Melland. — On Notornis niantclli. 297 



shaken by the fact that the 1880 (or 1879) takahe was caught, 

 as I said before, by a single rabbiter, and not by a party (this 

 man's name was " Bob Scott ; " the name of Mr. Park's assist- 

 ant is not given) ; and, secondly, by the very strong suspicion 

 that the booming note the man had so often heard was simply 

 that of the bittern, a bird far from unconnnon in the Mararoa 

 district. 



Mr. Park then proceeds to sum up our knowledge of the 

 takahe by adding his experiences to the list of captured 

 specimens, as if the evidence was all of the same value. He 

 then quotes Mr. Docherty, who recently informed the 

 Hon. Mr. Mantell that he had seen a Notonils at Dusky 

 Sound. " He said he came upon it in the bush close to the 

 beach, and that it flew some distance on to the water, and 

 then made back to the shore." By quoting this remarkable 

 statement without a word of conunent Mr. Park lays him- 

 self open to the suspicion of believing the Notornis to be a 

 bird capable of sustained flight. Without going into the 

 anatomical aspect of the question, I would simply point out 

 that both the takahes wdiose capture is recorded in detail 

 were run down by dogs after a long chase, and both could 

 have escaped had they possessed the power of flight. 



Mr. Park confidently concludes with the remark, " I think 

 I have said enough to show that the Notornis still exists in the 

 lonely sounds and mountain-recesses of Western Otago." 



I w'ould rather say that the article, by its whole tone — so 

 alien from the cautious true scientific spirit — onh- shows how 

 easy it is for some men to ])rove to their own satisfaction 

 anything they may strongly wish to believe. The mere fact 

 that the indefatigable Mr. Eeischek has been industriously 

 searching for the takahe in the very district mentioned for 

 many months without success might have given Mr. Park 

 some doubt as to the truth of his theory. So might Mr. Man- 

 tell's account of the first takahe, caught at Kesolution Island. 

 This bird was kept alive on board ship for three or four days, 

 and is said to have " uttered loud screams," but no mention is 

 made of anything of the nature of a booming note. This is, 

 of course, merely negative evidence, though not, I think, 

 without some value. 



It is usually very difficult to prove a negative, but in this 

 case the matter is simplified by the ease with which we can 

 prove a contradictory atfirmative. 



On the occasion when Mr. Park almost saw the author of 

 the booming note in its dusting-hole, he regretted that he had 

 not with him " a sharp dog," which could " easily have 

 caught it." 



It certainly is a matter for regret, because the dog would 

 have surprised its master by bringii:ig him a kakapo, and 



