Hvrrox.—On Dr. von Haast's Classification of the Moa. 363 
Art. XLV.— Remarks on Dr. von. Haast's Classification of the Moas. 
By Captain F. W. Hvrrox, Director of the Otago Museum. 
[Read before the Otago Institute, October 24th, 1876.) 
In his Presidential Address to the Philosophical Institute of Canterbury, in 
March, 1874, Dr. von Haast gives his views as to the proper classification 
of the Moas, * dividing them into two families, each of which consists of two 
genera. 
The first of these families, Dinornithide, is characterised by having no 
hind toe, by the bill being narrow and pointed, and by the metatarsus 
being comparatively long. The second family, Palapterygide, is character- 
ised by having a hind toe, by the bill being obtuse and rounded at the tip, 
and by having the metatarsus short. This classification is given as the 
result of his researches, but, owing no doubt to the nature of the address, 
no proofs are adduced as to the correctness of his diagnoses, although they 
directly contradict some of the results of the researches of Professor Owen. 
Since the publication of this address, a large and very valuable collection of 
Moa remains has been brought together in the Otago Museum, and an exa- 
mination of it has compelled me to reject Dr. von Haast's classification, and 
to agree on almost every point with Professor Owen. 
In the first place none of the differences pointed out by Dr. von. Haast 
are sufficient, in my opinion, to warrant us in dividing the Moas into two 
families. The skeletons of all the species are remarkably alike. Between 
no two is there anything like the difference that exists between the skele- 
tons of the Ostrich and the Rhea, which are always considered as belonging to 
one family. Nor is the difference so great as between the Emu and the 
Cassowary, which also belong to one family. The presence or absence of a 
hind toe, even if Dr. von Haast had been correct on this point, is by no 
means of sufficient importance to be used as a family character, for several 
families of birds contain genera both with and without hind toes. Neither 
can the absence or presence of a scapulo-coracoid be deemed of much im- 
portance in classification, for it is functionless or nearly so. Dr. Haast, 
however, uses this as a generic character only. Consequently we must, I 
think, consider all the Moas as belonging to one family, Dinornithide. 
Whether they should or should not be considered as forming one or more 
genera is a more difficult question in the present imperfect state of our 
knowledge of their anatomy. If, however, it should be thought advisable 
to divide them, many of the characters given by Dr. von Haast cannot be 
used. 
* * Trans. N.Z, Inst.," Vol. VL, p. 426, 
