150 ME. W. P. PYCEAET ON THE MOEPHOLOGY AND 



with regard to the " Carinatoe" That this attempt has not been fruitless will probably 

 be admitted. 



From the nature of the aim of this paper, it will I trust be agreed that the scheme 

 of investigation adopted is about the best possible. The desire has been to select those 

 characters which bear directly or indirectly upon the problem of the phylogeny of the 

 group. Moreover, to have dealt in detail upon the anatomy of the group would have 

 been to repeat a vast body of facts already well known and ably treated in the memoirs 

 enumerated at the end of this work, and from which much has been extracted to 

 serve the ends I had in view. Hence the majority of the omissions which may be 

 noted in these pages are not accidental but of design. The memoirs of Garrod, Gadow, 

 Furbringer, Meckel, Cuvier, D'Alton, Parker, Beddard, Lydekker, and others are the 

 milestones which mark the progress of the knowledge which has been accumulated on 

 this group. There seemed to me to be no reason or end to be gained in transcribing 

 the information which these individually impart, but rather it appeared more expedient 

 to set myself the task of recording the substance of their achievements, and to endeavour 

 to add a few courses more to the structures which they have reared. 



The rejection of the old terms Ratitce and Carinatoe, which I now propose, seems to 

 me to be warranted. The Eatite condition is admittedly a secondary one, and the name 

 is objectionable, in that Hesperornis and some " Carinatoe " are also " Ratitce.'" The 

 terms now suggested are mutually exclusive, and based upon a primitive character. On 

 this account they are to be preferred. Furthermore, as will be shown, the change is not 

 to be attributed to a desire to effect a change for change sake : it would not have been 

 suggested but for the need, and it seems to me a real need, to include the Crypturi with 

 the group hitherto known as " Ratitce." To have retained the old terms would not 

 perhaps have been so very contradictory, for, since some " Carinatoe " are really " Ratitce," 

 there is no reason why some Ratitce should not be " Carinatos " ! A further discussion 

 of the subject will be found in the summary. 



In conclusion, I wish to record my grateful thanks to Mr. Rothschild for having 

 entrusted this work to my hands. 



PTERYLOSIS. 



The description of the pterylosis of the Palceognathce is most easily accomplished 

 by an enumeration of the apteria. Though these are but few in number, they are 

 nevertheless of considerable importance, inasmuch as they disprove the prevalent 

 notion that the feathers in the ik Ratitaz" are evenly distributed over the body. It 

 has, however, long been known that apteria occurred in embryos of certain forms, 

 e. g. Struthio, Rhea, and Apteryx. 



The descriptions of the Oil-gland, Rhamphotheca, Podotheca, and of the structure of 

 the feathers, both macro- and microscopical, will be found in this section. 



