Obder APTEEYGES.] 
[Yam. APTEEYGIDEE. 
APTEEYX BULLEEI. 
(NORTH-ISLAND KIWI.) 
Aj}teryx 
A])teryx 
Apteryx 
Apteryx 
Apteryx 
australis, Gould, B. of Austr. vi. pi. 2 (1848, nec Shaw). 
australis var. mantelli, Finsch, J. f. O. 1872, p. 263. 
mantelli, Buller, Birds of New Zealand, 1st ed. p. 358 (1873, nec Bartlett). 
mantelli, Sharpe, App. Voy. Ereb. and Terr. p. 36 (1875, nec Barth). 
lulleri, Sharpe, Proc. Well. Phil. Soc. p. 6 * (1888). 
Native names. — Kiwi and Kiwi-parure. 
Ad. rufescens: dorsi plumis rufescentibus ad basin pallidioribus, utrinque nigro marginatis, quasi striatis, soapis 
plumarum productis, duris : pileo et collo postico nigricanti-brunneis, plumis ad basin grisescentibus : fronte 
et facie laterali clariiis grisescentibus, ilia pallidiore : gutture sordide brunnescente : corpora reliquo subtus 
grisescenti-brunneo, plumis medialiter pallidioribus, quasi striolatis : corporis lateribus dorso concoloribus : 
Eostro albicanti-corneo : pedibus saturate brunneis : iride nigra. 
* Dr. Finsch, as far hack as 1871, wrote to me : — “ You are quite right in what you say about Bartlett’s Apteryx mantelli. 
This is, as I have aheady stated, by no means a species ; for aU the characters given by him are without value. I have examined 
about twenty specimens, from the South Island, and they aE belong to one and the same species. Bartlett was not, at the time 
he described his bird, aware of the great variation in the size of the two sexes, and in the scutellation of the tarsus also. Some- 
times the scutellation in one and the same bird is different in the two legs. In any case, his name of Apteryx mantelli cannot 
become ajjplied to the North Island bird, and will always remain a s}nionym of A. australis. The North Island bird, if it is in 
reality a distinct species, must have a new name ; and if satisfied with the characters, on an actual comparison of specimens 
from the North and South Islands, I propose to distinguish the northern species as Apteryx hulleriP 
As will be explained further on (sec p. 324), Dr. Finsch arrived at the conclusion that the two birds were inseparable. 
Holding strongly to the opposite view, I figured and described the North Island bird, in my former edition, under the name of 
Apteryx mantelli. 
Mr. Sharpe, after a close study of a complete series of specimens in my collection, has lately contributed a paper on this 
subject to the Wellington Philosophical Society (Z. c.), in which he says “ During a recent examination of some skins of 
Apteryges, in company with Sir Walter Buller, I became firmly convinced that the ordinary brown Apteryx of the North Island 
is certainly specifically distinct from the Apteryx aiistralis of the South Island ; and I was a little surprised to find, on going over 
the literature of the subject, that, notwithstanding a similar verdict on the part of such excellent naturalists as Sir James Hector, 
Sir Julius von Haast, Professor Hutton, Mr. Potts, and others, the North-Island bird has not yet received a distinctive name. 
It has generally been called by naturalists Apteryx mantelli of Bartlett, under which name it appeared in the first edition of 
Buller’s ‘ Birds of New Zealand,’ and it is the Apteryx australis var. mantelli of Finsch s paper in the Journal fiir Ornithologie ’ 
(1872, p. 263). The characters given by Mr. Bartlett for his Apteryx mantelli are founded on the natural variations of Apteryx 
australis, of which A. mantelli is a pure synonym, and the North Island Apteryx awaits a title. The pair of adult birds in Sir 
Walter Buller’s collection are relatively much smaller than the corresponding sexes of A. australis, and the colour is of a blackish 
brown instead of a tawny tint, while the curious harsh structure of the plumage, especially of the feathers of the rump and nape, 
is a further character of importance. 
“ It gives me groat pleasure to adopt a suggestion of my friend Dr. Finsch that the North Island Apteryx be called Apteryx 
hulleri, after the learned author of the ‘ Birds of New Zealand,’ a work which, in its first edition, seemed to mo to be as complete 
as it was possible to make a history of the birds of any single area uniil I saw the magnificent new edition on which Sir Walter 
Buller is now engaged, and on the completion of which I should think any one would find it difficult to W'rite anything more 
about the birds of New Zealand.” 
