170 ME. W. K. PAKKEE ON THE STRUCTURE AND 



loose mannei' in which the nasal processes of the intermaxillaries fit upon the top of 



the ethmoid anteriorly, are the Gallinacea; ; the Rails are very different in this respect. 



The skull of the Gallinule's chick is very instructive, as showing the typical condition of 



these parts ; and with this little bird the extinct gigantic form agrees in all essentials. 



In the young Gallinule (about five weeks old) the nasal processes of the intermaxillaries 



are already quite confluent ; and both together form a relatively large bar of bone, the 



exact counterpart of that of the gigantic form. But the whole of this bar is not to be 



seen from above, for it enters, almost undiminished in size, beneath the broad posterior 



part of the nasals, which form the front half of the superorbital region, from side to 



side. These broad plates still further hide the nasal part of the intermaxillary by each 



sending forwards a rounded lobe, the two lobes thus increasing the roof over this bar. 



The upper view of the skull of the Great Notornis shows this hiding of the posterior part 



of the intermaxillary, but not to the same degree ; indeed this structure may be seen in 



many water-birds, e. g. the " Lamellirostres," especially the Palamedea and the Mute 



Swan ; but in these the nasal part of the intermaxillaries is very slender, and the mesial 



suture is persistent. 



Palapteryx. 



The same valuable paper (plates 54 & 55, p. 360) contains figures and descriptions of 

 the remains of some true struthious birds, under the generic term Palapteryx. I must 

 refer the reader to the paper itself for the descriptions, reminding him that the nomen- 

 clature of the bony parts is very different from that which I am in the habit of using ; 

 €. g. Professor Owen's " mastoid " is my squamosal ; his squamosal is here called " qua- 

 drato-jugal," and his " tympanic " " os quadratum," besides several others. I have 

 carefully examined the original specimens, as well as the drawings in Professor 

 Owen's paper, and I am quite of opinion that the somewhat unfortunate generic term 

 Palapteryx — which would seem to indicate that this is the more generalized and ancient 

 form of Apteryx- — has been very properly dropped, as the birds were evidently, to all 

 intents and purposes, only specifically distinct from the largest forms of Dinornis. 



The beautiful photographs of I), robustus show that the solid part of the intermaxil- 

 lary was unusually long and large, and that it was more decurved than is usual in the 

 group ; yet the differences between these extinct congeners of the Emu were not much 

 greater than may be seen between Dromceus irroratus and P. Novce Hollandioe. The 

 profile figure of Palapteryx geran'dides'\ shows the intermaxillary too far removed from 

 the skull, and thus giving the appearance of a longer head than that bird really pos- 

 sessed (see plate 54, fig. 1, op. dt.). The height and strength of the upper and lower 

 jaws of this bird are somewhat remarkable for one of the " Struthionidae," but Dromceus 

 irroratus connects it with the feebler-faced D. Novce Hollandioe. The basal figure (fig. 3) 

 beautifully displays the characters of the true Dinornis ; and there is a remnant of the 

 pituitary space, showing that the basitemporals were lateral, as in all the group. Like 

 Pinornis robustus, the basisphenoidal " rostrum " swells out as it passes forwards ; thus 

 showing the relationship to the African type, which, as I have already related, is also 



