24 William Davies—Fossil Bird-remains of India. 
collection, also figured upon the same plate, which appertain without 
doubt to the same species of Crane, but are unnoticed by Prof. Milne- 
Edwards. 
The first fragment consists of little more than the proximal third 
of the first phalange of the wing, and is faithfully represented of the 
natural size on pl. R. (figs. 8, Sa, b, c). The articular surface, 
although not quite perfect, coincides in form with that portion of 
the phalange of a recent bird, and with regard to size the antero- 
posterior diameter is 0°5, that of the recent bone being 0-42; the 
articular surface of the fossil is imperfect in the transverse direction. 
The lateral lamelliform expansion rises more abruptly than in the 
recent bone, but this is the only difference that I can detect. 
A second fragment, which is also figured upon the above-quoted 
plate (figs. 4, 4a, b), is the distal extremity of a left femur; it is 
somewhat mutilated, and is broken below the commencement of the 
condylar ridges, and therefore represents little more than the 
articular end. Compared with the femur of a skeleton of Argala 
indica (397a) in the British Museum, I again fail to detect any 
specific character—size always excepted—by which the fossil can be 
distinguished from the recent bone, unless it be that the anterior 
condylar groove in the fossil appears to be relatively a little deeper 
and narrower, a point of very slight importance. As regards size, 
the transverse diameter of the articular surfaces of the condyles in - 
the fossil and recent bones, which measure respectively 1:77 and 
1:48, will indicate the degree in which they differ. 
Another important fragment, which originally belonged to the late 
Dr. Falconer, and has only recently been acquired for the National 
Collection by the liberality of his brother, Charles Falconer, Esq., 
F.G.S. (since deceased), is the distal extremity of a left humerus 
(Pl. II. Fig. 4). It is in good condition, the condyles being perfect, 
and the anconal surface of the bone beautifully preserved ; a portion 
of the palmar surface is destroyed. And, as in the previously de- 
scribed fragments, it is also indistinguishable from the corresponding 
portion of the humerus of the great Indian Crane; so that, with the 
exception of size, of which I append comparative measurements, it 
possesses no distinctive characters for special description. 
Fossil. Recent. 
Length of fragment aie 
wes cc Soo 5-4 ) eve 
Transverse diameter at condylar tuberosities sae a Pe Pa atiscs Peril 
Ditto, of condyles ae ae aS ane Bes see ALTO Reena 
Antero-posterior diameter of base of shaft, radial side an toe MO: OeetheenemOn 
All the above-mentioned fragments of bones, representing various 
portions of the skeleton, and probably of as many individuals, being 
in accord as regards their relative proportions, tend to the conclusion 
that the remote ancestors of the existing Adjutant Crane surpassed it 
in size; yet there is in the National Collection a lower extremity of 
a tibio-tarsus, no larger than is that of the recent skeleton with 
which the other fragments have been compared. Mr. Lydekker 
himself States, that, of three bones of Argala Falconeri, in the Indian 
Museum, two are of “exactly the same size,” and the “third is slightly 
smaller” than in the living Adjutant. This inequality in size may 
