194 MR. H. E. STRICKLAND ON SOME BONES OF 
In a skeleton of Goura coronata now before me, we find the 
inch. lin. 
Femure 2) oe ee 
ibia ene eat le. on a ee 
Tarso-metatarsus . . . 3 7 
The proportion between the three bones is nearly the same in these two birds. Now 
the measurements of the Goura are very nearly half those of the Pezophaps, and as the 
Goura when living measures about 19 inches from the ground to the crown of its head, 
we may assume the Solitaire to have been about 38 inches in height, a stature which 
sufficiently corresponds with the descriptions of Leguat and D’Heguerty. 
Proceeding from these larger bones to the smaller series on which I have based the 
specific name of Pezophaps minor, we have, first, the right femur, No. 16. This differs 
from the femur No. 14, figured in ‘ Dodo and its Kindred,’ pl. xiv. figs. 4, 5, 6, 7, only 
in being of rather smaller dimensions (a quarter of an inch shorter), though the rugose 
state of its surface indicates an aged individual. As it is less perfect at the extremities 
than the femur No. 14, which has been already figured and fully described by Dr. Mel- 
ville, I need not notice this bone further than to append its dimensions :— 
inch. lin. 
Length from the intercondyloid notch to the upper surface 
il (ine WEEE! Ve Ma ip es 5 0 
Transverse diameter of the shaft mune acca ite umtiiars GOL 'S 
Antero-posterior diameter of the shaft . . . . . . . O 63 
Transverse diameter of superior extremity i ss 
Transverse diameter of inferior extremity 1 4% 
The right tarso-metatarsus No. 18, belonging to the Zoological Society, is an almost 
exact duplicate of the bone No. 17, sent to me by M. Bojer, and noticed in ‘ Annals and 
Magazine of Nat. Hist.’ Ser. 2. vol. iv. p. 336. As the latter bone is rather the more 
perfect of the two, I have given a figure of it (Pl. LV. figs. 5,6, 7) in preference to the 
former. The only noticeable difference between these two bones consists in the form 
of the concavity beneath the proximal extremity, which is rather shallower and more 
expanded in No. 18 than in No. 17. This is especially the case in its lower part, be- 
neath the internal interosseous foramen, at the insertion of the tibialis anticus muscle. 
So slight a modification in form must not be regarded as indicating any specific distinc- 
tion. It will be seen from the following Table that the bone No. 18 is slightly the 
longer of the two. 
