304 
on the first received collection of bones from New Zealand’. But the femur of the Emu 
(Dromaius), though still smaller than that of : the einige in comparison with fie 
gigantic species of Dinornis, is less different in shape. . The shaft of the hone 1s 
rounder than in the Ostrich; but the antero-posterior diameter of that part is less 
than in Dinornis. ‘There is no trace of the bifurcate ridge on the fore part of the 
shaft, and very feeble indications of “ line asperize ” on the back part of the anes 
rosities there developed in Dinornis no rudiment even is present in existing Stru- 
thionide. The medullarterial canal is very minute in Dromatus, as in other pneumatic 
femora; and the associated large air-hole at the back part of the upper end of the 
femur significantly differentiates Dromaius, as it does the other large existing Stru- 
thionide, from Dinornis. The head is sessile; one cannot predicate a cervix in the 
femur of Dromaius; the trochanter hardly rises above the level of the head; the 
back of the trochanter is scarcely at all accentuated, chiefly shows a smooth, feeble 
concavity; there are no gluteal rugosities, no trace of a lesser trochanterian place of 
muscular attachment. ‘The popliteal cavity is a shallow groove, not bounded by any 
post-intercondylar ridge from the intercondylar space. ‘The distal expansion is rela- 
tively much less than in Dinornis; the inner condyle is much narrower. ‘The tibial 
part ‘58 the outer condyle has relatively more longitudinal extent in Dromaius than in 
Dinornis; it rises well above the fibular division, which is relatively shorter than in 
Dinornis, where it equals in that dimension the tibial prominence. But the fibular 
division projects more outwardly in Lyromazus, is broader in proportion to its length, 
and more generally convex. ‘There is no trace of the rough pit for ligamentous or 
muscular attachment above the fibular division of the outer condyle which so markedly 
distinguishes the femur of Dinornis. 
Ihe antero-posterior extent of the outer condyle is much greater than that of the 
inner condyle in Dromaius; the difference is less in Dinornis giganteus®, Din. casua- 
rinus*, and Din. didiformis*’. The antero-posterior dimension of the outer and of the 
inner condyle are nearly the same in Dinornis gravis. 
The pelvis of Dinornis gravis is characteristically massive and ponderous, and accords 
in shape with those figured in Plates XIX. & XX. of the first Memoir’. 
The upper and outer bony wall of the hinder expansion, beyond the gluteal ridges, 
is better preserved than in figure 3, Plate XX. 
Hight coalesced vertebrae with combined par- and pleur-apophyses precede the three 
interacetabular vertebrae, in which those processes are wanting. The bodies of these 
are broader and flatter below than in the subject of figure 2, Pl. XIX. After the 
above eleven sacrals follow six vertebrae with par- and pleurapophyses again abutting 
against the iliac walls. 
The first sacral has, on each side the centrum, a circular cup for the head of a free 
t Ante, p. 73. * Pl. XXXVI fig, 2, * Pl. XXXVIIL. fig. 3. 
* PL. XXIV. fig. 3. ® Ante, p. 73. 

