Meeson. — On a Plague of Rats. 205 



although some of them are aged men.* About one thing they are perfectly 

 agreed ; the Kiore Maori was good to eat ; " bettern rabbit." As to all 

 else pertaining to the native rodent, they are about as ignorant and indiffer- 

 ent as the average Englishman is to the facts of natural history in his own 

 island. 



But there is a third species of rat, for which Professor Hutton proposes 

 the name Mus maorium. (Trans., vol. xi., p. 344; vol. ix., p. 348.) 

 Does our animal belong to this species ? I think it does, and I will, 

 with your permission, give my reasons for saying so. The Professor found 

 in Maori cooking places at Shag Point, on Mount Benger, and I th'uk else- 

 where, at various times and under circumstances which show that they had 

 lain where gathered for many years, certain collections of bones, principally 

 of birds, amongst which, however, were the remains and in some cases the 

 complete skeletons of a species of rat. He has given us exact measurements 

 of these skeletons, and his figures and accounts are extremely interesting ; 

 for after careful consideration he entertains no doubt that this animal was 

 the true Maori rat, and perhaps identical with the black rat of Polynesia. 

 Now in comparing Professor Hutton's measurements of the Shag Point and 

 Mount Benger rat skeletons, with the figures that I have given above of 

 the dimensions of our rats, it will be found that the two sets correspond 

 marvellously closely. The animal recently killed gives dimensions slightly 

 larger than the desiccated skeleton, and we should naturally expect that this 

 would be the case. My opinion is that our rats and Professor Hutton's 

 skeletons belong to the same species, which is that of the true and probably 

 more ancient Kiore Maori. The question then arises, what of Dr. Buller's 

 Mus nova-zealandim ? What was it ? Are we right in supposing that 

 there was only one species of Kiore Maori before the settlement of the 

 British in New Zealand in 1839-41 ? I do not see why we should suppose 

 so. It is possible that there are at least two species — both varieties of the 

 Mus rattus, both frugivorous and dwelling in trees — but one of large size 

 inhabiting the lower country and the other smaller occupying the highlands. 

 It is in that case to the former that Dr. Buller's specimen, the one found in 

 Tinakori Boad and several others described — would belong ; and to the 

 latter, our visitor. Perhaps one rat was a Moriori animal, the other a 

 genuine Maori, and if that supposition cannot be accepted — perhaps the 

 larger variety of Mus rattus came over with Captain Cook in 1769, or with 

 some earlier navigator. Li that case the small rat Mus maorium must be 

 accepted as the original Maori animal and of the Polynesian variety of 



* One old Maori believes that in his youth there were three rats in New Zealand — the 

 Maori, the Norwegian, and the English — whatever he may mean by the latter. 



