&2 MR. W. P. PTCRAFT ON THE [Feb. 15, 



lirst part of my paper closes. Whether I have succeeded in the 

 task that I set before me at the beginning of this paper remains 

 for my readers to decide. The accompanying diagram (fig. 8) is 

 an attempt to sliow the possible lines of divergence within the 

 Suborder, and the probable relationships of the different Families. 



Fig. 8. 



PHAETHONTIDft. 



Phaiacrocorac 



PLOTINA-. 



Diagram showing the probable relationships between the various Families 

 of the Suborder Steganopodes. 



"We must now turn to a question recently raised by Mr. Beddard 

 (1). Are the Steganopodes desmognathous birds ? The answer 

 to this, he tells us, depends upon the definition of the term " des- 

 mognathous." According to Huxley (10), in the desmognathous 

 skull " the vomer * is often abortive, or so small that it disappears 

 from the skeleton. When it exists, it is always slender and tapers 

 to a point anteriorly. The maxillo-palatines are united across 

 the middle line, either directly or by the intermediation of ossifi- 

 cations in the nasal septum." 



Those who will turn to Huxley's original paper will find that 

 he considered that the desmognathous skull was to be found 

 "under its simplest form in Palamedea and the Lamellirostres. 

 In these birds each maxillo-palatine is a broad, flat, and thin bony 



As a matter of fact, the vomer need not be taken into consideration at all. 



