| The light tint indicates a depth of less than 1,000 fathoms. |
| The dark tint ,, ,, more than 1,000 fathoms. |
The position of New Zealand, in the great Southern Ocean, about 1,200 miles distant from the Australian
continent, is very isolated. It is surrounded by a moderately deep ocean; but the form of the sea-bottom is peculiar, and may help us in the solution of some of the anomalies presented by its living productions. The line of 200 fathoms encloses the two islands and extends their area considerably; but the 1,000-fathom line, which indicates the land-area that would be produced if the sea-bottom were elevated 6,000 feet, has a very remarkable conformation, extending in a broad mass westward and northward, then sending out a great arm reaching to beyond Lord Howe's Island. Norfolk Island is situated on a moderate-sized bank, while two others, much more extensive, to the north-west approach the great barrier reef, which here carries the 1,000-fathom line more than 300 miles from the coast. It is probable that a bank, less than 1,500 fathoms below the surface, extends over this area, thus forming a connection with tropical Australia and New Guinea. Temperate Australia, on the other hand, is divided from New Zealand by an oceanic gulf about 700 miles wide and between 2,000 and 3,000 fathoms deep. The 2,000-fathom line embraces all the islands immediately round New Zealand as far as the Fijis to the north, while a submarine plateau at a depth somewhere between one and two thousand fathoms stretches southward to the Antarctic continent. Judging from these indications, we should say that the most probable ancient connections of New Zealand were with tropical Australia, New Caledonia, and the Fiji Islands, and perhaps at a still more remote epoch, with the great Southern continent by means of intervening lands and islands; and we shall find that a land-connection or near approximation in these two directions, at remote periods, will serve to explain many of the remarkable anomalies which these islands present.
Zoological Character of New Zealand.—We see, then, that both geologically and geographically New Zealand has more of the character of a "continental" than of an "oceanic" island, yet its zoological characteristics are such as almost to bring it within the latter category—and it is this which gives it its anomalous character. It is usually
considered to possess no indigenous mammalia; it has no snakes, and only one frog; it possesses (living or quite recently extinct) an extensive group of birds incapable of flight; and its productions generally are wonderfully isolated, and seem to bear no predominant or close relation to those of Australia or any other continent. These are the characteristics of an oceanic island; and thus we find that the inferences from its physical structure and those from its forms of life directly contradict each other. Let us see how far a closer examination of the latter will enable us to account for this apparent contradiction.
Mammalia of New Zealand.—The only undoubtedly indigenous mammalia appear to be two species of bats, one of which (Scotophilus tuberculatus) is, according to Mr. Dobson, identical with an Australian form, while the other (Mystacina tuberculata) forms a very remarkable and isolated genus of Emballonuridæ, a family which extends throughout all the tropical regions of the globe. The genus Mystacina was formerly considered to belong to the American Phyllostomidæ, but this has been shown to be an error.[[169]] The poverty of New Zealand in bats is very remarkable when compared with our own islands where there are at least twelve distinct species, though we have a far less favourable climate.
Of the existence of truly indigenous land mammals in New Zealand there is at present no positive evidence, but there is some reason to believe that one if not two species may be found there. The Maoris say that before Europeans came to their country a forest-rat abounded and was largely used for food. They believe that their ancestors brought it with them when they first came to the country; but it has now become almost, if not quite, exterminated by the European brown rat. What this native animal was is still somewhat doubtful. Several specimens have been caught at different times which have been declared by the natives to be the true Kiore Maori—as they term it, but these have usually proved on examination to be either the European black rat or some of the native Australian rats which now
often find their way on board ships. But within the last few years many skulls of a rat have been obtained from the old Maori cooking-places, and from a cave associated with moa bones; and Captain Hutton, who has examined them, states that they belong to a true Mus, but differ from the Mus rattus. This animal might have been on the islands when the Maoris first arrived, and in that case would be truly indigenous; while the Maori legend of their "ancestors" bringing the rat from their Polynesian home may be altogether a myth invented to account for its presence in the islands, because the only other land mammal which they knew—the dog—was certainly so brought. The question can only be settled by the discovery of remains of a rat in some deposit of an age decidedly anterior to the first arrival of the Maori race in New Zealand.[[170]]
Much more interesting is the reported existence in the mountains of the South Island of a small otter-like animal. Dr. Haast has seen its tracks, resembling those of our European otter, at a height of 3,000 feet above the sea in a region never before trodden by man; and the animal itself was seen by two gentlemen near Lake Heron, about seventy miles due west of Christchurch. It was described as being dark brown and the size of a large rabbit. On being struck at with a whip, it uttered a shrill yelping sound and disappeared in the water.[[171]] An animal seen so closely as to be struck at with a whip could hardly have been mistaken for a dog—the only other animal that it could possibly be supposed to have been, and a dog would certainly not have "disappeared in the water." This account, as well as the footsteps, point to an aquatic animal; and if it now frequents only the high alpine lakes and streams, this might explain why it has never yet been captured. Hochstetter also states that it has a native name—Waitoteke—a striking evidence of its actual existence, while a gentleman who lived many years in the district assures me that
it is universally believed in by residents in that part of New Zealand. The actual capture of this animal and the determination of its characters and affinities could not fail to aid us greatly in our speculations as to the nature and origin of the New Zealand fauna.[[172]]