aiKl obtained some good views of the flattened sides of tlie barbs 
and very clearly distinguished the remains of the lower jjart of tlie 
arndes. This I think clearly indicates that the barbs had once 
been furnished with barbules, but from some cause they had 
become denuded.” 
FliATIIER OF “HAIRY” MOORHEN. 
Fig. 1. Barbule (perfect), magnified 400 times. 
Fig. 2. Barb showing remains (a a a a a) of barbule, corresponding 
to the portion marked a i in figure 1. Magnified 400 times. 
I' ig .3. Part of shaft with tips of barbs and sliaft (a a a) broken off, 
(tlie barbs when perfect taper off to a point). The feathers 
on Mmseum specimen are also in this condition.* Tlie remains 
of the barbules are indicated by the dark marks on the sides 
of the barb-s. Magnified 30 times. 
Inability to moult may partly account for the hairiness of the 
plumage; but not entirely so I think; for if such were the case, we 
should have many instances of cage birds and domestic birds 
developing a hirsute plumage; but I never heard of anything of tlie 
Ivind.t Bald Bullfinches and Blackbirds are not uncommon : but 
I never heard of a hairy one. If they cannot get through the 
moult, they are seized with dizzy fits and die. Pheasants .isume 
* As doubtless are the other ten specimens in my list which have not been 
submitted to the microscope, though the plumage of some of them is more 
rough to the touch than others. 
t E.xcept in one instance, of a Grey Brahma Hen at Staines, for a know- 
ledge of which I am indebted to Mr. Bond, who says it had feathers exactl 
like hair. 
