A P T E R Y X AUSTRALIS, Shaw.
Rira Rira»
Aptéryx Australis, Shaw, Nat? Misc^vol. xxiv. 1058 ; and Gen. ZooL vol. xiii. p. 71.—Less. Traité
Yairell, in Trans. Soc. vol. i;. p. 71.
Arl- Aves, Cycl. of Anat.^ ^ ^Phys1., vol. £ 1836, p. 269,* andin Trans. ZooL Soc
b
Apte?yæ,^remm. Man. d’O m ^ d . E ^ t.^ n d .ÿ jc x iv . .
^ p terousPenouin. Lath. Gen. Hist. vol. x. p. 394. ‘ .
Dromiceius Movce-Zelandice, LessT Mail;, îrii.~ p. 210.
jfciyn-Kiwï, ‘Âôorjgmes óf
For our fiurst ki^^&lgfc.pf this bird we are indebted to the late'Dr. Shaw; to whom the specimen figured by
hiïn in the “ Naturalists’ Miscellany” was presented ï^ ^ ^ ^ ^ p ia rë la y , óf the ship Frovidencè, who brought it
from New Zealand about 1812. Dr.Shawsmguré was accompanied by a detailed drawing of the bill, foot,
and rudimentary w in ^ ^ th e ’hatuial Size. After Dr. Shaw’s death,' his at that time uniqüe specimen passed
into the pos'sessionrd fflie E ar! of Derby, then Lord^fanI^y^^u|^|^^|h^^bein^'a private collection, and
no other specimen having been seen either on J/hCcontinent or in England; the existence-of tkfe species was
doubted by naturalists gènëTahyTOr^upwards ’of twenty -years. M. Temminck, it is true, placed it with
hesitation in an order to which he gave the titlexjfl Inertes, comprehending the present Bird and the Dodo ;
M o th e r naturalists were indiUed tmSMny its existence altogether. The history of the'bird remuin'ed'in this
state untifJlmeïË3*3, when mylfëiend^ïr. Yarrell puhjlshédi i i^ ^ I c>‘ Trahsacti'ón^ 'óf the Zoological Society”
anmtëresting paper, detailing all'that had' bden^preyiSusly'mg/de knówmlMjtècÖ%“dvand fblly established
iti’apiong accredited species : this paper was1 accompahledby a^fi’gure^from the original s p e c i me n t h e
possession o f the Earl of Derby; 1 f e l l sihêë'had IB^^^^fóftÖjp^to^'é^ome acquainted withflve
additional specimens, andfto qbifeain some further information respecting the history o#|p> species. Two
of these, from which my figures are taken, were presented to the Zoological Society by the New Zealand
Company: the^fciëty also possesses a third, but imperfect specimen,;|^ic?h was presented by Alexander
MacLeay, E s q ,of Sydney; and two others have been recently added collection of the Earl of Derby,
on&pf which having been liberally presented to mé By his Lordship, my thanks are s p e c ia lly due for this
interesting addition tbimy collections.
A mature consideration of the form and structure of this most remarkable bird, leads me to assign it with
little hesitation to the family of Struthionidcs; and my reasons? think, be obvious to
eyèry one who will pyaminp andfjCompare the species -with the members of that group._ The essential
characters in v^ ^ K j t differs consist in the elongated form of the bill, in the shortness o f the tarsi, and in the
possession of a ,sharp spur, terminating a posterior rudimentary^pe^^Regarding thë Óstricb as the species
to which -it is least nearly related; we find in the Emu and Rhea a much nearer approach, not only in the
more lengthened form of the bill of the latter, but also in the situation ofAhé^^^^öIs^ vvhich in the Rhea are
placed nearer the tip than in any other species of the group, theApteryx excépted^^fact, when we compare
the bills of these two birds, it is very evident that both are formed on one plan, that of theApteryx being an
elongated representative o f the Rhea, wit)» the nostrils placed at the extremC^p V^p||)th these birds there
is the same peculiar elevated horny cere or fold. The tarsi are much shorter, and the nails o f the toes
much more curved than in the Rhea; but the scaly covering of these parts in both birds is precisely the
same; and it may be further observed that the number of toes increase as we pass on from the Ostrich,
there bein^' ofily two in that bird, three in the Rjhea, Emu, etc., and three with a rudiment of a fourth in the
Apteryx. The wing o f theApteryx, although scarcely more than rudimentary, agrees with that o f the Rhea
in having a strongly hooked claw at its extremity; while in the structure of itA{e|ther it approaches nearest
to the Cassowary; but unlike ySift obtains in that bird, the feathers are entirely destitute o f the accessory
plume, in latter respect it again agrees g§®| the Rhea. The members of this grpup, although few in
number, are remarkable fpr |heir structural p p p u h ^ § s | each being módificdtfqr its own peculiar habits
* I was not aware of the existence of Professor Owen's paper at the time I published my first account of this bird, otherwise it would not haw
remained unnoticed.