BuLLER.—O» Certain Species of N.Z. Birds. 125 
of Rallus philippensis and Rallus dieffenbachii, and then compare them with 
the figure Captain Hutton has given of the head of Rallus modestus. 
Fic. 1.—Ё. philippensis. Fie. 2.— A. dieffenbachii. 
It will, I think, be at once manifest that what Captain Hutton says of the 
bill of Rallus modestus, as compared with R. philippensis, applies with equal 
force to that of R. dieffenbachit. 
No two species of Rail, I should say, are more readily distinguishable 
than Rallus philippensis and R. dieffenbachii. I have rejected sub-generic 
distinctions altogether in my work, or I would willingly have referred these 
forms to different sub-genera, as was originally proposed by the late Mr. 
С. R. Gray. No naturalist who had actually seen the birds would attempt to 
unite them as a species. 
The fallacy of Captain Hutton’s case is, that he labours to disprove a 
proposition of his own making, for no one ever asserted that Rallus philip- 
pensis and Rallus modestus were the same. 
Captain Hutton is in error in stating that * R. philippensis has no claw at 
the end of the thumb.” The claw is well developed and very sharp. [The 
specimen submitted measures ‘25 of an inch in length.] 
TRIBONYX MORTIERI, Du Bus. 
The introduction to my ** Birds of New Zealand” contains a notice of the 
occurrence in Otago of a living example of Tribonyx mortieri. But from 
Captain Hutton's letter to * The Ibis" of 1st July last, it would seem that the 
bird brought home by Mr. Bills was obtained at Hobart Town, and kept for 
