[ 465 ] 
XII. On the Dermal and Visceral Structures of the Kagu, Sun-bittern, and Boatbill. 
By James Moris, W.D., PLS., £.G.S., &c., Prosector to the Zoological Society. 
Read May 9th, 1867. 
[Puates LVI. and LVII.] 
Prefatory Observations. 
THE order Gralla, as at present’ defined, contains several forms which it has puzzled 
the ornithologist and the comparative anatomist to assign clearly to any one of its 
families. The three species which I shall more particularly refer to, the Kagu (Rhino- 
chetus jubatus), the Sun-bittern? (Hurypyga helias), and the Boatbill (Cancroma 
cochlearia), are among those somewhat indefinite types. They may, indeed, have 
some predominant points assimilating them to one more than another group; but these 
are curiously masked and considerably interwoven with features leaning differently. 
My colleague, Mr. A. D. Bartlett, shrewdly studying the resemblances offered by 
external characters and habits, arrived at the conclusion (P. Z. 8. 1862, p. 218) that 
Rhinochetus is more closely allied to Eurypyga than to any other bird, while he admitted 
the singular combination of other general and family characters in the general appear- 
ance of the former. 
Since then my friend Mr. W. K. Parker, in an interesting little article “On the 
Osteology of the Kagu (Rhinochetus jubatus)” in our Proceedings for 1864, p. 70°, ex- 
emplifies its multiple type and relationships in a tabular view. Therein he places 
Rhinochetus, Eurypyga, and Psophia on the same level; whilst each, as it were, is 
‘ J allude of course to the date when this communication was read. About the same period Professor Huxley’s 
now almost classic paper “ On the Classification of Birds” was brought before the notice of our Society, and 
not long afterwards published. His new terms and divisions I have not adopted, simply because it would 
have involved my here and there altering the text without obvious advantage to the general tenor of my 
conclusions. 
* The name of Sun-bird, and not Sun-bittern, has been given to Eurypyga helias (Pall.) in the “ List of 
Vertebrated Animals living in the Society’s Gardens” for 1866. As signifying that it is not a true Bittern, 
this name is admissible and possibly may have advantages. I prefer, however, to retain the older and better- 
known name. 
* A more extended memoir, based on the above partial abstract, and bearing the same title, has since 
appeared in our Transactions, 1868, vol. vi. p. 501, illustrated by two plates of the skeleton. Whilst 
Mr. Parker in it has extensively compared the bones with those of other ‘‘Geranomorphs” of Huxley, and 
also very extensively homologized certain bones of the face with those of Reptiles, Mammals, and ornithic 
forms generally, he has departed little, if at all, from the taxonomic conclusions arrived at in his earlier shorter 
paper. 
VOL. VIL.—PART vi. June, 1871. 3) TH 
