te ee 
209 
conclusions are greatly at variance with our own, for the present. distri- 
bution of the avifauna might not, and probably did not, go very far back 
in point of time. Furthermore, birds being far more capable of migra- 
tion than plants or invertebrate animals, their distribution could not be 
considered as having as much weight in the evidence as that of the latter. 
Unfortunately, these investigators did not extend their observations 
beyond this Archipelago, so that we do not know what their views would 
have been on this broader problem. 
However, it should be stated that the conclusions given above can only 
be tentative until more is known of the ancient faunas and flora of these 
Islands and until further study of a comparative nature of the present 
fauna and flora of China, Japan, Formosa, and the Philippines has been 
undertaken. It should be stated that Mr. Merrill is now carrying on 
this work on the flora, and the results of his investigations will be 
awaited with great interest by all naturalists. 
In further support of Wallace’s view should be mentioned the occur- 
rence reported, and presumably in the Miocene of Mindanao, of remains 
of Hlephas (Stegodon) recently identified by Professor Osborn, of the 
American Museum of Natural History. ‘This Stegodon formerly ranged 
all through southern Asia and is the ancestor of Hlephas indicus, the 
living elephant of India. 
