913 Shufbldt, Contribution* to Avian Paleontology, 33 



\..i \ \ \ 



i 



received ia in a imall pasteboard box, marked on top "Birds. 

 Meleagris, op. nov. \. J, Meleagrops celer (type)." The speci- 

 men is the imperfect, proximal moiety of the left tarso metatarsus 

 of b rather targe bird. Ii is thoroughly Fossilized, earth-brown in 

 color, with the free borders of the proximal end considerably worn 

 off. < m its postero-external aspect, written in ink, are the words 

 " .1/. celer. On the cork of the vial containing the end of the 

 humerus, the initials G. B. G. are, withoul doubt, those of Dr. 

 George Bird Grinnell; and, as he there states that the specimen 

 w.i collected al G. Ranch, Colorado, it is clear that the locality 

 given (Oregon) in the Ias1 edition of the A. o. [J, ( !heck-List is in- 

 correct. Besides, Marsh states in Ins article that the fossil was 

 from Colorado; and this is further evidenced in the fact that the 

 fragment is pure while, which is so characteristic of such Fossils 

 found in the White River region of < Colorado. 



M\ comparisons of Marsh's specimens of his alleged fossil I urkeys 

 with the corresponding bones of the skeleton in the case of Meleagris 

 gallopavo sUveatru, were mosl critical and thorough. Everything 



to make BUCh comparisons complete were al my disposal for several 

 hours, and no pains were spared lo do (lie siihjecl justice. 



Marsh, in his article, evidently attached but little or no impor- 

 tance to the "other fragments" which were found With those upon 

 which he based his descriptions.; and from this, fact il is fair to 



presume thai they must, indeed, have been very fragmentary. 



It has been unfortunate for science that Professor Marsh in his 

 life time was enabled to pay such scant attention to the osteology 

 of existing birds; his weakness in this particular is evidenced in 

 mmi a few places, throughoul his writings, as I have elsewhere 



pointed OUt. 1 



1 Mir ii (i <■ Odontomithee, "The Rtruthious characters, teen In Hi per' 

 ■houl i probablj be regarded at evidence of real affinity, and In this case 

 //. ptromit would be essentlaU] a carnivorous, swimming Ostrlcb " (I) 



Shufeldt, R. \V. On the Afflnitiei o/ Hi perorm Nature, Vol, 13, So, 1104, 

 London, December 25, 1890, p, 176, Review of Professor D'Arcy Thompson's 

 paper showing the trui afflnitli of Hi perorm with the Colymbidm, and not with 

 the Ostriches, Bee also Bhufeldt's "Comparative Osteologlcal Notes on the 



Extinct Bird Iohthy "(Jour \ and Phys., Vol \\vii, N. 8., Vol. VII 



mi \n 2, Lond Apr. 1893, pp 330 142) where it is shown that Marsh 

 entirelj overlooked the relationships exl ling between Tchthyornii and Rhynchop . 

 and for the rea on that he was no1 familiar with the skeleton In the latti 

 ■ ■I birds, 



