such a paper was allowed to appear in the “Transactions.” With these introductory remarks, for clearing the ground as it were, I shall proceed to discuss the subject which I have selected for my theme this evening.

The ornithology of New Zealand, apart from its intrinsic interest, presents to the thoughtful naturalist several aspects of great philosophical significance. Not the least of these is that of the many peculiar forms which it contains, and their local distribution, because of the remarkable evidence hereby furnished in support of the now generally accepted Darwinian theory of the creation of species in the organic world—that is

to say, by a natural and gradual modification of character, due to the survival of the fittest in the universal struggle for existence.

The principle of natural selection is expressed by Darwin himself as that of “the preservation during the battle of life of varieties which possess any advantages in structure, constitution, or instinct.” He says, and with great’ force, “In scientific investigations it is permitted to invent any hypothesis, and if it explains various large and independent masses of facts it rises to the rank of a well-grounded theory…. If the principle of natural selection does explain these and other large bodies of facts, it ought to be received. On the ordinary view of each species having been independently created we gain no scientific explanation of any one of these facts. We can only say that it has so pleased the Creator to command that the past and present inhabitants of the world should appear in a certain order and in certain areas; that He has impressed on them the most extraordinary resemblances, and has classed them in groups subordinate to groups. But by such statements we gain no new knowledge; we do not connect together facts and laws; we explain nothing.”^* In his “Origin of Species” Mr. Darwin has shown that all organic beings, without exception, tend to increase at a very high ratio, and that the inevitable result is an ever – recurrent struggle for existence, in the natural course of which the strongest ultimately prevail and the weakest fail. By this process those variations, however slight, which are favourable are preserved or selected, and those which are unfavourable are destroyed. This continued production of new forms through natural selection inevitably leads to the extermination of the older and less improved forms, these latter being necessarily intermediate in structure, as well as in descent, between the last-produced forms and their original parent species. The position to which this brings us is thus stated: “Now, if we suppose a species to produce two or more varieties, and these in the course of time to produce other varieties, the principle of good being derived from diversification of structure will generally lead to the preservation of the most divergent varieties; thus the lesser differences characteristic of varieties come to be augmented into the greater differences characteristic of species, and, by the extermination of the older intermediate forms, new species end by being distinctly defined objects. Thus, also, we shall see how it is that organic beings can be classed by what is called a natural method in distinct groups—species under genera, and genera

under families,” Following the subject up with consummate skill, and bringing together a marvellous array of facts and observations, Darwin has shown very conclusively that descent with modification has been from time immemorial the means, whether naturally or artificially it matters not, of producing new and distinct forms of animal and vegetable life. The subject is on the face of it a very attractive one, and, when we come to deal with the actual facts, there is room for almost endless speculation in all directions. But what I propose to do this evening is to single out some wellestablished features and peculiarities of the New Zealand avifauna, to which, as you are aware, I have for many years given special attention, and to consider their direct bearing on the theory of evolution, or, putting it the other way about, to endeavour to find in the Darwinian doctrine of natural development their true and rational explanation.

Perhaps there is no country in the world where the process of natural selection among birds has had so favourable a field for its operation as New Zealand, owing to its great age as a continental island, and to the entire absence of natural enemies, up to the time, at any rate, of its occupation by man and the introduction of domestic animals which afterwards became feral. As a result, what do we find here as representing the ancient order of Ratite birds? I will not refer at present to the Moa and its kindred, because these, birds have become extinct, and, except by way of analogy, do not come into my present subject. But look at the genus Apteryx, taking, for illustration, the oldest known member of the genus, A. australis. Here is a bird with, so to speak, the body of a turkey and the wings of a sparrow, these limbs having become so dwarfed by the operation of natural laws that they are reduced to mere rudiments; yet all the muscular parts, aborted and atrophied though they be, become perfectly distinct under the dissecting knife. Unlike all other known birds, instead of having the nostrils placed in the nasal groove, or on the ridge of the bill (as in the Petrel family), they are situated under a terminal protuberance at the extreme end of the upper mandible; and on examination it is seen that the produced upper mandible is in reality a prolongation of the facial bones—the result, no doubt, of long-continued gradual development in that direction—the brain being pushed back, as it were, into a remarkably small cranial pan for the size of the bird. These modifications of structure are of course adaptations to the feeding habits of the bird, which subsists principally on earthworms, in search of which, aided by its power of smell, it probes the soft ground or loose vegetable mould in its forest haunts. In addition, to this the head is furnished with long rictal hairs or feelers, as sensitive as the

whiskers of a cat, and its hearing is known to be marvellously acute.

Mr. A. R. Wallace, in his admirable work on “Darwinism,” says (at page 114), “So soon, however, as we approach the higher and more fully developed groups, we see indications of the often-repeated extinction of lower by higher forms. This is shown by the great gaps that separate the mammalia, birds, reptiles, and fishes from each other; whilst the lowest forms of each are always few in number and confined to limited areas. Such are the lowest mammals—the Echidna and Ornithorhynchus Australia; the lowest birds—the Apteryx of New Zealand and the cassowaries of the New Guinea region; while the lowest fish—the Amphioxus or lancelet—is completely isolated, and has apparently survived only by its habit of burrowing in the sand. The great distinctness of the carnivora, ruminants, rodents, whales, bats, and other orders of mammalia; of the accipitres, pigeons, and parrots, among birds; and of the beetles, bees, flies, and moths, among insects, all indicate an enormous amount of extinction among the comparatively low forms by which, on any theory of evolution, these higher and more specialized groups must have been preceded.”

Now, whilst accepting Mr. Wallace's general argument and admitting its soundness, I must venture to differ entirely with that distinguished scientist as to the position assigned to the genus Apteryx. I cannot for a moment admit that the Kiwi is one of the lowest birds in the sense implied. It rather seems to me to be an extremely specialized form and one to which Mr. Wallace's own felicitous remarks (at page 105) are specially applicable: “In species which have a wide range the struggle for existence will often cause some individuals or groups of individuals to adopt new habits in order to seize upon vacant places in nature where the struggle is less severe. Some, living among extensive marshes, may adopt a more aquatic mode of life; others, living where forests abound, may become more arboreal. In either case we cannot doubt that the changes of structure needed to adapt them to their new habits would soon be brought about, because we know that variations in all the external organs and all their separate parts are very abundant and are also considerable in amount. That such divergence of character has actually occurred we have some direct evidence.” By way of illustration, Mr. Wallace reminds us that Madeira, like many other oceanic islands in the temperate zone, is much exposed to sudden gusts of wind, and that, as most of the fertile land is on the coast, insects which flew much would be very liable to be blown out to sea and lost. Year after year, therefore, those individuals which had shorter wings, or

which used them least, were preserved; till in process of time, as we now see, the insects of Madeira have become wingless and terrestrial, or, if they have not entirely lost their wings, have had them so reduced as to be useless for flight. To my mind it would nct be right to confound these wingless insects with the lower forms of the “more generalized ancestors,” but rather to assign them a place among the “higher and more specialized groups.” For it must be borne in mind that, as Mr. Wallace himself expresses it (page 120), the “remarkable advance in the higher and larger groups does not imply any universal law of progress in organization, because we have at the same time numerous examples of the persistence of lowlyorganized forms, and also of absolute degradation or degeneration. Serpents, for example, have been developed from some lizard-like type which has lost its limbs and though this loss has enabled them to occupy fresh places in nature, and to increase and flourish to a marvellous extent, yet it must be considered to be a retrogression rather than an advance in organization. The same remark will apply to the Whale tribe among mammals; to the blind amphibia and insects of the great caverns; and among plants to the numerous cases in which flowers, once specially adapted to be fertilized by insects, have lost their gay corollas and their special adaptations, and have become degiaded into wind-fertilized forms.” But it seems to me that on this point Mr. Wallace is inconsistent with himself; because at, page 481, after referring to my figure of the wing in vol. iii. of our “Transactions,” he says, “Even in the Apteryx, the minute external wing bears a series of nearly twenty stiff quill-like feathers”; and he goes on to say, “These facts render it almost certain that the Struthious birds do not owe their imperfect wings to a direct evolution from a reptilan type, but to a retrograde develop ment from some low form of winged birds, analogous to that which has produced the dodo and the solitaire from the more pronounced pigeon-type.” He adds that our best anatomists agree that both Dinorrnis and Apteryx are more nearly allied to the cassowaries and emus than to the ostriches and rheas.^* Now, from this point of view, I think the language in which I long ago characterized the Kiwi—although challenged by Professor Hutton and others—is fully justified—namely, that it is the diminutive and degenerate representative of the ancient colossal forms of wingless birds.

Its very existen, as we now find it, is an illustration of the truth, as formulated by Wallace himself, that “greater swiftness, increased cunning, nocturnal habits, change of colour,” or the power of climbing trees and living for a time on their-foliage or fruit, may be the means adopted by different species to bring themselves into harmony with the new conditions; and by the continued survival of those individuals only which varied sufficiently in the right direction the necessary modifications of structure or of function would be brought about, just as surely as man has been able to breed the greyhound to hunt by sight and the foxhound by scent, or has produced from the same wild plant such distinct forms as the cauliflower and the Brussels sprouts.”

I have referred to certain superficial characters; and for the purposes of our argument we need not at present, go beyond these. The Apteryx then, I take, to be the most specialized type of its kind—an extreme form of degeneracy, using that term in its Darwinian sense. But, besides Apteryx australis, there are five other species, more or less distinct the one from the other, but all closely allied in every respect, size and colour being the only distinguishing characters. I will enumerate these species, with the ascertained range of each. Apteryx australis, already mentioned, inhabits the southernmost parts of the South Island; Apteryx mantelli (=A. bulleri, Sharpe) is spread over the North Island; Apteryx oweni (Gould) is met with in the wooded country in the northern and eastern portions of the South Island; Apteryx haasti (Potts) in the Heaphy Ranges and further south; Apteryx occidentalis (Rothschild) on the western slopes of the Southern Alps, and, curiously enough, in the Tararua Ranges on the west coast of the North Island; and, lastly, Apteryx, lawryi (Rothschild) on Stewart Island.^* The dividing-lines between

these species at certain points, are so indeterminate that ornithologists are not yet agreed as to how many independent species should be recognised. Dr. Otto Finsch, the well-known German scientist, contends that the North Island bird cannot be separated from Apteryx australis, except as a Ideal variety, although in this view he now stands alone; professor Newton, whose opinion always carries great weight with me, declares his inability to distinguish the former as species distinct from Apteryx lawryi of Stewart Island, although he recognises Apteryx australis, which occupies an intermediate range of country. But the Professor is also in some doubt as to the propriety of admitting Apteryx haasti as a species.

Mr. Walter Rothschild, who owns the largest collection of Apteryges in the world (some thirty living birds, and I belieye over a hundred skins), has, after mature consideration, decided to separate the spotted grey Kiwis into two species—Apteryx oweni (Gould) and Apteryx occidentalis (Roths.). Of the latter he possesses a living example, obtained in the neighbourhood of Milford Sound, nearly as large as Apteryx haasti and very different in appearance from Apteryx oweni, having banded plumage, a dark head, and blackish-grey feet. To this he refers Mr. Morgan Carkeek's example from the Tararua Ranges (North Island), and a number of specimens collected by different persons on the west coast of the South Island. Of the distinctness of his type I have no doubt whatever; but I am not quite prepared to follow him in liniting the others with it. They seem to me to be a form intermediate between it and the Little Grey Kiwi (Apteryx owevni) with which we are all so familiar. Here, in fact, we have an instance of the boundary-line between one supposed species and another being so indistinct as to occasion constant doubt and confusion in the discrimination of the forms.

Then, again, with regard to Apteryx mantelli, in the North Island. You are no doubt familiar with the chestnut-brown Kiwi which inhabits the Pirongia Ranges and is found all the

way down the west coast to Wanganui. But all the specimens I have seen from the east coast are almost black in plumage even the feet being blackish instead of whitish-brown as in the ordinary bird. So far no attempt has been made to raise this form to the rank of a species, or even of a sub-species; but the fact remains that the birds from this part of the country are always dark-coloured, and, as such, readily distinguishable from the common Kiwi. And, as I have mentioned in my “Birds of New Zealand” (vol. ii., p. 310), there is likewise a rufous-coloured form, with plumage of a very peculiar texture. (“Kiwi-kura” of the Maoris), which I found breeding true in the Pirongia Ranges; but, as this bird inhabits the same district as Apteryx mantelli, it can only be regarded as a variety. Nevertheless it shows very clearly the latent tendency to vary.

Apteryx lawryi is the largest of these species, as Apteryx haasti (which is next in size) is the most handsome, owing to its chestnut-and-brown dappled plumage. Apteryx lawryi runs as it were in parallel lines with Apteryx mantelli and Apteryx australis, as Apteryx haasti does with. Apteryx oweni and Apteryx occidentalis. But, whether all these species be accepted as distinct, or some of them be regarded as mere varieties of others (which will always be debatable ground) there can be no doubt whatever that they have all come from a common parent stock, and that within a period of time geologically speaking, comparatively recent. Going back to earlier times, and reasoning by analogy, we may venture to infer that the remote ancestor of the degenerate parent form was a volant bird—probably one tolerably well furnished with wings and tail, with a proportionately large head and short, bill, with the muscles of the posterior limbs far less developed than in the Kiwi, and with very different plumage, both as to form and texture.

It may be asked how it is that we find the Kiwi developing a long stiletto-like bill, whilst another race of wingless birds, the Moas, belonging to the same order and inhabiting the same country, were perfecting themselves in an entirely opposite direction. But it must be remembered that, according to the ascertained laws of variation, divergence of chartcter in opposite directions may take place even among members of one and the same species, at one and the same time, and. within the same geographical area. Isolation, for such a purpose, does not necessarily mean insulation, as some writers appear to assume. Wallace puts it very clearly “Isolation” will often be produced in a continuous area whenever a species becomes modified in accordance with varied conditions or diverging habits. For example, a wide-ranging species may, in the northern or colder part of its area, become modified in one

direction, and in the southern part in another direction; and, though for a long time an intermediate form may continue to exist in the intervening area, this will be likely soon to die out, both because its numbers will be small, and it will be more or less pressed upon in varying seasons by the modified varieties, each better able to endure extremes of climate. So, when one portion of a terrestrial species takes to a more arboreal or to a more aquatic mode of life, the change of habit itself leads to the isolation of each portion.”

Now, it is not difficult to imagine that in the case of a country which was gradually emerging from the depths of the occan, presenting for long-continued periods of time low flats more or less covered with scrubby vegetation, available for purposes of concealment, a smaller size would be beneficial to the already practically wingless birds, the more so if correlated with a longer bill, for the purpose of hunting for annelids-and insects in the increasing deposits of mould covering these newly-formed flats. And, bearing in mind that natural selection acts solely “by the preservation of useful variations, or those which are beneficial to the organism under the conditions to which it, is exposed,” we should in this case regard the so-called degeneration of the Kiwi as amprovement in the organism of the bird in relation to its conditions and environment. So also, in regard to those wingless birds which continued to inhabit the table-lands, and to subsist on fern-roots and the ever-present “cabbage-tree,” should we regard a longer neck and a stronger bill as beneficial variations, especially if correlated with a more massive posterior development, such as that which distinguishes Dinornis elephantopus and Dinornis crassus. May not the giant Kiwi (Megalapteryx hectori), the remains of which were discovered and described by the late Sir Julius von Haast, represent one of the intermediate forms which have been stamped out and lost in the long-continued struggle for existence along the borderland, so to speak, of these different races of wingless birds?

As I have already stated, each so-called species of Kiwi is restricted in its range to a particular district. In the case of Apteryx mantelli and Apteryx lawryi this is insular, save as to the appearance of the Grey Kiwi on the Tararua Range, which I shall presently endeavour to account for. Now, if any sudden catastrophe were to overtake New Zealand, destroying all animal life, the remains of the different species of Kiwi (so far as they could be distinguished) would be found in different localities and never commingled. This is not the case with Dinornis and its allies. The bones of about a thousand birds were exhumed by Sir Julius von Haast from the Glen-mark marshes, and these comprised the skeletons of several

genera and numerous species, varying considerably in stature, all mixed up indiscriminately together, showing that these birds Lad inhabited the plains of Canterbury at one and the same time. I have endeavoured to furnish an explanation of this in my introduction to “The Birds of New Zealands” pages xxxiv., xxxv. Adopting a theory first put forward by Professor Hutton—to whom I acknowledge my indebtedness—I have attempted to show how this could have been brought about by natural causes. By going much further back in time—and that is the charm of the evolution theory, that it imposes practically no limits as to time and space—I have supposed that in very ancient times two or more species of brevipennate birds, themselves the descendants of volant birds of a still earlier epoch, roamed over a great southern continent, which, by some convulsion of nature, was afterwards submerged, leaving its higher levels and mountain-tops exposed in the form of numerous scattered islands, on which the survivors of the wingless race of birds would naturally remain; that this state of things continued long enough—how long it is impossible even to conjecture—for the inhabitants of each island to develope new characters suited to their special environment in each case, thus bringing into existence in the end the various species of Dinornis and its allies as we now know them; that a widespread upheaval or elevation of the land followed, reuniting most of the islands, and resulting in the areas now known to us as the Islands of New Zealand, when, of course, the Struthious birds which had been developed in the smaller insular areas would be able, in process of time, to commingle on common ground. “In process of time,” I say, because it would naturally take a considerable time for the newly-elevated areas to become covered with vegetation, although, on the other hand, it is quite possible that this elevation may have been gradual in its operation everywhere. I suggested that when, by the gradual subsidence of their domain beneath the waters of the great Pacific, they were driven as it were into a corner and overcrowded, the struggle for existence became a severe one, and the extinction of the race then commenced; that the more unwieldy giants, thus cabined and confined, were the first to succumb; and that the smaller species, perhaps in course of time differentiated from their ancestors by the altered physical conditions of their environment, continued to live on till their final extirpation by man within recent historic times. Professor Hutton supposes two successive submergences and elevations of the land at long intervals, but in this I am unable to follow him. Without that, the theory is sufficient, I think, to account for the co-existence in comparatively recent times of the various genera and species. But, as the modifications in form and

structure constitute important generic distinctions, very long periods of time must have elapsed after the continental subemergence before the final elevation of the land which made it possible for these wingless birds to commingle as they evidently did in later times. On the assumption that the North and South Islands were never reunited after the great submergence, these two areas having been independently formed by the fusion of different sets of islands, north and south, when the elevation took place, this theory will account for the singular fact that the Dinornis remains found in the North Island represent different species of birds from those of which remains have been so abundantly discovered in the South.

Professor Hutton is of opinion that the smaller forms of Ratitae in New Zealand must have preceded the larger; and the fact that bones of only the smaller species of Dinornis and Syornis have as yet been found in both Islands seems to favour that view. But the evidence on this point is, I think, far from being exhausted, for fresh discoveries of Moa-bones are still being made from time to time, and in the most unlikely localities. On the other hand, whatever date may be assigned for the extinction of the Moa (and upon this question there is much difference of opinion), there seems little doubt that the colossal forms, such as Dinornis maximus, D. altus, D. validus, and D. excelsus, were the first to become extinct, because none of their remains have ever yet been found in the ancient kitchen-middens, mixed up with the rejectamenta of human feasts, or bearing evidence by chipping or gnawing of manipulation by man in a recent state; besides which they have sometimes been found in a highly fossilized or mineralized condition, unlike the bones of the smaller species, which contain much organic matter and often look perfectly fresh. I am of opinion that the larger forms are the more ancient, and are those that roamed originally over the afterwards submerged continent, and that the smaller-sized Moas, of different genera and species, are the descendants of those which had been specialized in the various islands during the long epoch following the continental submergence. Professor Hutton, accepting the outcome of Professor Parker's important researches into the embryology of this form, admits that in the Kiwi the hind limbs undergo a relative diminution in size between the time of hatching and the attainment of fully adult proportions, especially in the case of the female; and he adds, “This implies that the ancestral Kiwis were, like Megalapteryx, larger than the living birds; and we may infer the same thing from the great size of the egg. It is a legacy from a larger bird which is not easy to get rid of. The greater proportionate size of the female is probably due to its having to lay such a very large egg. The males have decreased in

size more rapidly than the females, who were handicapped by such large eggs.” Professor Hutton suggests that the reverse of this obtained in the case of the Moas; but there is no evidence of that. After a critical examination of all the evidence afforded by the bones and their distribution, he says, “Evidently Anomalopteryx and Palapteryx are the oldest forms; but if Palapteryx had wings it could not have been. derived from the wingless Anomalopteryx; and, if the birds were increasing in size, Anomalopteryx could not have been derived from Palapteryx.”^* Exactly so; but on my hypothesis these difficulties disappear, and the supposed conditions are in harmony with it. In this connection I may mention the curious fact that, although Anomalopteryx didiformis is one of the smallest of the Moas, scarcely exceeding in size the common Bustard, it had proportionately the largest skull of all the Dinornithidae. Commenting on this, Professor Owen remarks that, if the peculiarly nutritious roots of the common fern contributed, together with buds or foliage of trees, to the food of the various species of Moa, the concomitant gain of power in the locomotive and fossorial limbs does not appear to have called for a proportionate growth or development of brain or of bill.

As with the Kiwi, it would seem that the development of the Moa was downwards, or in the way of degeneration, and the restriction of its range to small insular areas would doubtless favour this dwarfing process.

One can understand how in process of time the various species of Kiwi now known to us have become evolved from the parent stock by means of natural selection and the survival of the fittest, operating under well-established natural laws. Any divergences of character, however small to begin with, long continued and persisted in, would account for any number of so-called species in various parts of the country. For, a species—what is it? What does the name denote? Of what use is it to science except as an artificial definition, and for the greater convenience of systematic classification?

But the great difficulty in any theory on the subject is to account for the presence of the Grey Kiwi on the west coast of both Islands. Our knowledge of its existence in the North Island rests on a skin brought to me in a fresh state by Mr. Morgan Carkeek, who obtained it just below the snow-line on the highest of the Tararua Ranges, where, he states, he could have collected many more. For the present, I confess that the presence of this species in the North Island is very perplexing. One solution that suggests itself to my mind is that it may

have been introduced in former times through human agency. It will be remembered that the Maoris have a tradition that the Pukeko, or Swamp-hen (Porphyrio melanonotus)—which, until recent years, when its haunts were invaded and drained, was excessively abundant in both Islands–was first introduced by their ancestors, who brought tame birds with them in their canoes from Hawaiki. It must be borne in mind also that the range of the Grey Kiwi includes the north-west coast of the Nelson District, for specimens which I obtained from that locality have been referred by Mr. Rothschild to his Apteryx occidentalis; and, furthermore, that the passage to and from the Kapiti coast, on the opposite side of Cook Strait, could easily be effected by the Maoris in their war-canoes. To entrap a few Kiwis, and bring them across alive in flax cages, would have been a very simple operation, and a far less ambitious project than that of stocking New Zealand with the Swamphen from far-off Hawaiki. The suggestion does not seem an unlikely one, when we remember that the Kiwi was always highly prized by the Maoris from the earliest times, both as an article of food and on account of its feathers.

On the theory put forward, and assuming, as we fairly may do, that the North and South Islands have never been united since the continental submergence,—in other words, that there was a simultaneous elevation of the two areas, north and south, with a permanent sea-channel dividing them,—we can understand and account for the existence of closely-allied representative species in the two Islands. I will give some examples: In the North Island the Blue-wattled Crow (Glaucopis wilsoni), in the South the Yellow-wattled Crow (Glaucopis cinerea); in the North Island the Saddle-back (Greadion carunculatus), and in the South its grey ally, Creadion cinereus. It is true that Greadion carunculatus is found also in the South Island, which is the proper home of Creadion cinereus. This may, I think, be accounted for by an accidental colonization at some time, through the crossing of stray individuals to the other side of the Straits: even a single pair would suffice. Rare as this bird now is along the wooded shore on the north side of Cook Strait, I can remember that about thirty-five years ago it was more abundant there than in any other part of the country. But to resume my list of examples: In the North Island we have the Thick-billed Thrush (Turnagra hectori), in the South the common Turnagra crassirostris; in the North Island the Wood-robin (Miro longipes), in the South its congener Miro australis; in the North Island the Whitehead (Clitonyx albicapilla), in the South the Yellowhead (Clitonyx ochrocephala); in the North Island the White-breasted Tomtit (Myiomira toiton), in the South the Yellow-breasted Tomtit (Myiomoira macrocephala);

in the North Island the Pied Fantail (Rhipidura flabellifera), in the South the Black Fantail (Rhipidura fuliginosa). The same remark applies to the former of these as to the Saddleback, and the same explanationm may be offered. It will, perhaps, be objected that this bird is too weak-winged to cross the Straits under any circumstances; but, as against this, I may mention that during the past twenty years there have been several well-authenticated cases (as recorded in my “Birds of New Zealand”) of the Black Fantail crossing the Straits to the North Island; and of late years there has not been wanting evidence of its breeding here. What, therefore, is there to prevent such a species becoming naturalized in the North Island, and that without the intervention of any but natural causes? A gale of wind, under favourable conditions for the passage of the Straits, would alone be sufficient to occasion this dispersal of the species.

Now, all the representative forms I have named are accepted by ornithologists in general as good and true species. But take any two of them and compare them carefully. Who can for a moment doubt their common parentage?—how far back in time, it is not our present purpose to inquire. “Species,” “sub-species,” and “varieties” are now terms in general use among ornithologists, as well as among other specialists, and, as it seems to me, simply for the purpose of indicating the distinctness or otherwise of the lines of demarcation separating one from another in their present stages of development under the slow and invisible, but nevertheless inevitable and sure, processes of that law of evolution which governs the whole animal kingdom. When we come to study the matter more closely it often seems well-nigh impossible to draw any specific line at all. So-called species often appear to run into one another by insensible gradations; so much so, indeed, that no two naturalists are agreed as to how much persistent difference is necessary to constitute a species, as distinguished from a sub-species or variety. Take, by way of illustration, the various forms of Woodhen (Ocydromus) inhabiting New Zealand. Dr. Bowdler Sharpe, who, as a rule, does not err on the side of “lumping,” has recently declared (Bulletin, 1893, p. xxx.), that he finds it impossible to distinguish Ocydromus greyi of the North Island from Ocydromus earli of the South Island. This difficulty arose, no doubt, from the circumstance of his examination of the two forms having been confined to dried specimens. If he had been permitted to study the live birds he would have seen that, apart from the unmistakable difference in the general hue of the plumage, Ocydromus greyi has brown irides and legs, whereas the southern form (Ocydromus earli) has these soft parts of a lake-red colour. He says further (loc. cit., p. xxix.) that he

prefers the simple arrangement in my first edition of “The Birds of New Zealand,” limiting the number of species to three, to that of my second edition, fifteen years later, which admits five species of the group. This alteration, however, was not made by me hastily or without full consideration. I believe I have critically examined a very much larger number of Ocydromi than any other working ornithologist, and, although I do not wish to underrate the perplexities presented by the intergrading of plumage, I think I have adopted a very cautious rule of admission. Professor Hutton has recognised at least two more—namely, Ocydromus hectori and O. finschi—and a naturalist given to what is termed “splitting” might easily have increased the number still further. But this is the crux of the whole thing. In this particular instance the species of one naturalist is the sub species of another, and the “local variety” of a third. What is this but the existence of transitional forms under the steady march of evolution?

But the question of the great variability of the South Island Woodhens opens up a larger one, which I confess myself quite unable to answer. How is it. that in the North Island there is but one well-marked species of Wood hen spread over its entire area, whilst in the South Island, under practically the same conditions of environment, there are at least four species, and possibly more, running into one another in such a way as to puzzle even the most expert ornithologists?

The Woodhen genus offers an exceptionally good example for a study of this sort, because, although furnished with ample wings, the quills are soft and useless, and the birds in consequence are flightless.

To take another instance of the kind: the Kakapo or Ground-parrot (Stringops habroptilus) has ample wings, and yet it is incapable of flight. The presence of this flightless bird, essentially the same in all respects, in both Islands, presents a difficulty which cannot be ignored. But, then, some species are more persistent in their character than others; and it may be that the Kakapo, as it existed in different areas before the final elevation, had reached its full development, and has remained stationary ever since. Its markings had become so exactly like the green mosses and other vegetation among which it feeds, thus effectually protecting it from birds of prey, and, in the absence of feral animals, the faculty of flight had become so unnecessary to it, that it is difficult to see in what direction natural selection could operate further to the advantage of the bird. It may be asked why, seeing that the Kakapo is flightless from long disuse of its wings, these members have not been more completely aborted,

or dwarfed to mere rudiments, as in the case of the Kiwi. The obvious answer is that, allowing the necessary time,—in how many generations it is impossible to say,—the same results would naturally come about. How long it may have taken for the Kiwi to become practically wingless since the process of degeneration commenced we have no means of even guessing. But our pestilent civilization has, of course, put a stop to all that, and within measurable time the Kakapo will disappear altogether,—passing out of existence, in full possession of its wings, but feeble in their quills, and crippled by the atrophy of their muscular mechanism.^*

This incidental reference to the Kakapo and its protective colouring leads me into another very interesting field of observation—namely, the gradual adaptation, by natural selection of course, of certain species to their habitual environment by the acquisition of protective colours. The olive-green Bell-bird is almost invisible to the eye as it clings to the leafy climbing tawhiwhi (Metrosideros scandens), and inserts its brush-tongue into the corolla of the crimson flower; the grey-and-white Ground-pipit eludes the most practised eye as it perches on a dry log, or nestles by the wayside; the Bronzewinged Cuckoo so harmonizes with its surroundings as it rests silently on a low bough that you may be within a yard of it without detecting its presence; the Dottrel and the Godwit squat on the sands without being seen; the Wry-billed Plover hides itself among the loose pebbles and shingles of its own grey colour; the green Parrakeets are undistinguishable from the bright evergreen vegetation among which they feed; the Kaka, but for its discordant cry, would generally be safe from observation in the midst of the brown branches among which it loves to climb and explore for insects; the Rifleman, the smallest of our native birds, is quite invisible as it clings to the lichen-covered bark; and the Bush-wren hops in safety among the moss and vegetation of the forest to which its own colours so closely assimilate. And so one might go on selecting examples almost without end, in illustration of the well-known law to which I have referred as being almost universal in its application and effects.

Leaving birds, however, for one moment, let us consider the remarkable correlation of colour with its surroundings in

the case of many of our lizards. The beautiful green lizard (Naultinus elegans) so exactly harmonizes with the manuka bushes on which it is usually found that it requires a very practised eye to distinguish it. The protective resemblance is rendered more complete by the leaf-shaped markings of yellow on the back and sides; and it is pretty clear that this particular character has been acquired by natural selection, or descent with modification for protective purposes, inasmuch as the young of this species is of a uniform green colour. These remarks apply with even stronger force to my Naultinus pulcherrimus, from Nelson, although, being a somewhat rare species, it is perhaps less noticeable. Here the irregular white markings, intermingled with the yellow and green, coupled with the animal's peculiar habit of curling up its tail in the form of a “Catherine's wheel,” render the deception absolutely perfect. In this case also the young is of an almost uniform green colour, varied only with leaf-like markings of a darker green on the back. Then, again, as I have previously pointed out, the markings on the back of my Naultinus sylvestris (discovered by Mr. Annabell at Wanganui) so exactly resemble the minute yellow lichens which cover stems of dead wood in the forests as to render it at all times perfectly safe from detection in such situations. Naultinus sulphureus—whether we regard it as a distinct species or only a pronounced local variety—is admirably adapted by its uniform yellow colour to the sulphur deposits of Rotorua, where alone it has been met with. But to come to the common species: where could we find a more beautiful adaptation of colouring to the natural surroundings than in the case of our common tree-lizard (Naultinus pacificus), the shades and markings of which present an almost endless variety; or in that of the variable Mocoa ornata and Mocoa zealandica, inhabiting our stony places and roadside vegetation? A case even more remarkable still is that of our wonderful Sphenodon punctatum or Tuatara lizard. Now this lizard is so abnormal in its character that it forms by itself a distinct order of reptilia, and exhibits the most bird-like skeleton of all existing reptiles. It is perhaps generically the oldest inhabitant of the earth, being closely allied to the Prohatteria of the Permian period, its nearest relations being the various forms of Rhyncocephala, which occur in the Trias. I have not time now to refer to the wonderful peculiarities of this living representative of a remotely ancient race; but I may mention that the Tuatara has been found to possess, concealed under the tough skin of the forehead, the vestiges of a third but now obsolete eye, the functional parts being present, even to the optic nerve! It has become extinct on the mainland; and it is a very curious fact that, through long isolation, it has become differentiated

in colour in the several islands or groups of islets which it in habits. With the exception of a green form, exhibiting some structural modifications, which I have dedicated to our great herpetologist, under the name of Sphenodon quentheri, it has been found impossible to distinguish these forms except as local varieties, sufficiently well marked however to admit of their being referred to their respective island habitats. What are these, I would ask, but incipient species? Allowing sufficient time under the existing conditions of life, and, reasoning by analogy, each island or group of islets must in the end possess a distinct species of Sphenodon exactly suited to its environment. It is, moreover, sufficiently clear that nothing but the island asylum could have saved this lowly-organized and archaic form from absolute extinction.^*

Less fortunate has been another form of New Zealand lizard, the Kawekaweau, whose quasi-arboreal habits of life have prevented its taking advantage of this last refuge. From the accounts of the natives, the Kawekaweau appears to have been a form of iguana inhabiting the deep forest, and there can be no doubt that it lingered in the land till within the last thirty years, when the remnant of its race succumbed to wild pigs and other natural enemies. It is always described by the Maoris as beautifully marked with alternate

bands of colour, and reaching at maturity to a length of 2ft. or more.^*

But, although these are good illustrations of the correlation of colour and of the extinction of well-established forms in the struggle for existence, I feel that I am rather digressing from the real subject of my address.

Closely connected with this subject of assimilative colouring is that of the gradual adaptation of structure to the conditions of existence. In my “Birds of New Zealand” I have called attention to some remarkable cases of this kind, and notably to that of the Huia (Heteralocha acutirostris)—an instance quite unique in the whole class of Birds—where the sexes present differently-formed bills, specially adapted to their habits of life and general economy. Now, on what principle apart from the Darwinian theory can we explain this remarkable sexual difference?

And to mention another case, that of the Wry-billed Plover (Anarhynchus frontalis) is a very remarkable one. In this instance the bird has the bill turned or twisted to the right, this asymmetry being admirably adapted to this plover's peculiar mode of feeding among the pebbles of the seashore. In the case of our beautiful Red-necked Avocet (Recurvirostra nova-hollandice), the curvature of the bill is upwards instead of sideways; and in both forms this marvellous departure

from the normal type of a plover's bill is congenital, being present in the unhatched embryo. Then, again, what is the Rock Wren (Xenious gilviventris) but an extreme development of the Bush Wren (Xenicus longipes)—which has put off its, green plumage for the dun-coloured dress more in harmony with its surroundings among the rocks on the open mountain, and has acquired a longer hind claw, so as to fit it for this different habitat—or vice versa? The particular direction of the development does not of course affect the argument. And it is a significant circumstance that I possess intermediate forms; so much so, in fact, that I have been in doubt as to which of the two species they really belonged. Or, to take just one more case: who can doubt that the fleshy membrane on the bill of our Blue Mountain Duck (Hymenolaemus malacorhynchus) has been specially developed to enable it to hunt the more successfully for the peculiar stone-encased caddis-worm of our mountain streams, which now forms its principal article of food?

But now, to revert to my main line of argument: In considering the problem of representative species in the North and South Islands respectively, it must be borne in mind that there are probably many broken links in the chain of succession through the disappearance of representative forms. We all know that the existing avifauna is being stamped out and destroyed by a variety of artificial causes, not the least among them being the naturalization of foreign birds by way of acclimatization, on the one hand, and the introduction of bloodthirsty animals like stoats, weasels; and ferrets, on the other. But long before the effects of our drastic colonization made themselves felt, many of the ground species were dying out, in obedience, no doubt, to that inscrutable law of nature whereby races of animals and plants, apparently of their own accord, die out and give place to other forms of life. I remember, when I was a boy, the interest with which I followed the Maofis' descriptions of birds that had even then become rare or were disappearing from the land. One bird, a species of Rail apparently, was often mentioned to me under the name of Pukunui—so called from the abnormal size of its stomach. It was described as a reddish bird, frequenting swamps and marshes, and I was constantly hearing of it, Indeed, I never made an excursion among the Maoris anywhere without making diligent inquiry for the Pukunui, so much so that the older men thought I had Pukunui on the brain. I offered liberal rewards, and often felt that the bird was almost within my grasp. At length, at the small bush settlement of Mareikura, on the North Wairoa River, one was caught at the edge of a raupo swamp near the village by my trusty lieutenant, Tamati Nui, It had been taken unhurt,

and, pending an opportunity of forwarding it to me, it was kept tethered by a flax-string in the marae or open courtyard. A passing Maori unconsciously snapped the string with his foot, and, unfortunately for me and for science, this “rara avis in terris” made its escape. More than forty years have elapsed since this occurrence, and I have never so much as heard of the capture of another Pukunui!

In this connection, and also as marking the tendency towards extinction in certain lines, it is of interest to notice that the Ralline genus Notornis was contemporary with the smaller species of Moa, and that the bones of the living bird obtained in Otago differ so much from those of the fossil remains discovered by Mr. Walter Mantell at Waingongoro, in the North Island, and referred by Professor Owen to a form which he named Notornis mantelli, in honour of the discoverer, that Dr. A. B. Meyer, of Dresden, proposes to discriminate two species, distinguishing the southern form as Notornis hochstetteri, in compliment to the Austrian explorer. Assuming Dr. Meyer to be right in his determination, we have here a beautiful instance of representation, the North Island species having long since disappeared, whilst the South Island species is verging on extinction.

I think I have now noticed all the main points bearing on this question arising out of a study of the birds of the North and South Islands. But it is to the smaller insular areas that we naturally look for the strongest proofs in support of our theory, because the conditions there are altogether more favourable. Let us first take the Chatham Islands, lying about four hundred miles to the south-east of Wellington. It is very clear that there has been no land communication between the Chathams and New Zealand since the continental submergence. This has allowed time for the production by natural selection and the survival of the fittest of several distinct species. Now, let us see what we have. Notably, a new species of Bell-bird (Anthornis melanocephala) has come into existence—a much larger and finer species than our Korimako (Anthornis melanura), although presenting the same adolescent and sexual phases of plumage. But the curious thing about it is that, side by side with this endemic species, our Bell-bird is also to be found in the Chatham Islands and on the adjacent islets (Pitt Island and Mangare). To my mind the only explanation of this is the same that I have given in a former paper (Trans. N.Z. Inst., vol. xxiv., p. 65) for the occurrence side by side of Platycercus unicolor and Platycercus erythrotis on Antipodes Island—namely, that the smaller species owes its existence there to a comparatively-recent colonization, the result of some accidental flight or migration from the mainland,—with this difference: that in

the case of Platycercus erythrotis the irruption of the parent form must have been long anterior to the colonization, so to speak, of the Chatham Islands by the New Zealand Bell-bird, inasmuch as there has been time for a sufficient modification of characters to entitle it (in the opinion of many ornithologists) to take specific rank, distinct from Platycercus novaezealandiae. As to such occasional migrations there would be nothing in the distance, at any rate, to negative such a supposition. Then, again, we have a Wood-pigeon (Carpophaga chathamiensis) very similar to the New Zealand bird, but sufficiently differentiated to be accepted as a good species. Other representative forms are the Black Robin (Miro traversi), the Bush Warbler (Gerygone albofrontata), and the Chatham Island Fern-bird (Sphenaeacus rufescens). The near relatives of all these are to be found in New Zealand. But, instead of Ocydromus, there is a small flightless rail—a degenerate Ocydromine form—which Professor Hutton has made the type of a new genus, Cabalus modestus. To this genus (although the form is less aberrant from the typical Rallus) I have referred Dieffenbach's Rail, which is now extinct, the only known example being the one in the British Museum, obtained about the year 1845.

So far as we are aware no bones of Dinornis have yet been discovered in the Chatham Islands, but I have no doubt that they will be sooner or later; and I feel pretty sure that when discovered they will be found to be of different species (perhaps of different genera) from those known to have inhabited New Zealand in comparatively recent times: that is to say, our theory seems to require, for the sake of consistency, that this should be so, inasmuch as the same differentiation would be taking place in the Chatham Islands as in the other insular areas after the great submergence. And, as the Chatham Islands unquestionably formed part of that ancient continental area of which I have been speaking, we may reasonably expect to find there, sooner or later, fossil remains of the earlier forms (such as Palapteryx), similar to those that have been unearthed in the North and South Islands of New Zealand. As to the remarkable avian remains recently discovered by Mr. H. O. Forbes in the Chatham Islands, and referred by him to a genus allied to Archaeopteryx, we may feel equally assured that similar remains exist in New Zealand, and will hereafter be found in abundance to reward the diligent explorer.

The Auckland Islands, again, offer several good examples. Among the species specially developed there may be mentioned a Ground-pipit (Anthus aucklandicus), very readily distinguishable from our New Zealand bird by its rather larger size and warmer colouring; and a Green Parrakeet (Platycercus aucklandicus),

much smaller, but in other respects similar to our Platycercus novae-zealandice. Representing our Rallus philippensis, there is a very distinct species of Rail (Rallus muelleri, Rothschild), of which the only known specimen is in the Natural History Museum at Stuttgart; and, as if representing our Anas chlorotis, there is a flightless Duck (Nesonetta aucklandica) frequenting the seashore as well as the streams. But, what is still more significant and curious, there exists in the Auckland Islands a species of Merganser (Mergus australis), of which there is no representative in New Zealand, or indeed anywhere else in the Southern Hemisphere. The Bell-bird is there also, but it seems to be absolutely identical with the New Zealand form (Anthornis melanura), showing, as I think, a comparatively recent introduction.

On Antipodes Island, as already indicated, there is a strictly endemic Parrakeet (Platycercus unicolor), a species living abundantly on this oceanic rock, but not to be met with in any other part of the world, and commingling with a species (Platycercus erythrotis) more nearly approaching to the typical Platycercus novae-zealandiae. Going further south we come to Macquarie Island, where there is a Rail differing so perceptibly from ordinary examples of Rallus philippensis that Professor Hutton has proposed to distinguish it as Rallus macquariensis; and, although I am not prepared to concede to it distinct rank as a species, its presence there is another proof of the existence of transitional forms. It is an inexplicable fact, however, that on the same island is to be found the flightless Ocydromus earli, differing in no respect from examples obtained in New Zealand and on Stewart Island.^*

On the Snares, a group of islets about seventy miles south of the southernmost extremity of New Zealand, there is a peculiar form of Fern-bird, which I have recently distinguished under the name of Sphenceacus caudatus, very similar to Sphenceacus punctatus of New Zealand, but quite distinct as a species, and being intermediate in character between the last-named bird and Sphenceacus rufescens of the Chatham Islands. Now, no ornithologist who has studied the subject can doubt that these three closely-allied forms, although now perfectly distinct as species, have sprung from a common parent-form. Curiously enough, another Chatham Island bird, the Black Robin (Miro traversi) is abundant on the Snares, although not found in any part of New Zealand.

Then; again, the Kermadec Islands possess a Green Parrakeet which Mr. Rothschild declares to be distinct; and, although many naturalists will insist that this and the other island forms are, for the most part, local varieties of the well-known Platycercus novae-zealandice, their very existence as such is the best evidence of the constant operation of the law of development by variation and the survival of the fittest.

Even the sea-birds, whose range is practically unrestricted, furnish additional and, indeed, very important evidence. Mr. Rothschild, with the aid of Mr. Salvin, our great authority on the Petrel family, has lately been investigating the Albatroses of the Southern Hemisphere. Talking over the result with me, he said, “Why, every group of islands seems to have its own species of Albatros!” And, in a sense, this is true. Here we have birds enjoying the freedom of the wide ocean—commingling daily on their great hunting-fields on the face of the deep; and then, on the approach of the reproductive season, separating themselves, according to their species, and repairing to their own island-nurseries to breed. As far as our information at present goes, Campbell Island is held exclusively by my Diomedea regia, the noblest member of the group. The Auckland Islands are occupied by thousands of Diomedea exulans, with the exception of a small colony of the former breeding in a remote corner of the main island, and at a somewhat earlier season—according to Captain Fairchild's observations, four or five weeks earlier. On the Snares Diomedea salvini (hitherto known here as Diomedea cauta) reigns supreme. The Albatros breeding on the Sisters, some outlying islands in the Chatham group, on which the Maoris are said to have collected as many as a thousand young birds in one season, is probably Diomedea melanophrys, which is plentiful in that latitude; but I have not yet been able to obtain any specimens from that locality for identification. The breeding-place of Diomedea bulleri, Rothschild (hitherto confounded with Diomedea culminata), I have not yet discovered, all the specimens of that form known to us (some twenty in number) having been captured off the Otago coast.

Many of the smaller species of Petrel, it may be observed, confine themselves to particular islands: for example, Puffinus carneipes is the commonest of birds on the Island of Karewa, in the Bay of Plenty, but, so far as I am aware, has never been found breeding on any other island off our coast.

As with the Petrels, so in a limited sense with the Shags and Penguins, many of the species of both having their particular island group, which they resort to, for breeding purposes, to the exclusion of all others.

Finally I may refer to the Snipes, the local distribution of which is very remarkable indeed. My Gallinago pusilla,

the smallest of the Snipes, is an inhabitant of the Chatham Islands, where it is apparently very plentiful, Mr. Rothschild having, as he informs me, received from his collector, in one lot, fifty-four specimens. Sir James Hector has recorded two specimens from New Zealand, but it is evidently only a straggler with us. Gallinago aucklandica appears to be confined to the Auckland Islands, Gallinago tristrami to Antipodes Island, and Gallinago huegeli to the Snares. It will be seen therefore that these island-species are very sedentary; and they have no doubt acquired their distinctive characters through long isolation. Whether they are accepted by all ornithologists as true species or only as local varieties does not affect in the slightest degree the force of our argument in favour of the creation of new forms by a process of descent with modification. But I have probably pursued this branch of the subject quite far enough. There is another aspect of the question upon which I should like to say a few words before I close.

I have always stated my belief that our colossal forms of Dinornis were the most ancient and were the first to become extinct. Those on which the Moa-hunters feasted (as attested by the remains now found in the old kitchen-middens) were confessedly of a smaller stature. Probably the very last to disappear was the small Mesopteryx didinus. In 1878 Mr. Squires, of Queenstown, obtained and sent to the British Museum the head, with a continuous part of the neck, of this species of Moa, with the trachea enclosed and covered by the dried integument, and exhibiting even the sclerotic bone-ring of the dried eye-balls; also the bones of both legs with the feet covered by the dried skin, with some feathers adhering to it, and with the claws intact. Be that as it may, the only representatives of this Struthious race we have at the present day are the diminutive Kiwis, of which I have been treating. This remarkable sequence in the development of animal life on the earth, the larger forms preceding in geological time the smaller, appears to have been universal. The distinguishing feature of the Mesozoic period was the development of Saurians of marvellous size. From the Oolitic beds in the Rocky Mountains of North America the remains of huge Dinosaurians have been obtained, among these being the Atlantosaurus, the largest land animal yet known to have existed on the earth; for Professor Marsh describes it as “having been between 50ft. and 60ft. long, and, when standing erect, at least 30ft. high!” At the present day our largest saurians are crocodiles and alligators. But, coming down to Pliocene and Pleistocene times, we have only to think of the mammoth and the mastodon, the dinotherium and the megatherium, the diprotodon and the Irish elk, and compare them with the

elephant and the hippopotamus, the rhinoceros and the buffalo, of the present epoch, to realize the full force of this truth. But these revolutions in the animal world have, in both the Northern and the Southern Hemisphere, been accompanied by corresponding alterations on the earth's surface, and by climatic changes of a very extensive kind. To give one illustration: The mammoth was an animal which subsisted on herbage and vegetation of all kinds; and, looking to its unchecked and ever-increasing numbers, it would clearly have required a growth of tropical luxuriance to satisfy the wants of its capacious stomach. But where do we now find the remains of these ancient herbivora? Not buried in tropical regions, but frozen and embalmed amid the eternal snows of Siberia, where they have been preserved intact for thousands of years. What a revolutionary change of climate do these facts imply! And how sudden must have been the translation from ultra-tropical verdure to the utter desolation of Arctic frigidity when the entombment and refrigeration of these herb-eating leviathans took place fresh from their feeding-grounds!

But now let me give another illustration nearer home—one drawn from the recent discoveries of Dr. Stirling, F.R.S., in South Australia, the importance of which, from a scientific point of view, it would be impossible to overestimate. I will shortly state the facts so far as they have yet become known. In the central part of South Australia there is a vast stony desert lying to the eastward of Lake Frome and to the westward of the Grey Range. It is described as being unspeakably arid and desolate, abounding in salt-pans, of which Lake Mulligan is the largest. This forbidding district is entirely destitute of fresh water and almost absolutely devoid of animal life of any kind. The intrepid explorer, Captain Sturt, in 1844 penetrated about half-way across this inhospitable plain, and then, after suffering great hardships, had to make his way out of it to escape absolute starvation. Up to the present time this region has been to all intents and purposes a sealed book. But a few months ago an important discovery of fossil bones was made at Lake Mulligan, and, chiefly through the scientific enterprise of Dr. Stirling (aided all through by the generous liberality of Sir Thomas Elder), this discovery has been followed up with very astonishing results. A correspondent of the Scotsman, writing on the spot and from his own knowledge and observations, states that, after four months' digging among the gravels of the valley of the Mulligan, some two thousand bones, representing seventy different mammals and birds hitherto unknown, have been unearthed, and safely lodged in the South Australian Museum at Adelaide. This collection comprises the first complete skeleton of Diprotodon

australis, a gigantic marsupial considerably exceeding the rhinoceros in size, the remains of a giant wombat as large as a half – grown bullock, several kinds of colossal bird equalling in stature the Moa of New Zealand, and several species of gigantic kangaroos! The writer's reflection is as follows: “What a different picture of the past history of this country is brought to light by these discoveries! On the sides of these mountains lying between Lake Frome and Lake Torrens must have grown huge trees, and all around there must have been a dense tropical growth, exceeding in luxuriance the forests of the eastern slopes of the Andes in South America!”

Commenting on this remarkable sequence of animal life on the earth at different periods of its history in the same geographical areas, Sir John Lubbock observes, “Our prehistoric ancestors hunted the mammoth, the woolly-haired rhinoceros, and the Irish elk; the ancient Britons had the wild ox, the deer, and the wolf. We have still the pheasant, the partridge, the fox, and the hare; but even these are becoming scarcer, and must be preserved first in order that they may be killed afterwards.”

I fear I have already trespassed too long on your kind indulgence, but the subject is a very seductive one, and, in treating of it, however briefly, it is difficult to keep within the ordinary limits of an address. But just one word in conclusion. As you will have gathered from the views I have had the privilege of placing before you this evening, I am a thorough disciple of Darwinism in the higher sense, of that term. I do not think it is possible to explain on any other hypothesis the wonderful variety and complexity of living forms that inhabit this beautiful world of ours. We must, as it seems to me, acknowledge with the author of “The Origin of Species,” in one of his later works, that “man, with all his noble qualities, with sympathy which feels for the most debased, with benevolence which extends not only to other men but to the humblest living creature, with his godlike intellect which has penetrated into the movements and constitution of the solar system—with all these exalted powers, man still bears in his bodily frame the indelible stamp of his lowly origin.” I do not accept, however, as many do, the purely materialistic theory, because I am a believer in the truths of revelation and in the spiritual destiny of man. As that of a humble worker in the field of science, earnestly seeking the truth, this is, so to speak, my confession of faith as a naturalist. To adopt Mr. Wallace's admirable language on this point, I am “thus relieved from the crushing mental burden imposed upon those who—maintaining that we, in common with the rest of nature, are but products of the blind

the complete acquisition of the Little Barrier Island were being pushed forward, and with every prospect of speedy success, and that both there and on Resolution Island a custodian or ranger was being maintained by the Government. It is dis-heartening, however, to learn from the last report of the Auckland Institute that “in the meantime several natives and Europeans are living on the island, fires have been allowed to spread, and in the last week of January of this year a serious one was reported, which lasted at least a week.” It is also alleged in the report that “the island has been visited by collectors, and specimens of the very birds which it was hoped might survive have been shot and brought to Auckland.” I understand that effective steps are now being taken to prevent such depredations for the future. And, from what I can gather in the department, there is every reason to hope that within a measurable time the last of the native owners will have been settled with, and the private title extinguished. The whole of the island will then be Crown land, and will be under more effective control. All over the scientific world the action of the Government in this matter has been applauded. The efforts now being made, whether in the end completely successful or not, will in any case save us from the reproaches of posterity. If they should prove successful, as I believe they will, I venture to think that this service to science will bring credit and praise to the present Government when many of their more ambitious schemes and projects have been buried and forgotten. But it must be borne in mind that the conservation of the two islands I have named is only a partial carrying-out of Lord Onslow's recommendations and of the decision come to by the Government in 1892. The original proposal was not merely to protect the birds already existing on the two island reserves, notably the Stitchbird and the Whitehead on the Little Barrier, and Notornis mantelli, Kiwis, and Kakapos on Resolution Island; but that many other birds now living on the mainland, although becoming scarcer every year, should be systematically trapped from time to time and turned loose upon the islands. In addition to a further supply of Kiwis and Kakapos, of the different species, the birds specially marked out for these attentions were the Huia (Heteralocha acutirostris) and the Blue-wattled Crow (Glaucopis wilsoni) in the North Island, and the Thick-billed Thrush (Turnagra crassirostris) and the Orange-wattled Crow (Glaucopis cinerea) in the South Island. This could be done now, and at comparatively trifling cost; but every year it will become more difficult. It has now become a truism that the rarer New Zealand birds are passing away and will soon be extinct. But even species that were formerly very abundant all over the country are following suit, not only on the main-

land but on the small islands where the conditions of existence are so much more favourable. Mr. W. Hawkins, the wellknown collector, writing to me from the Chatham Islands in August last, says, “The Fern-bird (Sphenaeacus rufescens) and the Black Robin (Miro traversi) are gone. The Makomako and Cabalus modestus are going fast; and the Pigeon too. In fact Pitt Island is the only place where Pigeons and Bell-birds are to be got. …. On the Sisters ten years ago the Maoris got a thousand Albatroses; last year they got only three hundred and fifty. They say that if I go there I'll frighten the Albatros away altogether, so they have absolutely prohibited my collecting there.”

I shall now proceed to place before you my customary budget of ornithological notes. Dr. Sclater, the accomplished editor of the Ibis, has referred in terms of commendation to my practice of exhibiting at our meetings here the more important of the specimens to which the observations refer. I shall continue this practice, because it tends to keep up the interest of members in what is being done in this department of science. It is quite a mistake to suppose that because exhaustive works have appeared on the birds of New Zealand nothing remains to be done by the ordinary observer. In opposition to such a view, I may mention that since the publication of my last edition of “The Birds of New Zealand,” in 1888, I have, through the medium of these periodical notes (without including those contained in the present paper), added no less than ten species to the list of our birds, recorded thirty-four albinisms and other abnormal varieties, and made original observations, more or less important, on eighty-four ordinary species. Others have been working in the same direction, and registering interesting facts, the most important of these contributions being a paper on the birds of the Chatham Islands by Mr. H. O. Forbes, which appeared (with two excellent illustrations) in the Ibis for October, 1893.

Heteralocha acutirostris, Gould. (Huia.)

Sir John Lubbock, in his charming volume “The Beauties of Nature,” in an account of what he terms the Hura (meaning of course the Huia), pp. 48, 49, makes two mistakes. In the first place he calls it a Crow, whereas it has been proved to be a Starling; and, in discussing the curious modification of the bill in the two sexes and its use, he says, “When the cock has dug down to the burrow the hen inserts her long bill and draws out the grub, which they then divide between them” —the italics are mine—“a very pretty illustration of the wife as helpmate to the husband.”

Now, I believe I was the first to observe and record the peculiar adaptation of the Huia's bill to its habits of life, in a

paper which I read before this Society in 1870, describing the conduct of a pair of live birds then in my possession (Trans. N.Z. Inst., vol. iii., pp. 24–29). But I had previously told Sir George Grey all about it, and he, with his usual felicity of expression, told the story at a meeting of the Zoological Society on his return to England. It seems a pity to destroy the pretty sentiment of the case as put by Sir John Lubbock, but science is inexorable, and the truth must be upheld. What I stated in my record of observations was this: “The very different development of the mandibles in the two sexes enabled them to perform separate offices. The male always attacked the more decayed portions of the wood, chiselling out his prey after the manner of some woodpeckers, while the female probed with her long pliant bill the other cells, where the hardness of the surrounding parts resisted the chisel of her mate. Sometimes I observed the male remove the decayed portion without being able to reach the grub, when the female would at once come to his aid, and accomplish, with her long slender bill, what he had failed to do. I noticed, however, that the female always appropriated to her own use the morsels thus obtained.” I am sorry that the stern truth detracts from the poetry of Sir John Lubbock's narration.

Creadion carunculatus, Gmelin. (Saddleback.)

From Stephen Island, in Cook Strait, I received last year a fresh specimen, which was interesting as being in the full “saddleback” plumage, although a very young bird. It has very small caruncles, and a narrow yellow membrane at the angles of the mouth. The plumage is somewhat duller than in the adult, but the distribution of colours is the same. Such a specimen as this, which is still in my collection, establishes beyond all doubt the validity of Creadion cinereus as a distinct species.

Miro traversi, Buller. (Black Robin.)

The young of this species has the plumage slightly tinged with brown, and the feathers of the underparts have obscure margins.

Anthus aucklandicus, G. R. Gray. (Auckland-Island Pipit.)

In the Trans. N.Z. Inst., vol. xxi., p. 388, Mr. Reischek, after consultation with Professor-Thomas and Mr. Cheeseman, described a new Ground-lark or Pipit from Antipodes Island and named it Anthus steindachneri, after the Director of the Imperial Museum at Vienna. I have not seen the type, but the description of the bird given by Mr. Reischek indicates no difference between this bird and Anthus aucklandicus.

Rhipidura flabellifera, Gmelin. (Pied Fantail.)

In October, 1880, during a storm-bound visit to Motutaiko, in the Taupo Lake, I found the nest of this species, with four eggs in it, secured very neatly to a twig of kawakawa (Piper excelsum), a tree to which, as I have observed, the Fantail is very partial for nesting purposes. We had made our camp-fire immediately under the nest before discovering it, and, although we remained there several hours, the birds did not appear to be in any way inconvenienced by the volume of smoke that came from the driftwood fire, and enveloped them completely from time to time. Both sexes incubate in turn. There could be no mistake in this observation, because one of the birds had lost its tail, and could be readily distinguished from the other.

Rhipidura fuliginosa, Sparrm. (Black Fantail.)

On a recent visit to Papaitonga, I was much pleased to see a fine specimen of this South Island species in a clump of native bush near the homestead. It was associating with the Pied Fantail, which is particularly numerous in that locality. It was appreciably larger in size, and was in beautiful plumage, the white ear-spots being very conspicuous.

Mr. J. C. McLean, of Gisborne, in the Ibis for January last, gives an interesting account of the interbreeding in that district of a female bird of this species with a male of R. flabellifera. There were two eggs in the nest taken, and Mr. McLean thinks they are richer in colour than the ordinary egg of the Pied Fantail, “the spots being of a purplish tint, while in eggs of the pied bird they are brownish.”

Petrochelidon nigricans, Vieill. (Australian Tree-swallow.)

Several instances have been recorded of the occurrence in New Zealand of flights of the Australian Tree-swallow. Mr. H. Guthrie-Smith, writing to me from Tutiri Lake, on the 20th August, 1893, says, “While up at the Mahia last week, I observed some birds like Martins or Swallows. They have been there for some weeks, I believe. They were flying high above some blossoming gum-trees when they were first pointed out to me. It was a dark afternoon; but, as far as I could see, their tails were not forked. I should be much obliged if you could tell me to what species they belong. Could they be a flight of Hirundo nigricans?”

Mr. James Dall, of Collingwood, also writes to me, under date of the 25th June, 1893, “During this spring, summer, and autumn there have been large numbers of Australian Swallows or Martins visiting New Zealand—apparently all parts, as I see by a late Canterbury Times that a pair have built a nest and are hatching young ones in a mill about

Oamaru, where they are being greatly cared for by every one. In the spring of 1892 flocks of two or three dozen were observed in the neighbourhood of Cape Farewell.” I have no doubt these visitants are referable to the above species. (See “Birds of New Zealand,” 2nd ed., vol. i., pp. 74–76.)

Prosthemadera novae-zealandiae, Gmelin. (Tui.)

On examining a series of ten eggs I find that they vary a good deal both as to shape and colouring. For the most part they are of a narrow ovoido-elliptical form, with a very pronounced smaller end, but a few of them are less acuminate, and one is broadly ovoid. A typical one measures 1.25in. by 0.80in.; the more rounded one I have mentioned measures 1:125in. by 0.88in. This is almost entirely white, with only a few indistinct, widely-scattered, rusty or pale-red spots towards the larger end. The most highly-coloured example is of a delicate creamy-white or salmon tint, the larger end darker and thickly spotted and dotted with pale brown, these markings forming an indistinct zone. Two other eggs are almost exactly similar to this one, but with a paler ground, and all three are probably from one nest. Another set of three have scattered, somewhat obscure pale-brown markings over the entire surface. The three remaining ones (presumably from one nest) are white, with here and there a speck of pale brown, chiefly at the larger end.

Anthornis melanura, Sparrm. (Korimako.)

At 7 p.m. on the 26th October we left Tokanu for Tapuaeharuru in a four-oared boat, manned by a good crew of Armed Constabulary. It was a beautiful, calm day, and the surface of the lake was a perfect mirror. Five miles from land we could still hear the hollow boom of the Bittern, and the barking of the curs in the Maori village. There was not a breath of air to cause a ripple on the bosom of the lake, and the rock-bound margin of Motutaiko danced in the mirage of the morning sun. Our men were settling down to a long pull of twenty-five miles, and we had just arranged to make straight for Motutaiko and rest there for an al fresco lunch, when the seaman Todd, who was in charge of the crew, pointed to an advancing ripple from the southward; and, without a moment's warning, we were overtaken by a squall which increased in fury with amazing rapidity. Within the brief space of five minutes, instead of dreamily rowing on the placid waters, we were pitching and tossing in an angry sea—the rudder was powerless, and the oarsmen had the utmost difficulty in keeping the boat's head on. We shipped several heavy seas, and struggled on for hours, sometimes drifting, at others just holding our own, as the storm varied in force, the

men all pulling with desperate strength, knowing that to relax for a moment meant swamping and destruction to us all; for the best swimmer could not long have survived a capsize in such a sea, and with the atmosphere and water so intensely cold. After some four hours of unflagging labour, a lull in the storm enabled us to get under the lee of Motutaiko; but half an hour after we had landed, in a little rocky cove on the western side of the island, the storm redoubled in force, and for some hours such a gale blew as had not been witnessed in the lake for years. The “little white horses” of the sea chased each other in quick succession, and the spray rose in clouds as the winds swept over the tempestuous waters. Of course the first consideration on reaching land was a sense of gratitude at having escaped from a very perilous position; but I was delighted on landing to hear on all sides the silvery notes of the Korimako. As is well known, this little songster, which formerly was so abundant everywhere, has for a long time past been practically extinct in the North Island. At the time of this visit to Motutaiko it had not been heard of for several years on the mainland, although it was known to exist on certain islands off the coast, such as the Little Barrier in the Haurai Gulf, and the Island of Kapiti in Cook Strait; and the generally-accepted theory had been that the chief factor in its extermination was the introduced rat. That certainly was my own belief. But a fact now came to my knowledge which seemed to tell very much against that theory. It was this: The island on which I so unexpectedly met with the Bell-bird is famous for its rats. It is covered with pohutukawa trees and koromiko scrub, and the whole island swarms with rats. The ground is in places almost honeycombed with their burrows, for in one spot I counted no less than five holes within a radius of eighteen inches. So numerous were they that Topia Turoa had found it necessary to turn some cats adrift on the island to reduce their numbers before he could put in a crop of potatoes on one of the slopes; and wind-bound boats lying in the little sandy cove at night have, it is said, been invaded by multitudes of rats and had all their provisions carried off.

Then, again, as to the rat theory, it is a significant fact that, although the Korimako has disappeared from the North Island, it has continued to exist in the South Island, although in somewhat diminished numbers; and, so far as I am aware, the introduced rat is as plentiful there as in the North. There may be destructive causes in operation of which we have no present knowledge.

I lately had an opportunity of examining a collection of twenty-three eggs of this species, all from the South Island. I made the following notes: They vary only very slightly in

size, but exhibit a considerable amount of variation in the markings. In most of them the ground-colour is white, in others it is suffused with a delicate pinky blush. Some have the larger end smeared and the rest of the surface irregularly spotted with rusty-brown; in others the brown markings form an indistinct zone; in some the brown is concentrated at the larger pole, the rest of the shell being entirely free from markings. In some specimens these markings are irregular, being streaky or blotchy; in others they are rounded dots, being more or less confluent at the pole. Their colour varies from a dull umber-brown to a warm reddish-brown. In a few of them the markings are distributed over the entire surface in the form of minute speckles, without any appearance of a zone or any congestion at the larger pole. Two that I selected for the purpose measured, respectively, 0.75in. by 0.625in. and 0.88in. by 0.55in., both being slightly pyriform.

Pogonornis cincta, Gray. (Stitch-bird.)

I have lately had an opportunity of examining a large series of specimens collected for Mr. Spencer on the Little Barrier Island, before that last resort of this species came under Government protection. The young male has exactly similar plumage to that of the adult female, except that there is a broad spot of canary-yellow near the bend of the wing. When the first moult commences this expands into a conspicuous band on the humerus, after which there is a gradual change of the body-plumage. I have described in “The Birds of New Zealand” a beautiful specimen in the Auckland Museum in a transitional state of plumage.

Haleyon vagans, Lesson. (Kingfisher.)

I am indebted to the kindness of Mr. Taylor White, of Hawke's Bay, for the opportunity of exhibiting this evening a lovely specimen of our Kingfisher. It is a perfect albino, every feather being of the purest white, and the whiteness extending even to the bill and feet.

Nestor meridionalis, Gmelin. (Kaka.)

This fine parrot is far less plentiful than it formerly was, and this is the inevitable result of settlement and the consequent destruction of the forests. In districts where formerly it existed in thousands its scream is never heard, and to many of the new settlers the bird is quite unknown. It is seminocturnal in its habits, and towards evening becomes very animated, flying over the tree-tops in an excited manner, generally in parties of three, uttering its harsh scream. This changes to a soft musical whistle as the birds alight; and, in doing this, they always select, as a post of observation, the

withered top of some aged tree, always climbing to the highest, limbs, their progression being by a succession of short hops.

Platycercus novae-zealandiae, Sparrm. (Red-fronted Parrakeet.)

At Tapuaeharuru, on the Taupo Lake, I saw a fine caged example of this species in which the crown and sides of the head had a wash of yellow over the green.

Platycercus erythrotis, Wagler.

From a specimen received by the “Hinemoa,” on herrecent visit to Antipodes Island, I am able to give the measurements of this species: Length, 17in.; extent of; wings, 12in.; wing from flexure, 5.75in.; tail, 6in.; bill., along the ridge 0.9in.; along the edge of lower mandible 0.5in.; tarsus, 0.9in.; longer foretoe and claw, 1.25in. It proved, on dissection, to be a male.

Count Salvadori is of opinion that this species should be regarded as Platycercus hochstetteri (cf. Salvad., Cat. B. B.M., xx., p. 577), Platycercus erythrotis being the representative form on Macquarie Island. I have never seen the British Museum example mentioned by Dr. Finsch in his “Die Papageien,” vol. ii., p. 275; but he treats it as a mere synonym of Platycercus novæ-zealandiæ. In any case there seems to be much uncertainty about the origin of this specimen; and Captain Fairchild informs me that he has been unable to get any evidence as to the existence of a Parrakeet on Macquarie Island.

Platycercus unicolor, Vigors. (Antipodes Island Parrakeet.)

I take this opportunity of exhibiting an egg of this species which was laid by a captive bird on board the “Hinemoa” on her last voyage from the islands. As will be seen, it is perfectly white, with, a smooth surface, and almost spherical in shape, measuring 1in. in length by 0.9in. in extreme width.

Circus gouldi, Bonap. (Harrier.)

Although the Bush-hawk has almost entirely disappeared from all the settled districts, the Harrier maintains its ground, and is extremely abundant on some of the sheep-runs. At Papaitonga my son lately saw one with a perfectly white head, but it was very shy, and he was unable to shoot it. These hawks are in the habit of hunting along the shores of the lake, and are a perpetual terror to the young ducks. They are destructive also to the eggs of birds nesting in the sedge, on one occasion no less than fifteen eggs being taken from a goose's nest. They are bold enough, too, in their manner of attack. One day I saw three or four large Sea-shags (Phala

crocorax novæ-hollandiæ) perched on the naked branches of a lofty matai near the edge of the lake, looking very fine as they balanced their bodies against the blue sky beyond. Presently a Harrier appeared in sight, and, without a moment's hesitation, swooped down on the group of Shags, and they, much to my surprise, instead of showing fight, made precipitately for the water. On another occasion one of these hawks made a determined attack on a flock of Black Teal (Fuligula novæ-zealandia) well out on the lake. The ducks splashed and dived, and evinced every sign of terror, and the assailant kept up the pursuit for fully half an hour, but without effect.

Apart from these depredations, I have reason to fear that these hawks have been interfering with the Mallards and other English birds recently placed by me on the Papaitonga Lake.

Harpa ferox, Peale. (Bush-hawk.)

At Waipuna, in Hawke's Bay, I saw, on the 17th March, a young Bush Hawk boldly attack a litter of kittens, whilst actually under the protection of the maternal cat! It seized one of them and lifted it some feet in the air. The quarry managed, however, to disengage itself and dropped to the ground. The hawk, which, from its size, I took to be a female, then settled on the dry limb of a tree close by, apparently to await another opporturnity; and there we left her, balancing her body in an almost horizontal position, and looming large against the clear blue sky beyond.

Harpa novæ-zealandiæ. (Quail-hawk.)

The egg of this species is a very pretty object. I have now four specimens before me. They are of uniform size, and broadly ovoido-conical, measuring 2in. by 1.4in. Pale-brown, richly splashed and spotted over the entire surface with reddish-brown, especially at the larger end, where there is a mixture of blackish-brown with the brighter colour.

Carpophaga novæ-zealandiæ, Gmelin. (Wood-pigeon.)

It is very regrettable to see how scarce this fine Woodpigeon is becoming in all the settled districts. Even as late as 1880 it was extremely abundant in the Forty-mile Bush. I find the following entry in my diary for April of that year:—

The Pigeon is now feeding on koroi, the small red berry of the kahikatea, which is exceptionally abundant this year, the trees by the roadside as we passed through the Forty-mile Bush having a russet hue from the abundance of the ripe fruit. The miro berry comes in next month, and the whanake

early in June. The pate (called “patete” by the Ngatikahungunu, and “kotete” by the Ngatiraukawa) is now in fruit, the long spikes or drupes of berries hanging in conspicuous, clusters along the edge of the forest. This, too, is a favourite food of the Wood-pigeon at this season. The houhou, which has clusters of black berries, like the English elder-bush, contributes likewise to the bountiful bill of fare; so also does the karamu (Coprosma lucida), and a much larger kind, called raurekau by the natives, producing a brighter-red berry, and now in full bearing. The Tui and the Kaka also regale themselves at this season on these sweet berries.

The flight of the Wood-pigeon is rapid and direct at first, then oblique and somewhat tumbling: that is to say, the bird turns over first on one side,-then on the other, in a very measured manner. The tail is partially spread during flight.

Many beautiful varieties of this fine Wood-pigeon have been recorded from time to time, but there is a specimen in the Colonial Museum of which no description has yet been published. In this bird the plumage of the head, neck, breast, and mantle is largely varied with pure white, which predominates on the neck, the normal bronzy plumage shining out in the midst of it, especially on the breast, with a very pretty effect; there are also a few scattered white feathers on the wings and tail. This handsome bird was obtained at Eketahuna, and presented to the Museum by Mr. R. R. Greville.

There are two beautiful specimens in the possession of Mr. C. J. Robinson, of the Upper Hutt. One of these, shot by himself on a miro tree at the summit of the western range, opposite Wallaceville, in June, 1892, has the head, neck, and breast, and the upper surface generally dull yellowish-brown, shaded with darker; the primaries and tail-feathers clove-brown, the latter darker; the higher interscapular region or shoulders and the small wing-coverts rich vinous-brown; some of the outer coverts pale-brown with vinous edgings; the whole of the under surface pure white. Bill and feet red. The other bird was shot in the same spot about eight days later. It is a lovely albino, the entire plumage being pure white, with just the faintest tinge of cream, or, so to speak, another shade of white on the breast; and on the smaller wing-coverts there is a pale wash of cream. The primaries and tail-feathers are pale cream with pure-white shafts. Bill and feet red.

A specimen which I lately received from Nelson has the white of the underparts; especially along the junction with the bronze plumage of the breast, washed with chrome-yellow, and the under tail-coverts are entirely of that colour. It is apparently an adult bird, and is marked “female” by the collector.

Carpoptaga chathamiensis, Roths. (Chatham Island Wood-pigeon.)

I have very much pleasure in exhibiting this evening a specimen of the new species of Pigeon mentioned by me in a former paper,^* as it is an excellent illustration of what I have recently said about the development of insular forms.

Gallinago pusilla, Buller; (Chatham-Island Snipe.)

Gallinago huegeli, Tristram. (Snares Snipe.)

The Bulletin of the British Ornithologists' Club for June, 1898, contains a communication from the Rev. Canon Tristram, from which I extract the following: “In the Ibis for 1869, p. 41, Sir “W. Buller described” a second species [of Snipe], from the Chatham Islands as Gallinago pusilla. Very few specimens have been received, but the species has twice been obtained in New Zealand (to which it is evidently an occasional wanderer): once by Sir James Hector, in the Gulf of Hauraki, and once by Mr. F. B. Hill, on Little Barrier-Island. All doubts as to its being a distinct species have recently been set at rest by the large number of specimens obtained in the Chatham Islands by the collectors of the Hon. Walter Rothschild and Mr. H. O. Forbes. I have examined more than. twenty specimens, and find that all of them agree in every respect, and cannot be confused with the Auckland Island species. But when Sir W. Buller published his second edition of the ‘Birds of New Zealand’ he had, unfortunately, sent back to New Zealand his only specimen from the Chatham Islands, and borrowed from me a specimen which had been obtained by Baron A. von Hügel on the Snares, seventy miles south of the southern extremity of New Zealand. This I had put down as Gallinago pusilla, having at that time never seen a Chatham Island specimen. It is very accurately figured and coloured in Buller's second edition; but it proves to be very different from the true G. pusilla. The only other example in existence, so far as I am aware, is a second specimen obtained on the Snares at the same time by Baron A. von Hügel, and in the collection of the Hon. Walter Rothschild.”

Canon Tristram says, “This species may at once be distinguished from its congeners by its much redder hue, and especially by the remarkable fineness and delicacy of its markings, the edgings of the upper plumage and the striation and bands on the lower surface being much smaller, closer, and more distinct. In the other two species (Gallinago pusilla and G. aucklandica) the abdomen and thighs are whitish, while

in this they are thickly barred. In this species the three outer tail-feathers on each side are attenuated, with a white edging; in the others only the two outer pairs of tail-feathers appear to be so attenuated.”

Gallinago tristrami, Roths. (Antipodes-Island Snipe.)

I have much pleasure in exhibiting a specimen of this rare Snipe, obtained on the last visit of the “Hinemoa” to Antipodes Island, and kindly lent to me by Mr. Bethune, the second engineer.

In his communication relating to Gallinago huegeli, cited above, Canon Tristram made the following remarks: “There would. appear to be three species of Gallinago in the islands round New Zealand: G. aucklandica in the Aucklands, G. pusilla in the Chathams, and G. huegeli in the Snares, all being sedentary, or nearly so, in their several localities. To these further research will probably add a fourth from Antipodes Island, whence a single specimen has been received by Sir James Hector, who states it to be larger, darker in plumage, and with a more curved bill than the Auckland-Island species. Unfortunately he has not described it.” Shortly after this a specimen was obtained by the Hon. Walter Rothschild, who described it at a meeting of the B.O.C., and dedicated if to Canon Tristram.

Larus dominicaus, Licht. (Black-backed Gull.)

Larus scopulinus, Forst. (Red-billed Gull.)

We have an excellent proof of the wisdom of protective legislation in the numbers and increasing tameness of the Sea-gulls that now frequent our harbours and estuaries. Not only are these birds very ornamental as they rest on the wharves and jetties, or hover lightly among the shipping at its anchorage, but they do good service to mankind as scavengers of the water by devouring the garbage which will inevitably find its way into the water in the vicinity of human habitations, and which, unless consumed, decomposes, and vitiates the atmosphere. On my last visit to Auckland I was much interested at seeing scores of seagulls of both species (Larus dominicanus and L. scopulinus) crowded together on the ridge-boards of the sheds on the Queen-street Wharf, in the very midst of the busy traffic. After years of rigid protection the birds have become quite familiar with the presence of man, and are, indeed practically domesticated. What will happen in the course of time I saw exemplified at Glasgow, where hundreds of Kittiwake Gulls are to be seen all day long disporting themselves in the turbid waters of the River Kelvin, as it flows through the grounds in front of the Hunterian Museum. They are just as fearless and confident as domestic fowls, being wholly

indifferent to the stream of passengers to and fro on both sides of the river. I met with another instance of this at Blairquhan, the country seat of Sir Edward Hunter-Brown, Bart. Here, owing to the close protection given to a small lake in the park, a couple of hundred Wild-duck had become perfectly tame, and would come up every day to the keeper's house to be fed. These same birds on being seen on the River Girvan close by, where shooting is allowed, are as shy as ever. So much for the intelligence of the common Wild-duck, which has learned to regard the park lake as a sanctuary, where it is perfectly safe from molestation! But to return to the Sea gulls. The manner in which they have increased in Wellington Harbour during the last few years, in spite of advancing traffic, is a striking proof of the efficacy of this protection. At Pitone, where the Gear Meat-freezing Works are situated, there is of necessity a considerable discharge of refuse matter, and the number of Seagulls, of both species, that congregate there on the beaches and gravel-banks is something surprising.

On my last visit to Tokanu, on Lake Taupo, I noticed many hundreds of birds flying overhead, and the natives assured me these were the tarapunga (Larus scopulinus) on their regular migration from the Rotoaira Lake. This was on the 25th October. The birds were at a considerable elevartion, presenting peculiar combinations; at one time flying in closely-packed lines, then forming into a wedge-shape, and then scattering again like a flock of crows, and uttering all the time loud cries of kek—kek—kek. Large contingents of the birds had already arrived, because they were to be seen crowding together in large numbers on the exposed sandbanks just above the surface of the water.

Sterna frontalis, Gray. (Common Tern.)

On the Taupo plains, where there are thousands of sterile acres covered with manuka scrub, about five or six miles inland of the lake I observed two Terns, apparently of this species, hovering over the ground, although I found it difficult to imagine what they could find to attract them in such a barren locality. Probably they were in quest of lizards.

This species of Tern frequents the Taupo Lake, and so does Sterna antarctica,

Sterna fuliginosa, Gould. (Sooty Tern.)

I have received a good many specimens from the Kermadece Islands. Mr. Cheeseman writes, “It is called the ‘Widewake’ bird by the Bells, and breeds in immense numbers in the summer-time, but leaves the group altogether in the winter”

Oeydromus greyi, Buller. (North Island Woodhen.)

This species of Woodhen is still numerous on the wooded hill – sides and mountain gullies in the Murimotu – Taupo country. It is seldom met with in the open country, except at one particular season, when the birds are exceedingly fat, and the natives catch large numbers by running them down with dogs.

It is a very remarkable fact in local botany that on the arid lands forming the Onetapu Desert, and on the slopes of Ruapehu Mountain, where the climate is very rigorous, certain native pines, which in the lowlands attain to a considerable height as forest trees, are represented by dwarfed forms of the same species, not more than a few inches in height, and often assuming a creeping habit. These degraded forms, which are specifically identical with their forest relations, resemble them exactly in their fructification. The berries borne by these pigmy growths equal in size, and sometimes even exceed, those of the forest trees,—the fruit of the dwarf totara, for example, being sometimes double the size of the normal berry, while those of the miro, kahikatea, and rimu are at least fully equal to the berries produced by the forest trees. When these miniature woods are laden with ripe mast the Woodhen leaves the shelter of the woods and comes out into the open to revel in plenty. As already stated, the birds then become unusually fat, and, owing to their diminished activity, become an easy prey to the natives. Captain Mairinforms me that he has known of a native with a good dog, ten years ago, killing as many as eighty in a single day. Pigeons and kakas, also, are said to resort to these subalpine woods in considerable numbers to feed on the ripe fruit. When camped on the edge of a red-birch forest near the Mangataramea Stream (at an elevation of 3,000ft.) I heard the loud cry of the Woodhen every night, but I never met with the bird in the open country, and the sheep-farmer with whom I was staying appeared never to have seen one.

I was much struck with the beauty of these clumps of bush in the Murimotu highlands, where the Woodhen was so numerous. Some of them consist entirely of kawaka (Libro-cedrus doniana) a very ornamental tree of bright-green foliage and tapering growth, with a trunk like a miniature Sequoia. This is plainly seen when a fire has passed through the forest and left the trees dead and naked. In some places you meet with the strange sight of the whole forest apparently hewn down, and strewing the ground with bleached and charred trunks. The explanation is this: that these trees are generally hollow near the ground, and have only a feeble support of lateral roots. Consequently, when a fire has passed through

and killed the trees, the dead timber cannot long resist the action of the weather, and one after another the “cedars” topple over with the passing blast, till at length not a single trunk remains standing, and an appearance is presented of utter wreck and desolation. For the most part the trees are of small size, but Captain Mair informs me he has often met with them 4ft. in diameter at the base. Another tree that adds to the novelty of these subalpine woods is the silver-birch—a graceful and elegant tree of bright foliage, resembling at a short distance the larch, and showing up conspicuously amongst the black-and red-birch with which it mingles. In these mountain solitudes, however, there is very little animal life to engage the attention of the naturalist. On the summit of Gentle Annie, in fine weather, I met with what appeared to be a smaller and very bright variety of the Yellow Admiral-butterfly, but I could not catch any. I saw occasionally a small lizard, which I referred to Tiliqua zealandica. Bird-life is scarce, except at certain seasons and in particular localities.

Ocydromus earli, Gray. (Brown Wobdhen.)

I have to exhibit to-night another remarkable albinism. It is that of the Brown Woodhen of the South Island. The forehead, face, foreneck, and breast are pure white; five of the quills in one wing and six in the other are entirely white; there are a few white feathers scattered among the wingcoverts, and there is a large admixture of white in the plumage of the abdomen, sides of the body, and flanks. The rest of the plumage is normal. To judge from its large size, it is a male bird. I obtained it, through a dealer, from the west coast of the South Island.

Ocydromus brachypterus, Lafr. (Black Woodhen.)

Dr. Sharpe reports that he has examined the type specimen of Gallirallus brachypterus from the Caen Museum, for the loan of which he was indebted to Professor Joyeux-Laffine, the Director of that Museum. Dr. Sharpe points out that the species has been the subject of much controversial opinion, but that it is evidently the same as Gallirallus fuscus of Du Bus, which must therefore be known as Ocydromus brachy-pterus (Bull. B.O.C., Jan., 1873). This being so, the Buff Woodhen, which I referred to Ocydromus brachypterus in my second edition of “The Birds of New Zealand,” becomes Ocydromus hectori, Hutton (Trans. N.Z. Inst., vol. vi., p. 110, 1874), or, perhaps more properly, Ocydromus troglodytes, Gmelin.

Porphyrio melanonotus, Temm. (Swamp-hen.)

I have to exhibit this evening a curious example of the Swamp-hen or Pukeko, lately received by me from Nelson. All the primaries in each wing are crossed near the tip with a broad band of yellowish-white; the secondaries are similarly marked, but not so sharply, and so are most of the wingcoverts, imparting a mottled appearance to the upper surface. The tail-feathers are broadly-tipped with yellowish-white, and there are a few scattered white feathers on the shoulders and on the underparts. The rest of the plumage is normal.

I take this opportunity of mentioning a Swamp-hen from the Chatham Islands described as new by Dr. Bowdler Sharpe under the name of Porphayrio chathamensis (Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., xxiii., p. 202). He gives the following diagnosis of the species: “Similis P. bello, sed gutture toto nigro, pileo eoncolore; praepectore saturate cyaneo: tibiis nigris, abdomine imo concoloribus”; and he adds, “The tints are difficult to describe, but the differences are well seen on comparison with P. bellus.”

It seemed to me highly improbable that there should be a differentiated species of this widely-spread form at the Chathams, and, although holding Dr. Sharpe's judgment in great respect, I went to the British Museum to examine the type for myself. A single glance satisfied me that the supposed new species was nothing but our ordinary Swamp-hen in an unusual, but by no means uncommon, phase of plumage. The dark head and throat, the highly-coloured breast, and dark underparts are merely individual differences of colour and have no specific value. I would undertake to pick out several birds exactly similar to Dr. Sharpe's at the close of a day's shooting in any locality where Pukekos are numerous.

The Swamp-hen of New Zealand is abundant at the Chatham Islands, and the existence there of another species of so diffuse a form seemed on the face of it most unlikely.

Diomedea regia, Buller. (Royal Albatros.)

In the Hunterian Museum at Glasgow I saw an undoubted example of this species labelled as Diomedea exulans. The Curator told me the specimen had been in the Museum many years, and that it was recorded as having come from the Cape of Good Hope.

The following passage in Cook's “Second Voyage” probably refers to this species, and, if so, it is without doubt the earliest record of the bird: “In the afternoon of the 21st [January, 1773] being in the latitude of 64° 24′ South, longitude 42° 19′ East, we saw a white Albatros with black-tipped wings.”

Diomedea melanophrys, Boie. (Mollyhawk.)

In the perfectly adult bird the bill is of an uniform gambogeyellow, shaded with orange on the hook, and with a very fine line of black around the base of both mandibles; feet delicate blue-grey, darker on the joints and interdigital webs; claws white-horn colour.

Diomedea exulans, Linn. (Wandering Albatros.)

I have already mentioned the tame Albatros which lived so long at Government House, under Mr. Gillington's assiduous care.^* But there is a still more remarkable instance of the kind, for Mr. Martin Chapman had a live one in his possession for several months, having obtained it as a nestling from the Auckland Islands. It partook freely of fat meat, and had an inordinate appetite. It became quite tame, but on being provoked would snap audibly with its mandibles.

Captain Fairchild informs me that when visiting the Brothers and Stephen's Island in June last, in perfectly calm weather, he saw at least six hundred Albatroses resting on the water, and that from the anchorage off the latter he counted as many as a hundred. He says he has noticed that during the last five years they have been getting more and more plentiful off the New Zealand coast. Prior to that he never saw more than a straggler now and then, and generally at Flat Point, about midway between Wellington and Napier.

Diomedea fuliginosa, Gmelin. (Sooty Albatros.)

Captain Fairchild states that about the end of May last or beginning of June, when off Milford Sound, in the “Hinemoa,” he saw fully a dozen Sooty Albatroses coursing about together—a most unusual circumstance.

Diomedea bulleri, Rothschild. (Buller's Albatros.)

The bird which has hitherto been called Diomedea culminata in our New Zealand lists has been pronounced by Mr. Salvin a new species, and is described in the Ibis (vol. v., 1893, p. 572) by Mr. W. Rothschild, who has been good enough to dedicate this new form to myself. The type of the species, besides a very large series of representative specimens, is in the Rothschild Museum at Tring.

The following is the diagnosis: Thalassogeronti culminato quoad colores similis, sed rostro pallidiore, culmine ad basin latiore, ad latera attingente, culmine omnino flavo; alis subtus niveis. He adds, “It differs materially from the true Thalassogeronti culminato (Gould), a species of Ridgway's genus Thalassogeron, the base of the culminicorn being

separated by an interval of soft skin from the latericorn. In this respect the present species is somewhat intermediate between Diomedea and Thalassogeron, but the base of the culminicorn, though not so well developed, distinctly spreads and has a well-defined posterior margin.”

Diomedea salvini, Rothschild. (Salvin's Albatros.)

On the same unimpeachable authority, Mr. Rothschild has renamed the bird which has hitherto been known to us as Diomedea cauta, and has referred it to the genus Thalassogeron. The type of Gould's T. cautus is in the British Museum, and the present form is distinguished thus: Similis Th. cauto, sed rostro multo minore, ad basin minus elevato, plumbescente nec albido, tarsis et digitis brevioribus quoque dignoscendus. He adds, “In coloration this species is apparently greyer on the head and neck, the dark loral mark in front of the eye being very conspicuous.”

Majaqueus sequinoctialis, Linn. (The “Stinker” of whalers.)

In a former paper (Trans. N.Z. Inst., vol. xxv., p. 62) I mentioned, on the authority of the carpenter of the “Hinemoa,” a new species of Petrel at the Auckland Islands, of which he had obtained two specimens, and which, from his account of it, I referred to Majaqueus sequinoctialis. I have now the pleasure to lay before you two specimens (male and female), lately obtained through Mr. Smyth, the well-known taxidermist at Caversham, so that the claim of this fine species to a place in our list is beyond question. The peculiar odour which is characteristic of all Petrels in life, and never entirely quits the dried skin, is very pronounced in this species, and quite justifies the name by which whalers and sailors distinguish it.

Majaqueus parkinsoni, Gray. (Black Petrel.)

Mr. J. Brough, of Nelson, in sending me a skin of this Petrel, furnishes the following notes: “This bird was killed in February on a dividing-range between the head of the Heaphy and the Big River. It was found in a hole at the roots of a huge rata, in the midst of dense forest. I am quite satisfied that this bird is the ‘Night Demon’ of our diggers. I had a live one some time ago from Collingwood, and I kept it for three months; so I had every opportunity of observing its habits. It was strictly nocturnal, and would never feed by day. On windy nights the bird would become very excited, and then it would give vent to the hysterical laugh or scream from which it takes its name of ‘Night Demon’

Œstrelata leucophrys, Hutton. (Kermadec-Island Petrel.)

Under the above name Professor Hutton has described a Petrel received from the Kermadec-Island. The description was to appear in the “Proceedings” of the Zoological Society after I left England, and a beautiful plate of it had been prepared by Keulemans. It is as well to have it on record, but it is by no means certain that it is a good species. I had previously taken Home two specimens of this Petrel, which I had received from Captain Fairchild. On submitting them to Mr. Salvin, the great authority on the Petrel family, he unhesitatingly pronounced it an aberrant form of CEstrelata neglecta, which has a great tendency to vary. At Mr. Salvin's request, I afterwards examined Professor Hutton's type at the Zoological Society's rooms, and found it was identical with the species I had submitted to him. Mr. Salvin's own verdict was, “a bad species and a bad name.”

Œstrelata nigripennis, Rothschild; Ibis, vol. v., 1893, p. 573.

A third new species pointed out by Mr. Salvin in Mr. Walter Rothschild's beautiful collection of Petrels at Tring, and named as above, comes from the Kermadec Islands. “This species belongs to the Œ. cooki (Gray) section of the genus Œstrelata, of which CE. defilippiana is also a member. It differs from all its congeners in having a short, stout, wide bill, and in the almost total absence of white on the inner webs of the outer primary beneath; the under wing-coverts, with the exception of a rather wide margin, being white, as well as the axillary feathers.”

I do not know what authority Professor Hutton had for the following reference to me in his recent communication to the Zoological Society (Proc. Z.S., 1893, p. 750), of which he has kindly sent me a copy: “Œstrelata nigripennis, Rothschild (1893) = Œ. cooki, Cheeseman (fide Buller), Trans. N.Z. Inst., vol. xxiii., p. 224; not of Gray.” I am not aware that I ever saw Mr. Cheeseman's specimen; and there is certainly no warrant for this statement in that gentleman's paper (op. cit.) on the Kermadec Petrels. Where Mr. Cheeseman sought my assistance in identifying his specimens he has mentioned the fact.

Œstrelata axillaris, Salvin; Ibis, 1893, p. 264.

This is a very interesting addition to our list of native species. In the collection of birds made by Mr. Hawkins at the Chatham Islands, there were two specimens of a Petrel allied to Œstrelata cooki, but differing in several marked characters, notably in having black axillary plumes. Mr. Salvin states, “The skins were not quite adult, but were marked

male and female. The birds had been shot on the south-east island on the 8th May, 1892.”

Œstrelata cervicalis, Salvin. (Sunday Island Petrel.)

Shortly before I went to Europe, Captain Fairchild kindly presented me with a beautiful petrel from Sunday Island, in both adult and young states. The bird appeared to me to be an entirely new species, but, as I was going Home, I decided to delay my publication of it till I could compare my specimens with the types in the British Museum. But I was too late with it, for, in the meantime, a Captain Carpenter had sent a skin to the Museum, and Mr. Salvin had named it as above. It had fallen into good hands; and my only regret in the matter was that I had wished to connect Captain Fairchild's name with this fine species.

Œstrelata affinis, Buller. (Mottled Petrel.)

Professor Hutton is in error in stating (loc. cit., p. 753) that Mr. Salvin had identified my Œstrelata affinis with Œ. gularis (Peale). Had our acknowledged authority on Petrels, Mr. Salvin, so identified my bird, I certainly should not have described and figured it as Œstrelata affinis in my second edition of “The Birds of New Zealand.” While admitting the species, Mr. Salvin suggested that it might prove to be the same as Œ. gularis, Peale (see Ibis, 1888, p. 358), and so the matter rests. Professor Hutton knew this perfectly well, because I had stated the facts in my account of the species. The type of Œstrelata gularis is in the Smithsonian Institution, and neither Mr. Salvin nor I have had an opportunity of comparing it with Œ. affinis, mihi.

Puffinus gavia, Forst. (Forster's Shearwater.)

A nestling obtained in the Hauraki Gulf, on the 8th November, was covered with very long and thick down of extremely soft texture, and dark slate-grey, on the upper parts; thick and close, and of a paler grey, on the under parts, fading to whitish on the crop and foreneck. Black feathers just beginning to appear on the wings.

Puffinus griseus, Gmelin. (Sombre Shearwater.)

A nestling obtained from one of the islands in the Hauraki Gulf, on the 18th November, was covered with thick down, long, extremely fine, and dark slate-grey in colour on the upper parts, shorter and thicker on the under parts; paler grey on the sides of the body; white on the foreneck, crop, and down the centre of the abdomen, in a broad band, to the vent.

Puffinus chlororhynchus, Lesson.

I do not know what authority Professor Hutton had for citing me thus, in a recent communication to the Zoological Society of London: “Puffinus chlororhynchus, Lesson; Buller, ‘Birds of New Zealand,’ 2nd ed., vol. ii., p. 235; P. caneipes, Cheeseman (fide Buller), Trans. N.Z. Inst., vol. xxiii., p. 226; not of Gould.” On turning to Mr. T. F. Cheeseman's paper I do not find any justification for the reference. As a matter of fact I have never seen his specimens of this bird. I described both species in my second edition of “The Birds of New Zealand” (see pages 234 and 235), and am therefore familiar with them. From the Kermadecs I received two examples of Puffinus chlororhynchus, just as I was starting for England. I took them with me, and, on submitting them to Mr. Salvin, he confirmed my identification.

Puffinus assimilis, Gould. (Allied Shearwater.)

A fledgling which I have received from Sunday Island (one of the Kermadecs) is a very pretty object. The plumage is as in the adult, except that the longer wing-coverts and inner secondaries are minutely tipped with white. But the long, fluffy, dark-grey down still adheres to the sides of the body, and as the bird squats it looks as if reposing in a luxurious nest of down, which projects an inch or more from the body, and has a charming effect.

Anas chlorotis, Gray. (Brown Duck.)

I am indebted to Captain Mair for another partial albino of this species, which was shot by him on a lagoon near the Manawatu River. It has the forehead, sides of the head, nape, and hindneck white; shoulders and mantle with white feathers intermixed with the brown, the former preponderating. Rest of the plumage normal.

A specimen which came into my possession some time ago (now in the Rothschild Museum) has the sides of the head, crown, hindhead, and upper part of neck pure white, varied only by irregular patches of brown extending from the base of the upper mandible to the eyes, and thence across the vertex. Most of the small wing-coverts, also one secondary and one primary in each wing, are pure white; of which there are also touches near the tips of the other quills. The rest of the plumage is normal, except that the margins of the dorsal feathers are somewhat lighter than in ordinary birds.

Anas superciliosa, Gmelin. (Grey Duck.)

I have already recorded some remarkable eccentricities in the breeding of the common Grey Duck. I find the following in one of my note-books: At one end of the little island of

south of New Zealand, separating it from Phalacrocorax colensoi, and saying, “This species is distinguished at once by the approximation of the dark plumage of the head beneath the throat, leaving a comparatively narrow white stripe between them.” He also makes the possession of both the white alar bar and the white dorsal spot characteristic of his new species.

In my opinion we have a good deal more to learn about the Shags inhabiting New Zealand and the adjacent islands; and I think Mr. Forbes was somewhat rash in characterizing this as a new species without further investigation.

The type of my Phalacrocorax colensoi was from the Auckland Islands, but (like all the other specimens collected there by Mr. Burton at a wrong season of the year) it was in old and faded plumage, with dingy colours. Quite recently, however, I have had an opportunity of examining a large number of skins in good plumage, collected by Mr. Henry Travers at the Auckland Islands and on Campbell Island during the last cruise of the Government gunboat “Hinemoa.” The examination of this collection has satisfied me that Mr. Forbes's “characters” are of very little value. The form and width of the white stripe down the foreneck, the presence or absence of the alar bar, and the dorsal patch of white, are inconstant features, due apparently to age or season. It will probably be found, when we become better acquainted with the species, that the bird is carunculated at one season of the year and not at another, for all the specimens brought by Mr. Travers (killed in May) are without caruncles on the face. They include adult birds of both sexes, but presenting very different phases of plumage. In three of them there is a slight coronal crest, the feathers being acuminate, and produced beyond the ordinary plumage of the head.—In some the alar bar is very conspicuous, occupying the whole of the median wing-coverts, in others it is broken and irregular; in one of the birds it is wholly absent, whilst in another the only indications of it are a few scattered white feathers among the dark wing-coverts. Of the whole series only one presents the white dorsal spot. The white throat-stripe is very uncertain in character: in some of the specimens it widens gradually from the chin to the breast, whilst in one of them it is narrow and of even width in its whole extent; in some it is constricted in the middle; and in one of them the dark plumage of the sides of the neck almost meets above the breast, the white stripe being interrupted and broken. Out of the whole lot only one gives the wing – measurement of my type—namely, 10.5in. In all the others the wing, from the flexure, measures 11in. It will be seen therefore that, even in this respect, the species is variable. The fact is that this Shag, like many others,

varies with age and season, and the only thing to be done, so far as I can see, is to make the characters of Phalacrocorax colensoi somewhat wider.

In a specimen which I have since had an opportunity of examining the dark plumage actually meets about the foreneck, there being only a few minute white feathers along the line of junction. There is a single lengthened coronal feather, evidently the vestige of a crest that had recently been shed. There is a broad alar bar of white, but no dorsal spot. This bird, which presents old and faded, or out-of-season, plumage, was obtained by Mr. Henry Travers on a former visit to the Auckland Islands, about the year 1890.

With regard, however, to another species of Shag Mr. Forbes has, I think, been more fortunate. He is probably right in considering Phalacrocorax imperialis, with which I had united the Chatham Island Shag, as being confined to the Straits of Magellan, from whence the type came. I am perfectly sure that the Chatham Island bird is distinct from Phalacrocorax carunculatus of New Zealand, and if it cannot properly be united with P. imperialis it requires a distinctive name; and in providing this Mr. Forbes could not, in my opinion, have made a better selection than he did in dedicating this handsome species to our late Governor. Lord Onslow not only took an active interest in our native birds and their preservation, but he was the first to send to Europe living specimens of Phalacrocorax carunculatus, one of which, I believe, still survives in the Zoological Society's Gardens at Regent's Park.

The beautiful example of Phalacrocorax onslowi which I have the pleasure of exhibiting to you to-night came, I presume, from the Chatham Islands, although I have no information of locality with it. The specimen is in brilliant plumage, and if you will handle it you will find the feathers of the neck as soft and yielding to the touch as the finest silk-velvet. It is a male bird in full breeding plumage, and has a superb coronal crest, the feathers composing which are from one to three inches in length, of narrow even breadth, and of the same brilliant metallic blue as the surrounding plumage. Mr. Forbes, in diagnosing the character of this species, includes “an alar bar and doubtfully a dorsal spot of white as it is absent in the specimens, though mature and crested, described and figured by Sir W. Buller.” On examining the specimen now before the meeting, you will observe that, although apparently in the most matured plumage, the neck being adorned with white hair-like filaments an inch long and the alar bar being very conspicuous, there is not the slightest indication of the dorsal spot of white. I think we may conclude that its absence is characteristic of the species.

of Œstrelata leucophrys, and, following Mr. Salvin, I then stated my belief that, instead of being a distinct species, it was only a form of Œ. neglecta. We have not had to wait long for confirmation of this view. I have the pleasure of exhibiting to-night a pair of birds kindly lent to me for that purpose by Mr. Bethune, the second engineer of the “Hinemoa.” The male bird is in the plumage of Professor Hutton's CEstrelata leucophrys, whilst the female is in the ordinary plumage of Œstrelata neglecta. They were taken by Mr. Bethune himself from their breeding-burrow on Sunday Island. Indeed, Mr. Bethune assures me that on every occasion he can remember—and he has collected many of these birds in the breeding-season—he has found the two kinds mated and breeding together. From this it might be inferred that the difference of plumage is sexual. As against this view, however, I have to exhibit a specimen in an intermediate state of plumage, the sides of the head and neck being very prettily rayed with dusky grey; also an example with a still whiter head than Mr. Bethune's male bird presents. All this goes to prove the correctness of Mr. Salvin's contention as to the variability of this species in regard to plumage. It is perfectly clear, therefore, that Œstrelata leucophrys will not stand as a species.

At the same time that I submitted my specimens of Œ. neglecta to Mr. Salvin (as stated in my former paper, page 123) I showed him also a pair in entirely dark plumage, which seemed to me to be distinct, and which, in that case, I proposed to dedicate to Captain Fairchild, who has done so much to increase our knowledge of the birds inhabiting the outlying islands. Mr. Salvin expressed a strong belief that these were referable to the same species in a dark phase of plumage, and said that nothing would satisfy him to the contrary short of finding the dark-coloured birds nesting together apart from the lighter-coloured birds, and breeding true. I felt bound to defer to the opinion of a naturalist who has made the Petrel family his special study, so I abstained from recording this supposed new form. The two specimens which I exhibit to-night seem to prove that in this case also Mr. Salvin was right in referring the bird to Œstrelata neglecta. In one of them the entire plumage is brownish-grey, darker on the upper surface, changing to brownish-black on the wings and tail; the primaries, secondaries, and tail-feathers being white in their basal portion, with white shafts, darkening towards the tip. In the other specimen the under surface is much lighter, whilst on the throat there are indications of a change to the pale-grey characteristic of ordinary specimens of Œ. neglecta. I think, therefore, we may pretty safely assume that this is the young state of that species.

opposite direction, melanism, as we are informed, being of frequent occurrence there. Now, in the whole of my experience I have met with only two examples of melanism among New Zealand birds—the subjects being Anthornis melanura and Miro albifrons—and I cannot say that in either case was it very pronounced. Of albinism, however, in this country there are endless examples. In my “Birds of New Zealand” (2nd ed.) I have recorded albinoes, more or less perfect, of thirty-three species (see enumeration on page xlii. of Introduction). I have since recorded six more in the pages of our “Transactions”—namely, Myiomoira toitoi, Halcyon vagans, Puffinus griseus, Diomedea regia, Diomedea fuliginosa, and Apteryx haasti; and I am informed by the Hon. Walter Rothschild that he has received a pure albino of Thinornis novœ-zealandiæ from the Chatham Islands.

It is, of course, the pigments in the feathers which produce the colours that we admire so much. Dr. J. S. Kingsley, in an excellent article on the subject, informs us that “a colouring matter which is called zoomelanin, and thought to be identical with coriosulphurine, seems to produce all the black and dark hues in birds, while some green colours are due to an admixture of a yellowish pigment called psittacofulvine. A really green pigment has only been found in the touracoes, —hence the name turacoverdin,—and no blue or violet pigment has yet been discovered, while red (zooerythrine) is quite common. Another red, turacin, causes the magnificent red on the wings of the Musophagidœ. There is no white pigment, but wherever that colour occurs it is due to the countless number of interstices between the molecules of the feather, the substance of the latter being colourless. Many tints—for example, blue, violet, and certain greens—are not due to the pigment, which is black-brown to yellow, but the blue results from a particular surface-structure of the feathers, so that it must disappear if the colour-producing parts be destroyed. Thus, if we hammer carefully the deep-blue feathers of a Macaw, the blue colour immediately disappears, and the injured part looks grey or brownish, according to the underlying pigment. Some green parrot-feathers, when treated in a similar way, become yellow, since this is the colour of their pigment.” We are told that the-gloss of feathers, independent of the colour itself, is the result of their surface being smooth and polished, while the metallic lustre is due to a transparent sheath which acts like a prism.

Closely connected with this subject is that of “dichromatism.” Of this colour-problem the same author says, “We are accustomed to call it dichromatism, but of its true nature and its significance in the animal economy we are quite ignorant. By this term we designate the peculiarity, in certain

species of birds, that individuals present two different styles of coloration, or ‘phases,’ presumably more or less independent of geographical distribution, present or past, or, in fact, of any apparent cause whatsoever. The difficulty in finding a plausible theory is much increased by the circumstance that there are nearly as many kinds of dichromatism as there are dichromatic species.” Among the examples put forward by him is that of the dark and white forms of Ossifraga gigantea. In this I think he is mistaken. I have, from time to time, recorded seven examples of the White Nelly from New Zealand waters. Of these only two were absolutely pure albinoes. One of them, which I obtained at Waikanae, about forty miles up our west coast, and presented to the Colonial Museum, was of snowy whiteness, without blemish of any kind, even the legs and feet being whitish, whilst the bill was yellowish horn-colour. The other, which is almost as pure, was obtained at sea, about ten miles north of Milford Sound, and presented to me by Captain Fairchild. All the other examples are more or less marked with dark feathers, scattered irregularly over the entire body. There are certainly two phases of the dark plumage—the one uniform slaty-grey, the other paler grey with whitish cheeks and throat—but these differences are in my opinion attributable to age and sex.

In addition to “dichromatism” there is what is termed “trichromatism,” where, apart from the normal form, there ares two different-coloured phases, although this phenomenon appears to want confirmation, the evidence in support of it being incomplete. If the theory be true it may help to explain the formation of new species,—the original stock dying out in the struggle for existence, and the dichromatic phases becoming stereotyped into two invariable forms or species, separated geographically but still identical in structure. Dr. Kingsley mentions an example brought forward by Mr. Ridgway, that of the Scarlet and the White Ibises (Guara-rubra, and G. alba), of which he remarks that they are now so different in colour that probably no one would deny their specific distinction, though structurally so alike that a specimen of the white one dyed scarlet would be indistinguishable from G. rubra; and he concludes with this observation: “The question which finally impresses itself upon the inquirer, in view of the above facts, is this: Are not the two or three phases of dichromatic or trichromatic species ‘incipient species,’ the final state of which will be that of the White and the Scarlet Ibises? The subject is one of the most perplexing, and consequently most interesting, questions in modern ornithology. It shows what we know, and particularly what we do not know; it shows that ornithology means more than a mere description and naming of birds; that one of its aims is to contribute to

the solution of the great problem of the age—‘the origin of species.’”

There is another point on which I should like to say a word before exhibiting the specimens. I have recorded only five perfect albinoes of Apteryx oweni and one case of partial albinism.^* It will be seen therefore that this condition of plumage is a rarity. I do not hesitate to say, however, that in a few years' time a specimen of the Grey Kiwi in the ordinary plumage will be as rare in New Zealand as the abnormal example I am presenting to you to-night; and I will tell you why. Not many years ago this species existed in great abundance in certain parts of the South Island. It was of course to be expected that a bird incapable of flight and devoid of any means of self-defence would diminish in numbers as the country became settled, and dogs and cats, running wild, spread themselves over the interior; but a new factor has come into existence which threatens the speedy extermination of not only Apteryx oweni but of many other indigenous forms. I refer to the introduction, at the instance of a former Government, of polecats, stoats, and weasels. From a naturalist's point of view, I regard this act in the light of a crime. The vermin that every farmer in the Old Country was trying to extirpate as an unmitigated evil our wise Government bought up by the hundred and imported into this country, in the vain hope that these “carnivorous beasts” would change their habits and take to a rabbit diet, to the exclusion of everything else! No doubt, to abate the rabbit-nuisance, which, was causing widespread loss and even ruin to our sheepfarmers in many parts of the country, was a most desirable object. But it is a question whether, in the introduction of polecats, stoats, and weasels, the Government was not establishing, even from the farmers' point of view, a still greater evil. As shipment after shipment of this vermin from over the water arrived in New Zealand, I raised my voice in protest against so insane a policy, and so did others—notably Professor Newton of Cambridge—but all to no purpose. The imported animals were turned loose north and south, and have now become firmly acclimatized in a country where the conditions of life are so favourable to their existence that no power on earth will ever dislodge them. The Wairarapa was the principal seat of the rabbit-plague in this provincial district; so the destroyers, of whom so much was expected, were liberated there. But they did not stay long with the rabbits. Swarming over the dividing-range, and crossing in summer the snow-capped ridges of the Ruahine, they descended upon the fertile lands of the west coast, where they are now fairly established,

and where there are practically no rabbits for them to prey upon. They are making themselves felt, however, in other respects. The rabbits devastated the pastures, but they left the sheep alone. Not so with these “Government immigrants.” One farmer at Kereru complains that in a single night this season he lost forty lambs, each exhibiting a small punctured wound, betraying the depredator. My sons had their hen-roost visited at night, and a brood of valuable fowls-destroyed. The breeding of turkeys was at one time a profitable industry in these districts, the hen-birds forming their nests in the scrub and along the outer edges of the bush; but, with these marauders abroad, a turkey has now very little chance of bringing out a brood. Formerly, the Woodhen (Ocydromus greyi) was very abundant in the Horowhenua and Manawatu districts, its loud and not unmusical whistle being heard on all hands as the snades of evening deepened, into the gloom of night. Now all this is changed. The responsive cries of the Woodhen are seldom heard, and there is nothing to break the stillness of the night but the call of the Morepork keeping his vigils. The diminution in numbers of our introduced game—Pheasants and Californian Quail—must, I think, be attributed to the same cause.

Mr. Jonathan Brough, writing to me from the Pelorus, says, “I have now been camped in these woods for about a month—up one of the tributaries of the Pelorus River known as Wakamarina. I am camped a long way up the creek, at a place where I used to collect birds some years ago. In those days I found this a good hunting-ground; a great number of species could be then obtained in this locality; but now all this is changed. I seldom see or hear any birds worth collecting. The stoats and weasels have done their work. For three weeks I was camped right up amongst the mountains and in the heart of the bush, and I never saw a single Woodhen, nor did I ever hear one. I heard one Kiwi calling, and I found one dead on the ground with its head and neck mutilated by the stoats. I do not now see or hear any Saddlebacks, or Pigeons, or Wrens, all of which were plentiful enough in this place a few years ago. The Blue Duck used, to be fairly abundant in the creek, and they are now nearly extinct. This time I have seen only one pair. They had a brood of young ones, so I felt that I could not shoot them. They had six young ones when I first saw them. I have an opportunity of seeing them in the creek every day, and it is very interesting to watch them. But the young ones are getting fewer every week, and now there are only three left I attribute this also to the stoats, which are very numerous about here. Collecting specimens of natural history in this

part of the country is a thing of the past, for the stoats and weasels have swept away everything.”

An old settler at Wanganui, from whom I have received many specimens in the past, writes me: “Weasels have destroyed all game, and I think Wekas will share the same fate. I never see any. I have killed seventeen weasels on my place in three months; and of the many bad things introduced I think this the worst.” And Mr. William Smyth, the well-known collector, writing to me from Dunedin, says, “I got only a few Wekas from Waimate last winter. They have practically disappeared from the Otago country.”

Even the country babies appear to be scarcely safe, for a paragraph has appeared in one of the newspapers stating that a child playing on the open common at Palmerston North was attacked by a pack of four stoats, and narrowly escaped serious injury.^* Whether this report was true or not I cannot say, but it is just what is likely to happen when the bloodthirsty animals become numerous enough. Side by side with this wicked introduction into our fair country of animal pests we have the reckless—and, to my mind, ignorant—practice on our sheep-farms of poisoning hawks. There can be no doubt that the Harrier (Circus gouldi) does occasionally attack weakly lambs, tearing out their eyes and causing their death. So, for that matter, does the large Seagull (Larus dominicanus). But it is much easier for a hawk to attack and prey on a young rabbit than on a lamb; and, as a matter of fact, we owe to this cause that the rabbit, although it became established on the sandhills of the west coast of this province some twenty years ago, has never been able to sweep the country as it has done elsewhere. The conditions for hunting it on the open sandhills are favourable to the Harrier, and the bird has effectually kept the rabbit-nuisance under. I have always said that it is a dangerous thing to disturb the balance of nature; and I am persuaded that on our west coast at any rate the farmers who sometimes poison with strychnine twenty or more hawks in a week do themselves far more harm than good. But that is an evil of far less magnitude than the one we have been discussing—the introduction of polecats, stoats, and weasels. The Minister who, in the excess of his ignorant zeal, authorised this public expenditure will probably be remembered in the colony long after we are dead and gone.^†

It is melancholy to reflect that the New Zealand avifauna, which had already, from a variety of adverse causes, become endangered, should be thus subjected to an overwhelming influence for evil. But for this unfortunate introduction there would have been some hope of many of the species being permanently preserved. Indeed, it had become a subject of remark that such birds as the Woodhen, the Swamp-hen, and the Banded Rail were becoming more numerous in all the cultivated districts, the conditions of existence being more favourable. To show you that I am not raising an unnecessary wail over the birds that are vanishing, I will quote a passage from Professor Newton's admirable article on “Birds” (Enc. Brit., p. 742):—

“As a whole, the avifauna of New Zealand must be regarded as one of the most interesting and instructive in the world, and the inevitable doom which is awaiting its surviving members cannot but excite a lively regret in the minds of all ornithologists. This regret is quite apart from any question of sentiment; if it were otherwise, it could not be defended against that sentiment which prompts our colonial fellow-subjects indiscriminately to stock their fields and forests not only with the species of their Mother-country, but with all the fowls of heaven, whencesoever they can be procured. The regret we express arises from the thought that, just as we lament our ignorance of the species which in various lands have been extirpated by our forefathers, so our posterity will want to know much more of the present ornis of New Zealand than we can possibly record; for no one nowadays can pretend to predict the scope of investigation which will be required, and required in vain, by naturalists in that future

when New Zealand may be one of the great nations of the earth.”

Without further preface I shall invite your attention to the three very interesting specimens on the table, about each of which I have a few remarks to offer.

1. Nestor meridionalis, Gmelin. (Kaka.)

Mr. Gould, in the supplement to his superb work on “The Birds of Australia,” figures and describes several species from New Zealand. Among these there is the Prince of Essling's Parrot (Nestor esslingii, De Souance), upon which he remarks as follows:—

“A single specimen only of this magnificent Parrot has come under my notice; and this example is perhaps the only one that has yet been sent to Europe. It formerly formed part of the collection of the Prince d'Essling of Paris, but now graces the National Museum of Great Britain. It is in a most perfect state of preservation, and is, without exception, one of the finest species not only of its genus, but of the great family of Parrots. The native country of this bird is supposed to be New Zealand; but I, as well as M. de Souance, have failed to learn anything definite on this point. In size it even exceeds the great Kaka (Nestor meridionalis), which it resembles in the form of the beak, while in its general colouring it closely assimilates to the Nestor productus; in some features of its plumage, however, it differs from both. In both those species the tail-feathers are strongly toothed on the under surface with red; and in the N. esslingii no such marks occur, the toothing on the inner webs of the primaries is not so clear and well defined, and the light-coloured interspaces are much freckled with brown.”

Dr. Finsch, on the other hand, states in his “Monograph of Parrots” that Nestor esslingii is in size and general colour the same as Nestor meridionalis, but “has the breast ashgrey, with brown terminal margins, and a broad yellowish-white transverse band straight across the belly.” He quotes De Souance to the effect that the red marks on the inner vane of the quills and tail-feathers are precisely as in Nestor meridionalis.

As far back as 1870 I expressed my belief that this was only an accidental variety of our common Nestor meridionalis; and a subsequent examination of the specimen in the British Museum, on my first visit to England, confirmed this view. At this time the specimen was exhibited, mounte with others of the same genus, in a plate-glass show-case in one of the main galleries. But Dr. Bowdler Sharpe, the able Curator in charge of the collection of birds, has had them carefully unmounted and reduced to the condition of cabinet skins, as

In 1867 I published in the “Zoologist,” page 850, the description of a new species, Hemideina megacephala, Buller, distinguished by its enormous head.

In 1869 ten more names were added to the group, namely: Hemideina producta (afterwards referred by Professor Hutton to H. thoracica),^* H. capitolina, H. figurata, H. abbreviata, H. tibialis, Ceuthophilus (?) lanceolatus, Macropathus filifer, M. fascifer, and M. altus (White, Cat. Locustidae); also Hadenoecus edwardsii (Scudder, Proc. Boston Soc. of Nat. Hist., xii., p. 408).

In 1870 I communicated a paper to this Society (Trans. N.Z. Inst., vol. iii., pp. 34–37) in which I republished my account of Hemideina megacephala, and described a new species under the name of Deinacrida rugosa, Buller (with figures of both).

In 1880 Mr. Colenso described (Trans. N.Z. Inst., vol. xiv., p. 278), under the name of Hemideina gigantea, “a species bigger in every way than D. heteracantha,” adding, “it is also much more spiny, and differs greatly in colours,” &c. He at the same time described (tom, cit., p. 240) another species, Hemideina speluncae, giving as its habitat “dark underground caves near the head of the Manawatu River, in the Forty-mile Bush.”

Respecting the first-named of these Mr. Colenso gave some very interesting historical particulars.

An admirable figure of Deinacrida heteracantha appeared in the “Zoology of the ‘Erebus’ and ‘Terror,’” part “Insects,” p. 24, pl. 5, fig. i.; and in 1868 Professor Hochstetter published a good figure in outline (“New Zealand,” p. 170), with a brief and somewhat inaccurate account of the insect, concluding with this remark: “Despite its hideous looks it is perfectly harmless.”

Mr. Colenso stated in 1880 (l.c., p. 280) that his unique specimen of Hemideina gigantea had then been forty-two years in spirits with its colours unaltered, the liquid in the glass bottle containing it being still clear and pure. To