('uLK.NSu. — U)l a How Splreuoduli. 119 



Being thus aided for my task, I was enabled to go to work, 

 and to examine and study the few bones I had obtained ; and hi 

 this short paper I give you the result. 



As I said at the beginning, the bones, unfortunately, were 

 few. The total number of whole bones and pieces was but 

 forty-three, several being small chippy portions of the skull 

 that had separated at their sutures ; fortunately the jaws with 

 their teeth were among them, and nearly entire. Then, as 

 regards their bulk, a wine-glass would have contained them 

 all. Their complete list, as far as I have been able to make 

 them out (through shortness of time), will run as follow : — 



1. Of the Head: 6 bones, containing the teeth, viz.: — 2 

 maxillary, 2 mandibles, and 2 maxillary-palatal; also 1 splenial, 

 and 1 artiadar (belonging to one of the mandibles), 1 os quad- 

 ratum, and 1, the basal portion of the skull, with exoccipital and 

 other bones attached; with a few small, thin, chip-like bones 

 and fragments. 



2. Of the Fore-limb; 1 humerus, 1 ulna (whole), and 1 radius 

 (part only). 



3. Of the Vertebra: 9 joints. 



4. Of the Body : 8 ribs (some broken), and the pair of pelvis 

 bones. 



There was also among them what appears to be the tarsus 

 of some small bird, but broken. 



I will now give a more particular description of those bones, 

 showing where I have observed them to differ from those of 

 S. punctatum, as given by Dr. Giinther. 



Before, however, that I describe its teeth, I should observe 

 that this animal, like 5. punctatum and a few others, is a true 

 Acrodont ; that is, it has no proper teeth set into proper 

 (alveolar) sockets like those of other animals ; but its teeth are 

 composed of little bony points, arising from the bone of the jaw 

 itself," and are of various shapes and sizes, so that it is difficult 

 sometimes to decide whether a tooth or a projection should be 

 considered as one or as three, from the number of its sharp, 



*To this, I may be permitted to add in a note, that I was the first to 

 point out this curious novelty ; and this I did first to Dr. Dieffenbach (in 

 1841), from my living specimen, which I had and kept alive for several 

 months. Dr. Dieffenbach then resided at Paihia, Bay of Islands, very near 

 me, and visited me frequently ; Dr. Dieffenbach, also, having at that time 

 received from me the very specimen which Dr. Giinther has stated in his 

 admirable Memoir as being the first one taken to England, and deposited by 

 Dr. Dieffenbach in the British Museum. (This is extracted by Dr. Giinther 

 from Dr. Dieffenbach's early work on New Zealand, vol. ii., p. 205, in which 

 work, however, my quondam friend omitted to mention how and when he 

 received it, as well as several other similar matters relating to specimens of 

 New Zealand natural history, the Maori language, customs, etc., etc. Dr. 

 Dieffenbach never visited the East Coast of the North Island.) 



