HuTTON. — On the Geographical Relations of the N.Z. Fauna. 231 



he has any proof of the existence of a dog in New Zealand before the arrival 

 of man, and the difference of date of these cooking-places for which Dr. Haast 

 contends, is denied by many observers, and his argument derived from the 

 presence or absence of ground stone implements has, I think, been successfully 

 Qontroverted. I can therefore attach no weight to the absence of gnawed 

 bones. On the other hand, there is the fact that no indigenous dog or rat has 

 ever been found on an island that was not inhabited by other Mammalia, and 

 when we remember that Marsupials came into existence long before rats and 

 dogs, it is difficult to see how the latter could possibly get to any country 

 without the former coming also. It is evident that neither Banks, nor 

 Solander, nor the Forsters, considered the dog and rat that they found in New 

 Zealand as a new species, or they would certainly have mentioned it ; neither 

 did Lesson in 1827, nor Quoy and Gaimard in 1831. Dr. Dieffenbach, in 

 1842, was the first to state that a frugivorous rat, distinct from M. rattus, 

 existed in New Zealand ; he, probably, not being aware that M. rattus is 

 entirely frugivorous. I am therefore of opinion that both the rat and the dog 

 were brought by human agency, and it is worth remarking that the Maori 

 traditions relate that they brought both with them. (Travers, Trans. N.Z. 

 Inst., IT., p. 58.) The specimen of Mus gouldi in the Auckland Museum 

 (see Trans. N.Z. Inst., III., p. 3) was caught, I beKeve, at the Thames in 

 January, 1853, and as a mission station had been established there some years 

 previously this specimen was no doubt brought over from Australia in their 

 vessel. 



The animal seen at Dusky Bay by some of Capt. Cook's sailors (2nd Voyage, 

 I., 98) was probably a dog, as none on board had at that time seen a dog 

 in New Zealand. 



The evidence of a kind of otter inhabiting the South Island rests upon 

 some foot-prints seen by Dr. Haast, and mentioned by him in his first 

 presidential address to the Canterbury Philosophical Society ("Nat. Hist. 

 Bev.," 1864. p. 30). In the same address he also mentions having seen tracks 

 in great numbers of a small jumping mammal in the riverbed of the Hopkins, 

 but as no further evidence of the existence of these creatures has been adduced, 

 although eight or nine years have since elapsed, it is impossible for me to take 

 any further notice of them in this paper. 



Birds. 



The first point that claims our attention here is the great development of 

 the Struthious birds. This division can be subdivided into two families, one 

 {Apterygidce) containing only the kiwis, and the other {Struthionidoe) including 

 all other living forms as well as the extinct moas. The kiwis in the structure 

 of the egg-shell have an affinity with the Carinate di.vLsion of birds. Their 



