Hill. — On a Discovery of Fossil Moa-feathers. 319i 



having found in it many varieties of fossil leaves, and it was 

 then referred to by nie as corresponding to the Kidnappers 

 conglomerate and pumice-beds, which, in my opinion, form the 

 youngest of the pliocene deposits in this district. 



Professor Hutton, in vol. iv. of the " Transactions," gives a 

 description and an illustration of a moa-feather, and in several 

 particulars two of the feathers found by me in the above beds 

 agree with the description referred to. Unfortunately, the top 

 ends of two of the best specimens are missing. The feathers 

 are about 4in. long, and the barbs are unconnected, as 

 in the case of struthious birds. The barbules can be seen, but 

 there are no other traces of bifurcations, nor is there any 

 accessory plume, as in the case of many specimens of moa- 

 feathers now known. The feathers differ from any of the 

 illustrations in the ' ' Transactions ' ' in their being broader, in the 

 basal part of the shaft being thicker, and possibly in the 

 absence of barbs at the basal end, these not showing at the 

 point where the shaft is broadest. 



The other feather which I have is not such a perfect 

 specimen as the above, and it appears to be of a different kind. 

 It is about 2^in. in length, and is bent not unlike the small 

 side-feathers to be seen in the Prince of Wales plume. 



I do not think there can be any doubt as to the feathers 

 here described having once belonged to a moa, and if such be 

 the case it will place the history of that bird much further 

 back in geological time than has hitherto been recognised. 

 No scientific question has been more sturdily discussed in our 

 "Transactions" and elsewhere than the date of the disappear- 

 ance of the moa in New Zealand, one party maintaining that the 

 moa has been so long extinct that no reliable traditions have been 

 handed down, whilst yet another party supports the view that 

 the moa became extinct in comparatively recent times. The 

 case, however, is yet undecided, and we must wait for further 

 evidence on this interesting subject before a final judgment 

 can be entered. But in the long discussion which has been 

 carried on no one, as far as I am aware, has hitherto produced 

 any evidence likely to call in question the statement put forth 

 by the late Sir Julius von Haast to the effect that " different 

 species of Dinornis or moa began to appear and flourish in the 

 post-pliocene period of New Zealand."''' The generalisation 

 made by Sir Julius was based upon a wide experience and 

 knowledge of the remains of moas found throughout the 

 country, but it would seem to have been made without due 

 consideration as to what the future testimony of the rocks 

 might be on the subject. 



The discovery of fossil feathers in pliocene beds offers suffi- 



* See " Trans. N.Z. lust.," vol. iv., p. 106. 



