340 PROFESSOR OWEN ON THE GENUS DINORNIS. 
prominence (32), measuring 7 lines across the back or lower part and 9 lines across the 
upper border. The length of the symphysis is ] inch 3 lines. The upper border of 
the dentary swells outward, increasing in depth as it approaches the symphysis, the 
surface of which is perforated by the numerous nutritious vessels of the matrix of the 
horny beak, the thinner hind part of the dentary being smooth. The alveolar border 
(Pl. LIV. fig. 4, b) is impressed by a shallow groove. 
The premaxillary (Pls. LIT. & LIV. fig. 1, 22) is very broad, depressed, with the usual 
triradiate division posteriorly ; the upper ray (PI. LIII. fig. 1, 22") is a backward con- 
tinuation of the middle raised part of the body of the bone, which expands transversely 
and becomes flattened from above downwards as it extends backward to rest upon the 
nasal fossa (15); the sides of this process, before it quits the body of the bone, are 
concave, as it were pinched in; the least breadth of the upper part of the process is 
6 lines. The maxillary processes (22”) are short; both, however, are broken: the 
breadth of the palatal part of the premaxillary (PI. LIV. fig. 1) is 3 inches; it has a 
small posterior emargination, on the under surface of which is a canal leading forward 
into the bone: on the upper surface are three similar orifices, also leading forwards. 
The upper or nasal surface of the plate (22") of the premaxillary shows a shallow 
posterior excavation for the support of the palatal part of the maxillary. The alveolar 
borders of the premaxillary show a shallow multiperforate broad groove (0). 
§ 2. Skull of Dinornis robustus found, with the Skeleton almost entire, in the Valley of 
Manuherikia, Otago. 
The foregoing description of the parts of the skull of the Dinornis robustus, from 
‘Timaru,’ was drawn up in the course of last winter with a view to communication to 
the Zoological Society in the session of 1863-64. But my visit to the south of France 
to explore the cavern of Bruniquel, in January 1864, compelled me to Jay the subject 
for a while aside; and after my return to the British Museum, I received the following 
letter, dated ‘‘ Dunedin, 15th February, 1864,” from Dr. Hector, F.G.S., the accom- 
plished and efficient Provincial Geologist of Otago, New Zealand, informing me of the 
discovery of ‘‘an unusually perfect skeleton of a Moa,” which had been “ recently 
found by some gold-diggers in the interior” of that province. ‘The skeleton,” he 
writes, ‘‘ was not that of one of the largest-sized Moas, the tibia, for instance, being 
only 27 inches in length, whereas I have frequently seen them as much as 36 inches.” 
This skeleton Dr. Hector proceeds to describe ‘‘as the most perfect I have ever heard 
of, as all the bones, excepting five or six, are present; and it is further, I believe, a 
unique specimen in so far that portions of the integuments and feathers still remain 
attached to the sacrum. ‘There is also a portion of the sole of the foot; and the joints 
of one leg have their ligaments and interarticular cartilages preserved.” 
Dr. Hector then proceeds to give the following instructive and valuable account of the 
geological characters of the locality and district where the discovery was made :— 
