FrwscHu.—On New Zealand Ornithology. 59 
To give an example: the question concerning Falco nove-zealandie, and 
whether this species does not in reality include several others, remains with. 
out a satisfactory solution (1).* Here, as in many other instances, the 
author has failed to produce conclusive evidence, or close observations on 
the habits (reileben) of the birds, so much required. 
In this respect there remain open to his zeal and to his acknowledged 
power of observation a wide field of discovery, and the task of placing such: 
matters beyond dispute. And let us hope that our knowledge of the orni- 
thology of Mr. Buller's adopted country will yet progress as we desire, and 
many a gap be filled up. 
The merit of,describing in detail the species already known to science, 
and in partieular with respect to the change caused by age or season of the 
year, is far greater than the superficial description of new species. 
To his determined adherence to Gray's catalogue of the year 1862 may 
be chiefly attributed the blame that so many species, which have not been 
proved to be distinct up to the present time, remain undetermined ; whilst, 
on the other hand, the catalogue has been increased by a few new discoveries 
made during the last few years. The total number of New Zealand birds— 
of which I append a catalogue at the end of this paper—is now estimated at 
about 144. Of these, eight species remain doubtful. 
Moreover, as regards the general remarks of the author, dix require in 
some instances additions, in others corrections; for in my opinion all the 
principal characteristics of the ornithology of Now Zealand have not yet 
been described. And, further, the author does not appear to be well in- 
formed on the geographical distribution of some species; for instance, the 
Waders and Swimmers. 
The remarkable distribution of some birds, comparatively speaking, 
spread north and south in species so nearly connected, is by no means an 
isolated instance, but is met with everywhere, only the fact is more observ- 
able in insulated zones (2). It would be premature to lay down any 
exact rule on the subject from the few instances mentioned by the author. 
A better acquaintance with the birds of New Zealand will prove, doubtless, _ 
that they spread wider over their confined territory than appears from 
Mr. Buller’s quoted examples. 
The fact that the avifauna of New Zealand, of which we now take into 
consideration only existing species, is very peculiar, has not received from 
Mr. Buller the consideration which it deserves. More than half (eighty) of 
the species are indigenous, and of the sixty-four species of land birds, there 
are only eight that have a wider range. But more remarkable still is the 
* The numerals in parentheses refer to Mr. Buller's notes in reply (vide Art. VL) 
