224 Transactions. — Zoology. 



interest, which have been handed to me for identification by 

 Mr. A. Hamilton. As I am unable to refer them with cer- 

 tainty to any of the hitherto described species, I append a 

 brief description of each, with measurements. 



The terminology and the system of measurement employed 

 are those used in my paper " On the Cranial Osteology, Clas- 

 sification, and Phylogeny of the Dinormthida," now in course 

 of publication in the Transactions of the Zoological Society 

 of London. '■'■ 



Skull No. 1. — This is undoubtedly a skull of some species 

 of Paclujornis, differing from P. ele2:)liantoinLS mainly in its 

 greater size. It has the characteristic vaulted skull, wide 

 squamosal region, prominent mammillar tuberosities, widely- 

 separated optic foramina, large temporal fossae, narrow, 

 pointed beak, and stout, boldly-curved maxillo-jugal arch. 

 The supra-occipital region is very prominent, and the pos- 

 terior lambdoidal ridge strongly curved backwards. It is 

 about 10 per cent, larger in nearly all dimensions than P. 

 elephantopiis, from which I have little doubt that it is spe- 

 cifically distinct. As P. immanis, Lyd., at present known 

 only by leg-bones, differs from P. elepliantopus in its greater 

 dimensions, I think the present specimen may be referred pro- 

 visionally to that species. 



The whole frontal region is marked with shallow feather- 

 pits, and a somewhat rhomboidal area forming the roof of the 

 posterior olfactory region is strongly marked with irregular, 

 probably venous, depressions, which, as Mr. Hamilton sug- 

 gests, may x^ossibly indicate the possession of a caruncle by 

 this species. 



Skull No. 2. — This specimen consists of the cranium only. 

 It has the general characters of Pachyornis, but is about IQ 

 per cent, smaller in nearly all dimensions, and is further 

 remarkable for the fact that the wide temporal fossae are 

 hardly produced on to the roof of the skull, so that what I 

 have called the temporal index (see below) is only about 

 100:104, instead of 100:130-110, as in P. elcpliantopus. In 

 this respect, therefore, the skull resembles that of Emens, but 

 the great width of the temporal fossa, the prominent mammillar 

 tuberosities, and the distance between the optic foramina, 

 incline me to place it under Pachyornis. Unfortunately, the 

 premaxilla, maxillo-jugal arch, and mandible are absent, and 

 without them it is impossible to determine the genus with 

 certainty. I propose to call it provisionally Pachyornis, 

 species [i. 



Skull No. 3. — In this case also the cranium alone is pre- 

 sent, and, as will be seen from the table of measurements, is 



* See Proc. Zool. Soc, 14th February, 1893. 



