10 
the shorter proportions of the legs of the Dodo also distinguish it 
from the Gigantic Bird, whose career in the North Island of New Zea- 
land was probably closed about the same period as that of the Dodo’s 
existence in the Isle of Rodriguez, 
“The fragments of the pelvis prove this to have been relatively 
broader, behind the acetabula, than in the Ostrich, Emeu, or Apte- 
ryx, its proportions being more like those of the Bustard. 
“The results of the foregoing comparisons justify the, reference of 
the Great Bird of New Zealand to a distinct genus in the Struthious 
order, for which I propose the name Dinornis, with the specific ap- 
pellation Nove Zealandie. 
*“« The extraordinary size of the tibia above described—still more 
that of the tibia said to measure two feet ten inches in length, ob- 
tained by Mr. W. Williams, and mentioned in his letter to Dr. Buck- 
land—prove the Dinornis of New Zealand to be the most gigantic 
of known birds. There is little probability that it will ever be found, 
whether living or extinct, in any other part of the world than the 
islands of New Zealand, or parts adjacent. At all events, the Dinor- 
nis Nove Zealandie will always remain one of the most extraordinary 
of the zoological facts in the history of those islands ; and it may not 
be saying too much to characterize it as one of the most remarkable 
acquisitions to Zoology in general which the present century has pro- 
duced.” 
Mr. Ogilby then communicated his descriptions of two new spe- 
cies of Baboon :— 
“When at Frankfort in the year 1837 I saw in the museum of 
that city two Baboons of the genus Cynocephalus, which my friend 
Dr. Riippell had brought from Abyssinia. They were however con- 
founded with the ‘ Babouin’ of the French authors (C. sphinw), under 
which name they are noticed in the ‘ Neue Wirbelthiere’ ; and though 
I was too well acquainted with that species, from having frequently 
seen an individual then living in the Surrey Zoological Gardens, to 
fall into the same error, I yet committed the similar mistake of con- 
founding the Frankfort animals with C. anubdis, of which there was 
no specimen at hand to compare them with. Since that time I have 
had frequent opportunities of observing the latter species, which is 
an inhabitant of the coast of Guinea, and not uncommon in our mu- 
seums and menageries; but it is only within the last few days that 
the acquisition of a fine adult male specimen of Dr. Riippell’s animal 
by the Zoological Society has enabled me to compare them together, 
and to ascertain their specific distinction. Both species are now 
living in the Society’s Gardens, and offer a rare and valuable oppor- 
tunity for studying their characters. 
“The Abyssinian species, which was reported to have been 
brought from Bombay, but which had no doubt been carried thither 
on board some vessel trading to the Red Sea, possesses a higher de- 
gree of interest than attaches to any other Cynocephal. With the 
exception of C. hamadryas, it is the only known species in that part 
of Africa, and must consequently have been the animal which we find 
