d’Ornithologie, ii. 210, or Voy. de la “Coquille,” zoologie, p. 418),
and now very generally adopted in English—of one of the most
characteristic forms of New Zealand birds, the Apteryx of
scientific writers. This remarkable bird was unknown till
George Shaw described and figured it in 1813 (Nat. Miscellany,
pls. 1057, 1058) from a specimen brought to him from the
southern coast of that country by Captain Barcley of the ship
“Providence.” At Shaw’s death, in the same year, it passed
into the possession of Lord Stanley, afterwards 13th earl of
Derby, and president of the Zoological Society, and it is now
with the rest of his collection in the Liverpool Museum. Considering
the state of systematic ornithology at the time, Shaw’s
assignment of a position to this new and strange bird, of which
he had but the skin, does him great credit, for he said it seemed
“to approach more nearly to the Struthious and Gallinaceous
tribes than to any other.” And his credit is still greater when
we find the venerable John Latham, who is said to have
examined the specimen with Shaw, placing it some years later
among the penguins (Gen. Hist. Birds, x. 394), being apparently
led to that conclusion through its functionless wings and
the backward situation of its legs. In this false allocation, James
Francis Stephens also in 1826 acquiesced (Gen. Zoology, xiii.
70). Meanwhile in 1820 K. J. Temminck, who had never seen
a specimen, had assorted it with the dodo in an order to which
he applied the name of Inertes (Man. d’Ornithologie, i. cxiv.).
In 1831 R. P. Lesson, who had previously (loc. cit.) made some
blunders about it, placed it (Traité d’Ornithologie, p. 12), though
only, as he says, “par analogie et a priori,” in his first division
of birds, “Oiseaux Anomaux,” which is equivalent to what we
now call Ratitae, making of it a separate family “Nullipennes.”
At that time no second example was known, and some doubt
was felt, especially on the Continent, as to the very existence
of such a bird [1]—though Lesson had himself when in the Bay
of Islands in April 1824 (Voy. “Coquille,” ut supra) heard of it;
and a few years later J. S. C. Dumont d’Urville had seen its
skin, which the naturalists of his expedition procured, worn as a
tippet by a Maori chief at Tolaga Bay (Houa-houa),[2] and in
1830 gave what proves to be on the whole very accurate information
concerning it (Voy. “Astrolabe,” ii. 107). To put all
suspicion at rest, Lord Derby sent his unique specimen for
exhibition at a meeting of the Zoological Society, on the 12th of
February 1833 (Proc. Zool. Society, 1833, p. 24), and a few months
later (tom. cit., p. 80) William Yarrell communicated to that body
a complete description of it, which was afterwards published in
full with an excellent portrait (Trans. Zool. Society, vol. i. p. 71,
pl. 10). Herein the systematic place of the species, as akin to the
Struthious birds, was placed beyond cavil, and the author called
upon all interested in zoology to aid in further research as to this
singular form. In consequence of this appeal a legless skin was
within two years sent to the society (Proceedings, 1835, p. 61)
obtained by W. Yate of Waimate, who said it was the second
he had seen, and that he had kept the bird alive for nearly a
fortnight, while in less than another couple of years additional
information (op. cit., 1837, p. 24) came from T. K. Short to the
effect that he had seen two living, and that all Yarrell had said
was substantially correct, except underrating its progressive
powers. Not long afterwards Lord Derby received and in March
1838 transmitted to the same society the trunk and viscera of
an Apteryx, which, being entrusted to Sir R. Owen, furnished
that eminent anatomist, in conjunction with other specimens
of the same kind received from Drs Lyon and George Bennett,
with the materials of the masterly monograph laid before the
society in instalments, and ultimately printed in its Transactions
(ii. 257; iii. 277). From this time the whole structure of the
kiwi has certainly been far better known than that of nearly
any other bird, and by degrees other examples found their way
to England, some of which were distributed to the various
museums of the Continent and of America.[3]
Kiwi.
In 1847 much interest was excited by the reported discovery of another species of the genus (Proceedings, 1847, p. 51), and though the story was not confirmed, a second species was really soon after made known by John Gould (tom. cit., p. 93; Transactions, vol. iii. p. 379, pl. 57) under the name of Apteryx oweni—a just tribute to the great master who had so minutely explained the anatomy of the group. Three years later A. D. Bartlett drew attention to the manifest difference existing among certain examples, all of which had hitherto been regarded as specimens of A. australis, and the examination of a large series led him to conclude that under that name two distinct species were confounded. To the second of these, the third of the genus (according to his views), he gave the name of A. mantelli (Proceedings, 1850, p. 274), and it soon turned out that to this new form the majority of the specimens already obtained belonged. In 1851 the first kiwi known to have reached England alive was presented to the Zoological Society by Eyre, then lieutenant-governor of New Zealand. This was found to belong to the newly described A. mantelli, and some careful observations on its habits in captivity were published by John Wolley and another (Zoologist, pp. 3409, 3605).[4] Subsequently the society has received several other live examples of this form, besides one of the real A. australis (Proceedings, 1872, p. 861), some of A. oweni, and one of a supposed fourth species, A. haasti, characterized in 1871 by Potts (Ibis, 1872, p. 35; Trans. N. Zeal. Institute, iv. 204; v. 195).[5]
The kiwis form a group of the subclass Ratitae to which the rank of an order may fitly be assigned, as they differ in many important particulars from any of the other existing forms of Ratite birds. The most obvious feature the Apteryges afford is the presence of a back toe, while the extremely aborted condition of the wings, the position of the nostrils—almost at the tip of the maxilla—and the absence of an after-shaft in the feathers, are characters nearly as manifest, and others not less determinative, though more recondite, will be found on examination. The kiwis are peculiar to New Zealand, and it
- ↑ Cuvier in the second edition of his Règne Animal only referred to it in a footnote (i. 498).
- ↑ Cruise in 1822 (Journ. Residence in New Zealand, p. 313) had spoken of an “emeu” found in that island, which must of course have been an Apteryx.
- ↑ In 1842, according to Broderip (Penny Cyclopaedia, xxiii. 146), two had been presented to the Zoological Society by the New Zealand Company, and two more obtained by Lord Derby, one of which he had given to Gould. In 1844 the British Museum possessed three, and the sale catalogue of the Rivoli Collection, which passed in 1846 to the Academy of Natural Sciences at Philadelphia, includes a single specimen—probably the first taken to America.
- ↑ This bird in 1859 laid an egg, and afterwards continued to lay one or two more every year. In 1865 a male of the same species was introduced, but though a strong disposition to breed was shown on the part of both, and the eggs, after the custom of the Ratitae, were incubated by him, no progeny was hatched (Proceedings, 1868, p. 329).
- ↑ A fine series of figures of all these supposed species is given by Rowley (Orn. Miscellany, vol. i. pls. 1–6). Some others, as A. maxima, A. mollis, and A. fusca have also been indicated, but proof of their validity has yet to be adduced.
