(371 ) 



iliscnssion about its validity as a species, bnt the majority of those writer.s who 

 formerly denied its validity now admit that it is specifically distinct from -I. 

 australis australis. It is true that the North Island specimens can always he 

 distinguished from the true ^1. australis by their harder, more bristly tips to the 

 feathers of the ujiperside, or at least of the neck. Thus the mere touching of 

 the neck-feathers, stroking the neck upwards, is generally sufficient for discriminating 

 between the two forms. In addition to this peculiarity the southern birds are 

 lighter and often larger. It is therefore wrong to unite the two forms ; but the 

 differences being so slight that they are not always very apparent, and the two 

 being representative forms on two not very distant islands, it is more natural to 

 regard them as subspecies than as species. Their anatomy and habits are also 

 (jnite similar. 



The original description of the North Island Kiwi is as follows : — 



"ON THE GENUS APTERYX. BY A. D. BARTLETT. 

 (" Aves, PI. XXX, XXXI.) 



" In calling the attention of the Meeting this evening to the large collection 

 of sj)ecimens of the genus Apteryx on the table, I beg to state that I have been 

 led to make a careful e.xamination of all the individuals I could find in the 

 l^olli'ctions of the British Museum, the Museum of the Zoological Society, the 

 Royal (College of Surgeons, and elsewhere, in consequence of an Apteryx belonging 

 to Dr. Mantell having been placed in my hands by that gentleman a few days 

 since, which ajipeared to me to differ from all that I had before seen. As a careful 

 comjiarison of this bird with the specimens in the collections before mentioned fully 

 justitied me in considering it as a distinct species, I was about to describe it as a 

 new one ; but, most fortunately, I heard that the original specimen figured and 

 described by Dr. Shaw (to which he applied the name Apteryx Australis) was in 

 the collection of the Earl of Derby at Knowsley. It is with much pleasure I have 

 to acknowledge the kindness of his lordship in honouring me with the loan of 

 this bird, which has enabled me to identify the large Apteryx placed in my hands 

 by Dr. Mantell as belonging to this species, and also to determine most satisfactorily 

 the distinctive characters of the common species, which is considerably smaller, 

 and lo which the name of Apteryx Australis has long been erroneously ajijilied. 

 This bird differs from the original Apteryx Australis of Dr. Shaw in its smaller 

 size, its darker and more rufous colour, its longer tarsus which is scntulated in 

 front, its shorter toes and claws, which are dark horn-coloured, its smaller wings, 

 which have much stronger and thicker quills, and also in having long straggling 

 hairs on the face. I may, however, remark, that although individuals of this 

 species differ much in size, depending probably on age, se.x, etc., I have found 

 no e-Kcejition to the distinctive characters above given. I therefore propose? the 

 name of Apten/x Mantdli for this smaller and more common species, — a humble 

 effort to commemorate the exertions of Walter Mantell, Esq., to whom we 

 are indebted for so many valuable discoveries in the natural history of New 

 Zealand. 



" I subjoin a short description of the two species, together with figures of their 

 legs and wings, in order that they may be more readily distinguished. 



