140 Transactions. — Zoology. 



characteristics of form and coloiir as would enable the ornithologist to I'ecognize 

 at once a specific difference. Messrs. Finsch, Gui'ney, Hutton, and Buller, 

 have given their opinions, pro and cooi., hut outside the value of the evidence 

 that may be got from the critical examination of specimens, there remains for 

 consideration the weight that may be attached to certain peculiarities that can 

 be learnt from the birds themselves. Are these peculiarities sufficiently 

 marked to justify a separation of our Falconidce. into two species ? 



The three writers just named, as far as we are aware, do not touch on 

 these birds in their living state. Dr. Buller's evidence must be sifted to 

 ascertain its value ; he deals with the living bird, and, at present, inclines 

 towards the maintenance of two species. In Trans. N.Z. Inst., Vol. I., 

 p. 106 (1868), he writes: — "In a paper forwarded to the Philosophical 

 Institute of Canterbury, in June, 1864, and again in the Essay, I stated my 

 belief that on a further acquaintance with the species it would be found 

 necessjtry to expunge Hieracidea hrunnea from our list of species, and to 

 regard it as H. novce-zealandice in an immature state. * * * * 



Since the publication of the Essay I have been able to determine satisfactorily 

 this disputed point. 



" In December last, dviring a visit to the Taupo distiict, I was fortunate 

 enough to discover a nest of this hawk, containing three young ones. The 

 parent birds were beautiful specimens of II. novce-zealandice. * * * 

 One of them shortly afterwards died, but the others (which are still alive in 

 my aviary) developed in due time into perfect examples of the so-called 

 H. hrunnea. It will be seen, therefore, that this form is the young of 

 H. novce-zealandice, and not the female, as suggested by Herr Einsch." In 

 striking contrast to this statement, we find his notice of the Falconidce in his 

 " History of the Birds of New Zealand ;" at page 9, the story of the inmates 

 of the nest found in the Taupo district is given as a portion of the history of 

 H. hrunnea. Now, will this fresh view of these nestlings induce us to rely 

 that Dr. Buller has "been able to determine satisfactorily this disputed 

 point" 1 



In the introduction to the " Birds of New Zealand," page xv., may be 

 found this passage : — " Thus Dr. Haast writes to me (under date of March 1 0, 

 1872), concerning the specific distinctness of the Sparrow-hawk and the 

 Quail-hawk. I may tell you that on my last journey into the interior I got 

 two of the former {i.e. the small species). They were male and female, and I 

 secured them at the nest, where they had young ones. The female was a little 

 bigger and lighter than the male bird. Both birds were fuU-gvo\Yn, and 

 showed at a glance the impossibility of their ever develojiing into the large 

 and perfectly distinct Quail-hawk." This reads like strong evidence in favour of 

 the two-species theory, but there must be some mistake in this statement. 



