4 
round depression in the centre of the clump and placed a few dry twigs there. There were three 
young birds. Two of these sprang out of the nest on his approach, but were afterwards shot ; the 
youngest he managed to catch before it could escape, and from this I have taken my description of the 
nestling. On another occasion he met with the nest near the wooded summit of the Waitakere ranges. 
It was a large irregular-shaped structure, composed of twigs and moss coarsely put together, and 
placed high up on a miro tree. The young birds (three in number) had just left the nest, but had 
not yet quitted the tree. They were shy and wary, and, on an alarm being sounded by one of the 
parent birds, they immediately secreted themselves in the thick foliage, from which it was found 
impossible to dislodge them. This was on January 3rd, which fixes approximately the breeding- 
season ; although my son discovered a nest at Whangarei, containing three well-fledged nestlings, 
at a somewhat earlier date. 
I agree in the opinion expressed by Mr. Kirk * that the egg brought to the Colonial Museum by 
Mikaera on October 20, 1885, and disposed of as the egg of the Huiaf, is in reality that of the 
present species. Subsequent events have shown that Mikaera’s testimony cannot be depended on ; 
and no credence can be given now to his statement that it was “ taken from a cavity in a dead tree.” 
The egg contained a young bird, apparently just ready for extrusion, and both embryo and shell are 
now in the Museum collection. The egg is ovoido-conical in form, measuring T45 by T05 inches, 
and is of a pale stone-grey, irregularly stained, freckled, and speckled with purplish grey, the markings 
in some places running into dark wavy lines. The chick has the bill very stout, with the caruncles at 
the angles of the mouth well developed and of a flesh-white colour. The whole of the body is bare, 
with the exception of what appears (in spirit) to be strips of coarse, black, hair-like filaments, from 
one half to three quarters of an inch in length, but which are in reality tufts of extremely fine downy 
feathers. A. strip of these filaments encircles the crown, a line passes down the course of the spine, 
and there is another along the outer edge of each wing and behind each thigh. 
Accepting, as I do, the view so well formulated by Professor Parker, that “ in all respects, physio- 
logical, morphological, and ornithological, the Crow may be placed at the head, not only of its own great 
series (birds of the Crow-form), but also as the unchallenged chief of the whole of the Carinate ” J, I 
have, in my systematic arrangement of the New-Zealand ornis, accorded the foremost rank to the family 
Corvid®, instead of placing the Turdidse at the head of the list as is now the fashion with writers on 
Systematic Ornithology. Some doubts, however, having hitherto existed as to the true position of the 
genus Glaucopis, I was glad of the opportunity to place a skeleton of this species in the hands of 
Dr. Gadow, of Cambridge, in order that he might investigate its natural affinities. That gentleman made 
a critical examination of the bones, and compared them with those of Strepera, Gymnorhina, Paradisea, 
Struthidea, Graucalus, Ptilonorhynchus, Heteralocha, and Sturnus, with the following general result. 
He finds that Glaucopis is a Corvine form, being closely allied to the Austrocoraces, a group of birds 
which form a connecting-link between the true Corvidae and the Laniidse. It agrees with Strepera, 
and shows considerable similarity in structure with Ptilonorhynchus, although Glaucopis presents in 
its skull, sternum, and sacrum several characters which are peculiar to the genus. Struthidea agrees 
with Glaucopis by far less than might have been supposed, whilst Graucalus is still further removed, 
being apparently on the line through which Glaucopis reaches the Muscicapine forms. Dr. Gadow 
sums up the results of his investigation by saying that “ if a Satin-bird could be induced to marry a 
Piping-Crow, their offspring might, in New Zealand, become a Glaucopis .” 
* Journal of Science, 1882-83, vol. i. p. 262. 
•f Trans. New-Zealand Instit. 1875, vol. viii. p. 192. 
+ <‘ There are, of course, innumerable points in regard to the Classification of Birds which are, and for a long time will 
continue to be, hypothetical as matters of opinion, but this one seems to stand a fact on the firm ground of proof” (art. “ Ornitho- 
logy,” Encycl. Brit., by Prof. Newton, F.K.S.). 
