Porrs.—JNew Zealand Birds. 139 
Авт. XXX.—On the Birds of New Zealand. By T. Н. Ports, F.L.S. 
(PART IV.) 
[Read before the Philosophical Institute of Canterbury, 4th December, 1873.] 
List oF BIRDS DESCRIBED IN THIS PAPER. 
Nove. TE species are numbered in c conformity with the lista en in erie, L, IL, and 
IIL, in Trans. N.Z. Inst., IL, Art. viii. ; LL; Art. x d V., Art. 
Y Falco nove-zealandie. BS Chrysococcyx lucidus. 
AL „ро 59. Carpophaga nove-zealandiz. 
3. Athene nove-zealandie. A. 65. Charadrius obscurus. 
8. Neomorpha gouldi. B. 65. Anarhynchus frontalis. 
18. Acanthisitta chloris. C. 65. Thinornis novz-zealandisx. 
19. Orthonyx ochrocephala. 85. Ortygometra affinis. 
B: 16. а, albicilla. 86. 5 tabuensis. 
Orthonyx albicillus. A. 89. Ocydromus fuscus. 
23. Gerygone. B. 89. Gallinago pusilla, 
29. Petroica macrocephala. 102. Eudyptes. 
36. Keropia crassirostris. A.108. Ossifraga alba. 
37-8. Rhipidura. 123. Diomedea melanophrys. 
40. Glaucopis cinerea. 124. Lestris catarractes. 
47-50. Platycercus. 126. Larus dominicanus. 
51. Nestor meridionalis. B. 131. Sterna alba. 
57. Eudynamis tahitiensis, 
In offering another small budget of nótes-à on native birds, the writer has to 
express his regret that they are but fragmentary. Unfortunately notes on 
birds in their wild state are necessarily less complete than those which can be 
gathered from the fluttering prisoners in the condemned cell of an aviary. 
The writer having been laid under contribution by Dr. Buller, in his 
* History of the Birds of New Zealand," is compelled to refer to some 
mistakes as to matters of fact in the “ History," or else he might be thought 
to concur therein ; as to theories, they are the property of anyone to shape 
according to fancy. 
No. l.—FaArco NOVJE-ZEALANDLE, (ml. 
Quail-hawk. 
Those ornithologists who have written on the fauna of New Zealand have 
held conflicting opinions on the Falconide. Attempts have been made to 
prove that one species only inhabits these islands ; on the other hand, evidence 
has been offered that the fauna includes at least two species. The question 
involved—of much interest to those who care for the natural history of this 
country—has its chief difficulty in-the absence of such marked or distinctive 
