Genus— MANTELLORNIS. 
Closely allied to Porphyrio, but of a stouter build. The upper wing-coverts are 
much elongated, nearly covering the quills, and the secondaries nearly as long 
as the primaries. The scutellations of the tarsi are also different (see annexed 
Plates). Only one species. 
Distribution. New Zealand (almost extinct) (four skins are known). 
The discovery that the Porphyroid bird at one time inhabiting Lord Howe Islands 
has no relationship with the “ Notornis {=Mantellornis) of New Zealand, but is purely a 
Porphyrio, coupled with the fact that the “ Ocydromus ” of Lord Howe Island has no 
relationship with the genera Ocydromus ” {=Gallirallus) or Cabalus of New Zealand but is 
a degenerate Evlabeornis, has brought once more before me for consideration the alliances 
of the Lord Howe and Norfolk Island avifaunas. 
When I drew up my Handlist I called it “of Australasia,” and by that title I included 
Lord Howe and Norfolk Island with Australia proper. When I came to work slowly at the 
Australian avifauna, I was compelled to allow that the affinities as shown by the existence 
of Nestor, Hemiphaga, Ocydromus, Cyanoramphus and Notornis surely outweighed those of 
the Passerine birds which were unquestionably Australian, and therefore omitted the 
avifauna of the two groups in question from the Australian avifauna. 
I have now to recognise that the facts as at that time understood were misleading, and 
must acknowledge that the attachment of these groups to Australia is more in accord with 
the true facts than any other. Since I had accepted their inclusion, my friend Mr. A. F. 
Basset Hull has written to the Emu (XI., p. 58 (1911)), questioning my rejection, and 
giving his reasons for their inclusion in the Australian avifauna once again. Although we 
have arrived at the same conclusion, my reasons do not coincide with Mr, Hull’s, as I do not 
recognise political boundaries as having anything whatever to do with zoology. I am not 
including British New Guinea in my scheme of Australia, although I believe I am quite 
correct in terming it a “ political dependency ” of Australia. Neither do I propose to 
include the avifauna of Macquarie Island, although it is a political dependency of 
Tasmania : moreover it has always been recognised by New Zealand scientists as an 
appanage of the Maorian Subregion, and the fauna as known is generally noted by New 
Zealand writers in most branches. 
I will however, from the new knowledge of the facts, admit that Lord Howe and 
Norfolk Islands be included in Australia, and moreover consider Mr. Hull’s proposition, 
that they be termed the Phillipian Subregion and kept apart, a most welcome one. 
I propose to discuss fully the relationship of these groups in another place, and more 
clearly show the exact alliances of the Phillipian Subregion than is here advisable. 
255 
