.7-7

*

Old Series, > Continuation of the I New Series,

Vol. X. ) Bulletin of the Nuttall Ornithological Club \ Vol. II

The Auk

a UuartetC vnal of Onutliology

i TOR,

J. A. ALLEN

ASSOCI. TE EDITORS,

ELLIOTT COUES, ROBERT RIDGWAY, WILLIAM BREWSTER,
and MONTAGUE CHAMBER-LAIN

VOLUME II

PUBLISHED FOR

The American Ornithologists’ Union

BOSTON, Mass

ESTES <Sc LiAURIAT

Printed by

W. //. Wheeler, 41b Harvard St.,
Cambridge, Mass.

CONTENTS OF VOLUME II.

NUMBER I.

PAGE.

On the Breeding Habits of Some Arizona Birds. First

Paper. By W. E. D. Scott ........ i

Bird Names of the Selish, Pah-Uta, and Shoshoni Indians.

By W. J. Hoffman , M. D. . 7

On the Vertical Range of Birds in Colorado. By Frank M.

Drew . . . . . . . . . . . .11

Observations on Elanoides forficatus and Ictinia subccerulea in

Kansas. By N. S. Goss . 19

Manitoban Notes. By Ernest E. T. Seton . . . . .21

On the Function of the Inferior Larynx in Birds. By F.

M. W. Kitchen , M. D. . . . . . . . .24

Notes on the Occurrence of Certain Birds in the Missis¬
sippi Valley. By W. W. Cooke . 31

The Nesting Habits of the Cape May Warbler ( Dendrceca

tigrina ). By Montague Chamberlain . . . . . .33

Bird Notes from Long Island, N. Y. By William Dutcher . 36

Field Notes from Pictou County, Nova Scotia. By y antes

Me Kinlay ........... 39

Analecta Ornithologica. Fourth Series. By Leonhard Stejneger 43
Preliminary Report of the Committee on Bird Migration.

By C. Hart Merriman, M. D. ....... 53

Swainson’s Warbler. By William Brewster . . . . . 65

The Heath Hen of Massachusetts. By William Brewster . 80

Preliminary Notes on Some Birds obtained in Arizona by

Mr. F. Stephens in 1884. By William Brewster . . .81

RECENT LITERATURE.

Abbott’s ‘ A Naturalist’s Rambles about Home,’ 86; Seebohm’s His¬
tory of British Birds, 88; Ingersoll’s ‘Country Cousins,’ 91 ; Lan-
gille’s ‘ Our Birds in their Haunts : A Popular Treatise on the
Birds of Eastern North America,’ 91 ; Stejneger on the Wrens
of the Subgenus Anortkura, 94 ; Stejneger on the Ptarmigans of
the group Attagen , 94; Stejneger on New Species of Birds from
Kamtschatka, 95; Stejneger on Recent Ornithological Publica¬
tions in the United States, 95 ; Merriam on a Bird New to the
Bermudas, etc., 95 ; Shufeldt on the Osteology of Ceryle alcyon ,

95; Shufeldt on the Avian Patella, 96; Minor Ornithological
Publications, 96; Publications Received, 101.

GENERAL NOTES.

Albino Robins ( Turdtis migratorius), 102; Nest and Eggs of the
Golden-winged Warbler ( Helminthophila chrysoptera ) , 102;

Nest and Eggs of the Blackburnian Warbler, 103; Nesting of the
Worm-eating Warbler ( Helmitherus vermivorus') , 103; Oporornis
agilis and Dendrceca palniartini palmarum at Shelburne, near
Gorham, New Hampshire, 104; Swainson’s Warbler oft Southern
Florida, 104; Swainson’s Warbler — An Omission, 105; The Red

IV

Contents of Volume II.

Crossbill breeding in Massachusetts, 105 ; The Ipswich Sparrow
(Passerculus princep s') in Delaware, 105 ; Peuccea aestivalis and its
Subspecies illinoensis, 105; The Black-throated Bunting in Maine,

106; Foster Parents of the Cowbird, 106; Nest and Eggs of the
Rusty Grackle ( Scolecophagus ferrugineus ), 106; A White Crow
(Corvus frugivorus), 107; A Remarkable Migration of Canada
Jays, 107; The Kingbird in a New R61e, 108 ; Late Occurrence
of the Phoebe ( Sayornis fusca ) at Brewer, Maine, 108; Hawk
Owls in New England, 108; The Turkey Buzzard in Central
New York, 109; Recent Occurrence of the Black Vvdture in Ohio,

109; A New Bird for Illinois, 109; The Great White Egret and
Yellow Rail in Ottawa, Canada, no; CEdicnemus dominiccnsis
in Confinement, no; The Western Semipalmated Sandpiper on
the Coast of Virginia, no; The Canada Goose, in; The Eider
Ducks of the New England Coast, in; The White Pelican on
Lake Ontario, in ; The Common Cormorant off Boston Harbor,

112; The Common Cormorant in Massachusetts, 112; Rare Sum¬
mer Residents in Kansas, 112 ; Third Addendum to List of Birds
Ascertained to Occur within Ten Miles from Point des Monts,
Province of Quebec, Canada; Based chiefly' upon the Notes of
Napoleon A. Comeau, 1 13 ; Albinism, 113.

CORRESPONDENCE.

Vernacular Names of Birds, 114.

NOTES AND NEWS.

Ornithological Publications, 115; Ornithological Societies, n6; The
Baldamus Collection of Birds’ Nests and Eggs, 1 16 ; The Names
‘Junco’ and ‘Snowbird,’ and ‘Vireo’ and ‘Greenlet,’ 116.

SUPPLEMENT.

Committee on the Migration and Geographical Distribution
of North American Birds. — Circular for 1S84. By C. Hart
Merriam , M. D. . . . . . . . . . .117

NUMBER II.

PAGE.

Winter Notes from New Mexico. By Charles F. Batchelder . 121

Sexual Selection and the Nesting of Birds. By J. A. Allen 129
Notes on Some of the Birds of Pueblo, Colorado. By Charles

Wickliffe Beckham ........ . 139

A Study of the Singing of our Birds. By Eugene P. Bicknell 144
Notes on the Birds of the Nearer Islands, Alaska. By Lucian

M. Turner ........... 154

On the Breeding Habits of Some Arizona Birds. By' IV. E.

D. Scott. Second Paper. Icterus cucullatus . 159

On Buteo harlani (Aud.) and B. cooperi Cass. By Robert

Ridgtvay ........... 165

Remarks on the California Vulture ( Pseudogryphus Califor¬
nia tins'). By Robert Ridgtvay . . . . . . .167

Contents of Volume II.

PAGE.

Note on Sarcorhamphus .equatorialis Sharpe. By Robert

Ridgzuay ........... 169

Winter Mountain Notes from Southern Arizona. By W. E.

D. Scott ............ 172

Variations in the Form of the Beak, that take place dur¬
ing its growth, in the Short-tailed Albatross {Diomedea .
brachyura). By Dr. R. IV. Skufeldt, Cl. S Army . . . 175

Analecta Ornithologica. Fifth Series. By Leonhard Stejneger 178
Supplementary Notes on the Ornithology of Chester

County, South Carolina. By Lever ett M. Loomis . . 18S

The Rock Ptarmigan of Newfoundland. By William Brew¬
ster ............. 193

Additional Notes on some Birds collected in Arizona and
THE ADJOINING PROVINCE OF SONORA, MEXICO, BY Mr. F.
Stephens in 1884: with a Description of a New Species
of Ortyx. By William Brewster ...... 196

Notes on Some Species of Birds attributed to Point Bar-

row, Alaska. By John Murdoch ...... 200

Change of Color in the Wing-feathers of the Willow

Grouse. By C. Hart Me r riant, M. D. ..... 201

RECENT LITERATURE.

Gurney’s ‘List of the Diurnal Birds of Prey.’ 203; Newton’s ‘Or¬
nithology,’ 235; Ridgway on the American Red Crossbills, 206;
Ridgvvay on Various American Birds, 207; Jordan’s ‘Manual of
Vertebrates,’ 208 ; Shufeldt on the Osteology of Num cuius longiros-
tris, 208; Rives on the- Birds of Newport, R. I., 20S ; Bell on Birds
observed between Norway House and Forts Churchill and York,
209; Minor Ornithological Publications, 209; Publications Re¬
ceived. 214.

GENERAL NOTES.

The Wood Thrush in Maine, 215 ; The Occurrence of the Catbird
(. Mimus carol inetisis') on the Farallone Islands, Pacific Ocean,
215; The Yellow-rumped Warbler Wintering in Maine, 216; The
- Migration of the Swallows, 216; Nelson’s Sharp-tailed Finch on
the Atlantic Coast, 216; Wintering of the Swamp Sparrow in
Eastern Massachusetts, 216; Cyanocitta stelleri frontalis Nesting
in Holes in Trees. 217 ; The First Nest and Eggs of Eremophila
alpestris found in Niagara County, N. Y., 217; The Swallow¬
tailed Flycatcher in Manitoba and at York Factory, 218; The
Food of the Hummingbird ( Trochilus colubris) , 218; The Chuck-
will’s-widow (Antrostomus carolinensis ) in Massachusetts, 220;
The Hawk Owl in Eastern Massachusetts, 220; The Ptarmigan of
Anticosti — A Correction, 220; A Blue Heron’s Meal, 221 ; Wood
Ibis ( Tantalus loculator) in Eastern New York, 221; Wilson’s
Plover in Nova Scotia, 221 ; The Occurrence of Chroicocephalus
franklini in Wisconsin, 222; Rissa tridactyla kotzbuei in Wash¬
ington Territory, 222.

CORRESPONDENCE.

Indian Bird Names, 222.

VI

Contents of Volume II.

NOTES AND NEWS.

Government Aid to the A. O. U. Committee on Bird Migration, 223;
The New Maine Bird-law 223; The Collection of Birds in the
Museum of Comparative Zoology, 224; The Editor’s Change of
Address, 224; Obituary — Dr. N. Severtzow, 224; The Ridgway
Ornithological Club, 224; ‘The Young Ornithologist,' 224.

NUMBER III.

PAGE.

Notes of an Ornithological Trip in Arizona and Sonora.

By F. Stephens .......... 225

The Gulls of the California Coast. By H. W. Henshaw . 231

Winter Notes from New Mexico. By Charles F. Batckelder . 233

Counter-1 Notes on Some Species of Birds Attributed to

Point Barrow, Alaska.’ By E. W. Nelson .... 239

On the Breeding Habits of Some Arizona Birds. By IV. E. D.

Scott. Third Paper. Phainopepla nitens ..... 242

Hybrid Quail (Lophortyxgambeli X L. calif ortiicus') . B y H. W.

Henshaw ........... 247

A Study of the Singing of Our Birds. By Eugene P. Bickt.ell 249
Winter Birds of Prince Edward Island. By Francis Bain . 262

Notes on Manitoban Birds. By Ernest E. T. Seton . . . 267

Long Island, N. Y., Bird Notes. B y Newbo/d T. Lawrence . 272

The Black-capped Vireo and Nonpareil in Southwestern

Kansas. By N. S. Goss . 274

The Birds of Southeastern Dakota. By G.S. Agersborg . 276

RECENT LITERATURE.

Nests and Eggs of the Birds of Ohio, 2S9; Willard on Birds of Brown
and Outagamie Counties, Wisconsin, 289; Lawrence on New
Species of American Birds, 290; Ridgway on New Species and
Subspecies of American Birds, and on the Nomenclature of
Other Species, 290; Nutting on Nicaraguan Birds, 293; Stejneger
on the Genus Ceppkas , 294; Ridgway on New Species of Birds
from Cozumel Island, Yucatan, 294; Cory’s Birds of Haiti and
San Domingo, 295; Minor Ornithological Publications, 295 ; Pub¬
lications Received, 302.

GENERAL NOTES.

Abnormal Coloration in a Caged Robin, 303; Another Black Robin,
303; Return of Robins to the same Nesting-places, 30^; Abun¬
dance of Pants atricapillus near Washington, 304; Occurrence of
Helminthophila leucobronckialis in Virginia, 304; Another Ex¬
ample of Helminthophila leucobronckialis from Connecticut, 304;
Nesting of the Worm-eating Warbler ( Ilelminthotherus vermi-
vorus') in Southern Connecticut, 305 ; Probable Breeding of the
Wheatear ( Saxicola cenanthe) on the North Shore of the Gulf of
St. Lawrence, 305; Nest and Eggs of the Philadelphia Vireo, 305 ;

Contents of Volume II .

A White-winged Junco in Maryland, 306 ; Junco annectens — A
Correction, 306; Capture of Amtnodramus caudacutus nelson i in
the Lower Hudson Valley, New York, 306; Swamp Sparrows and
Yellow-rumps, — A Question of Evidence, 307; The Song of Car-
dinalis virginianus , 307 ; The Black-throated Bunting, Yellow¬
breasted Chat and Connecticut Warbler in Ontario, 307 ; A Belated
Bird, 30S; Cowbird Wintering in Western New York, 309; Nest
and Eggs of Calypte costce, 309 ; Curious food for the Kingfisher
( Ceryle alcyoii) ,311; Occurrence of the Sharp-shinned Hawk in
New Hampshire in Winter, 311 : Early and Accidental Occurrence
of Catkarista at rota and Tantalus loculator in Kansas, 311 ; The
Glossy Ibis and Avocet at San Diego, Cal., 31 1; The Eggs of the
Knot ( Tringa canutus) found at last, 312; Southern Range ol
Rissa tridactyla kotzbuei , 313 ; The Relationship of Podiceps occi-
dentalis and P. clarhii, 313 ; The Western Grebe in Manitoba,
314; Capture of Escaped Cage-birds, 314; Introduced Game
Birds in Oregon and Idaho. 315; Fourth Addendum to List ol
Birds Ascertained to occur within ten miles from Point des Monts,
Province of Quebec, Canada, 315.

CORRESPONDENCE.

The Popular Names of Birds, 316.

NOTES AND NEWS.

Time and Place of Meeting of the A. O. U. for 1SS5, 317; A. O. U.
‘Code and Check List,’ 31S; Economic Ornithology, 31S; Mr.
Brewster’s Ornithological Explorations, 318 ; Messrs. Bailey and
Sennett’s Ornithological Collections, 318; Ridgway Ornithologi¬
cal Club, 319; Ornithological Works in Prospect, 319; New Or¬
nithological Journals, 320.

NUMBER IV.

PAGE.

On the Breeding Habits of Some Arizona Birds. Fourth Paper.

Virco vicinior. By IV. E. D. Scott ...... 321

List of Birds observed in Summer and Fall on the Upper Pe¬
cos River, New Mexico. By H. W. Henshaw ■ • • 326

Interesting Records from Toronto, Canada. By Ernest E. T.

Seton ■ • • • • • • • • • ; • 334

Analecta Ornithologica. Sixth Series. By Leonhard Stejneger 337
Description of a New Cardinal Grosbeak from Arizona. By

Robert Ridgway . ■ • • • • • • • 343

Additional Notes on the Nest and Eggs of Swainson's War¬
bler. By William Brewster ....... 346

Early Spring Notes from the Mountains of Southern Ari¬
zona. By W. E. D. Scott . 343

Descriptions of New Species of Birds of the Family Colum-

bid.e. By George N. Lawrence ...■■•• 357
Helminthophila leucobronchialis. By Robert Ridgway . . 369

On Junco cinereus (Swains.) and its Geographical Races. By

'Robert Ridgivav . 363

Contents oj Volume II.

RECENT LITERATURE.

Sharpe’s Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum — Volume X,
365; Turner’s List of the Birds of Labrador, 368; Zeledon’s
Catalogue of the Birds of Costa Rica, 370; Ridgway on New
American Birds, 370; Ridgway on the Type Specimen of Buteo
oxypterus Cassin, 371 ; Ridgway’s List of Emended Names of
North American Birds, 371 ; Minor Ornithological Publications,
372; Publications Received, 375.

GENERAL NOTES.

Kirtland’s Warbler from the Straits of Mackinac, 376; Odd Nesting
Habits of the Blue Yellow-backed Warbler in Missouri, 377;
Swainson’s Warbler in Jamaica. 377 ; A Specimen of Helmintho-
phila leucob ronchialis in New Jersey, 378 ; Capture of two more
Specimens of Helminthophila leucobronchialis at Sing Sing, New
York, 378; Evidence concerning the Interbreeding of Helmintho¬
phila chrysoptera and H. pintts, 378; The Loggerhead Shrike in
New Hampshire, 379 ; Breeding of Loxia americana in the Dis¬
trict of Columbia, 379; Non-appearance of Juncos at Montreal,
380; Familiar Chipping Sparrows, 380; Swamp Sparrows and
Yellow-rumps, 380; Note on the Capture of Coturniculus lecontei
and Dendreeca kirtlandi within the city limits of St. Louis, Mo.,
381; On the Feeding Habits of Phalcenoptilus nuttali, 382 ; Co-
laptes auratus in California, 383 : A Hawk Owl at Chatham,
Mass., 383 ; Another Richardson’s Owl in Massachusetts, 384; The
Oyster-catcher ( Hcematopus palliatus) in Massachusetts, 384;
The Baird’s Sandpiper (Actodromas bairdi ) at Locust Grove, New
York, 384; A Bird New to Massachusetts, 384; Ereunetes occi-
dentalis on the Lower Potomac, 385 ; The Great Marbled Godwit
at Portland, Maine, 385 ; The Little Yellow Rail ( Porzana nove-
boracensis ) in Kansas, 385 ; Harelda hyemalis in Maryland in Sum¬
mer, 385 ; An Albino Surf Duck ( CEdemia perspicillatd), 386;
On the Alleged Occurrence of the Pacific Eider in Labrador, 3S6;
A New Petrel for North America, 386; Probable Occurrence of
Diomedea exulans in Florida, 387 ; The Bill of the Horned Puffin
( Ceratorhina monocerata) , 387 ; A Crested Auk on the Massachu¬
setts Coast, 388 ; The Thick-billed Greb e (Podilymbus podiceps)
Breeding in Kansas, 388.

CORRESPONDENCE.

Republication in ‘The Auk’ of Descriptions of New North American
Birds.— A Suggestion, 389.

NOTES AND NEWS.

The Next Meeting of the American Ornithologists’ Union, 389; Ridg¬
way Ornithological Club, 390; The A. O. U. Check List and
Code of Nomenclature, 390; Ornithological Works in Press,
390; Obituary — Dr. William Wood, Dr. H. A. Atkins, 391; New
Natural History Serials, 391 ; Recent Additions to the British
Museum Collection of Birds, 392.

Index

393

THE AUK:

A Q_U ARTE R L Y J OU R N A L 0 F

ORNITHOLOGY.

vol. ii. January, 1885. No. 1.

ON THE BREEDING HABITS OF SOME ARIZONA

BIRDS.

First Paper. — Icterus par isorum.

BY W. E. D. SCOTT.

During the spring and summer of 1884 it was my good fortune
to make the acquaintance of a number of birds whose breed¬
ing habits are at best but little known, and the following data
give some of the results of such observations. Most of the
notes on the species in question were made at a point, to
be more fully described presently, on the San Pedro slope
of the Santa Catalina Mountains, in Pinal County, Arizona
Territory.

Here Scott’s Oriole ( Icterus par isorum') arrives about the
middle of April, and is at once among the more conspicuous
birds, both for its brilliant plumage and rich song. Few birds
sing more incessantly, and in fact I do not recall a species in the
Eastern or Middle States that is to be heard as frequently. The
males are of course the chief performers, but now and again,
near a nest, while watching the birds, I would detect a female
singing the same glad song, onlv more softly. At the earliest day¬
break and all day long, even when the sun is at its highest, and
during the great heat of the afternoon, its very musical whistle is
one of the few bird songs that are ever present.

2

Scott on the Breeding Habits of Scott's Oriole.

[January

From the time of its arrival until July 29 I heard the song
daily, even hourly, and during the height of the breeding season
often many were singing within hearing at the same time.

This has been called ‘a desert species,’ and most Arizona birds
might fall under the same grouping, at times, I suppose, but my
experience with it is so very directly to the contrary that a word
as to the surroundings of the home of this Oriole, as found by
me, will perhaps give a better idea to the reader.

There is a canon that begins high up in the Santa Catalinas,
and, dividing the hills and table lands on either side of it by its
deep furrow, it extends for two miles or more, where it joins the
valley of the San Pedro River. It is the upper or more elevated
part of this canon with which we have to do, at an altitude vary¬
ing from four thousand to five thousand feet. The hills on either
side are high, the canon generally quite narrow. Live oaks are
the trees of the hills and hillsides, and reach in places to the bed
of the canon. Here in parts are groves of cottonwoods and
scycamores, and some cedars, and, with the exception of the verv
bed of the canon, where for a part of the year is a brook, the
grass covers the surface of the ground. The brook begins to
dry up in its exposed parts early in May, but all summer long
there is running water for at least a mile in the cottonwood
grove, and in a number of places, even during the driest part of
the year, the water rises to the surface, making ‘tanks,’ as they
are called. Along this running water and about the ‘tanks,’ bird
life is very abundant, and here, surely no desert, is the summer
home of many Scott’s Orioles. There is very little cactus, and
none of the ‘chollas’ that are so very characteristic of the deserts
of the neighboring region.

After August 7 I missed the song, although the birds were
abundant until the 10th of that month, and I saw a single bird
or so for the following three days. Then I supposed they were
all gone, but on the 14th of September, about dusk, I started one.
an adult male, from a yucca where he had evidently gone to
roost. lie scolded angrily at me from the dead limb of a cedar
near by for a few moments, when I left him to go to bed. Again,
on the iSth of September. I heard a male in full song, and going
closer found a party of four together, three old males and a
young one of the year. This is mv last note of their occurrence
at this point.

i SSs . ] Scott on the Breeding Habits of Scott’s Oriole. 3

There are many yuccas ( Yucca baccata ) in the canon and on
the hillside, none of them exceeding ten feet in height, and it
was in one of these, only a few feet from a wood near where
some one passed daily, and close to a ‘tank’ of water, that on
May 24 I found the first nest. It was carefully concealed under
the half dead and dry leaves that hung downward close to the
trunk of the plant. Two of the long pointed blades had still
been green enough to allow the pulp to be picked away, and the
tough fibers had then been frayed and used as a sort of starting
point or foundation for the structure which was thus ‘sewed’ — I
know no more appropriate word — fast to the edges of the leaf.
I only caught a glimpse of the female and was not sure of the
bird till later, when both parents were identified to mv satisfac¬
tion.

The nest contained three fresh eggs, though four is the usual
number, as three nests found during the next few days proved.
These nests were all built in vuccas, none were far from water,
and, strangely, for a rather shy and suspicious bird, all were
within ten feet of the road. The last, that of May 30, to be
spoken of in detail presently, was so near a much used trail, that
the passer by might have touched it with the hand. The follow¬
ing descriptions of the nests in detail are copied from mv notes :

“Nest of May 24. Built in a yucca, four feet from the ground.
Sewed to the edges of five dead leaves which, hanging down
parallel to trunk of the plant, entirely concealed the nest. Semi-
pensile. Composed externally of fibers of the yucca and
fine grasses. Lined with soft grasses and threads of cotton-
waste throughout. The walls are very thin, at bottom not more
than half an inch, and on the sides from one-eighth to a quarter
of an inch thick. The whole nest was rather closely woven and
very strong. Inside depth, three and a half inches. Inside diam¬
eter, four inches. The whole cup-shaped. Contains three fresh
eggs. The female was killed flying from the nest, or the set
would have been completed. Eggs bluish-white in color, with
a cluster of chocolate-brown spots, and others of lighter lilac-
brown at the larger end, spotted very sparsely all over, mainly
with a still lighter shade of the latter color, though a very few of
these dispersed markings are also dark chocolate-brown. They
measure .98 X .69, .92 X .65, 1.00 x .73 inches, respectively.
I have called this nest semi-pensile, as the edges of the yucca

4

Scott on the Breeding Habits of Scott's Oriole. [January

leaves are not simply attached to the rim or top edge of the nest,
but are ‘sewed’ to the sides of the structure — one blade for three
inches, three for four inches, and the other two for more than two
inches and a half. The nest is sewed to the blades or leaves
about seven inches from where they join the trunk of the plant,
and the blades are about twenty-two inches long.”

“Nest of May 27. Built in yucca, about four feet from
ground. Nest sewed to the edges of three leaves, all on one side
of the structure and close together, being about three-quarters of
an inch apart. Other leaves project downward at an angle of
about 450, and the nest rests on them, as it would on the slanting
roof of a house. It is thei'efore not at all pensile. Is built of
grasses, yucca fiber, and has cotton twine woven into its walls.
Inside it is lined to within half an inch of the rim with small
pieces of cotton batting, some cotton twine, and a little very soft
grass. It is sewed to the edges of each of the three leaves it
rests on for six inches. The walls on the sides are an inch, and
at the bottom an inch and a half thick. The general inside
shape is oval, the greatest diameter being four and the least
three and a half inches. The greatest depth inside is three and
a half inches. The walls on sides sewed to leaves are about six
inches in depth, and on the side rising from the leaves four
inches. It contains four fresh eggs, that recall those of the Red¬
winged Blackbird ( Ageheus pJiceniceits ) in general appearance.
They measure as follows : .96 x .68, .98 X .66, .92 x .68,

.C)6 X .68. The nest is sewed to the leaves about ten inches
from where they join the trunk of the plant, and the leaves are
about eighteen inches long. Other leaves hanging downward
above those on which the nest rests almost conceal it.”

“Nest of May 30. Built in yucca, four feet from the ground.
Composed of yucca fiber and fine grasses, and is very similar to
that of May 24 in general appearance. The bottom of the
structure inside is lined with a soft mat of cotton-waste. Semi-
pensile, being sewed to six leaves of the plant, three of which
almost conceal the nest from view. The nest measures: depth
inside, four inches ; depth outside, five and a half inches ; inside
diameter at top, four inches. The general shape of the interior
is that of a rather large and shallow cup. Contains four eggs,
partially incubated. Ground-color bluish-white, with much the
same colored markings as those of the nest of May 24. Their

1SS5.]

Scott on the Breeding Habits of Scott's Oriole.

5

general shape differs, however, as they are much more pointed at
one end and flattened at the other, the shape reminding one of the
eggs of some of the Plovers. They measure .92 x .71, .93 X
.78, .91 X .70, .88 X .69. The sewing of the nest reaches on
two of the leaves four inches ; on one, five inches ; on one,
three inches ; and on the other two. an inch and a half. The
nest is fastened to the leaves about five inches from where they
join the stem or trunk of the plant, and the leaves to which
it is fastened are rather more than twenty inches long. -

“Second nest of Mav 30.. Similar in location to the first nest
of same date and built in same kind of plant. Composed of
grasses and yucca fiber, the later mainly, and has in the inside
at bottom a very thick lining of cotton-waste. Is semi-pen-
sile, and is sewed to four green leaves — to one for six inches, the
entire wall of the nest for its whole length being fastened. A
second is sewed only for half an inch to the wall very close to
the bottom of the nest. A third is very similar in its point of
attachment, only that it is fastened for a little more than an inch,
and the last is fastened for three inches in the ordinary way.
The nest is very uneven in shape externally, being fully six inches
deep on one side and not more than two inches deep on the
other. The nest has an interior diameter of four and a quarter
inches, and is very shallow and cup-shaped, being only two and
a quarter inches deep at its deepest part. Four fresh eggs are
the contents, and they vary only in not being so pointed as the
other set of May 30. They are rather larger than any others
measured, being 1.01 x .72, 1.02 x .70. .97 X .70, 1.02 x .73.
The general shape of the nest is an uneven, one-sided cup, with
its greatest external diameter four and three-quarters inches. It
is attached to the leaves about seven inches from the trunk of the.
plant, and the leaves to which it is attached are twenty-six inches
long. It is built but little more than three feet from the ground,
and partially concealed by over-hanging leaves.”

The cotton and cotton-waste were doubtless picked up by the
birds about the house and near a mill but a little distance
away, where the waste is used in polishing machinery, etc.

Some pairs of the birds, at least, raise two broods during the
season. A fifth nest, completing my series, was found just
finished on June 26, and all the eggs, three in number, were
deposited by July 1. when the nest was taken. It was built in a

6

Scott oh the Breeding Habits of Scott's Oriole. [January

sycamore overhanging the wood-road before mentioned, and
about forty yards from water. It differs greatly from any of the
others, as the appended notes show.

“Nest of July I. Built in a sycamore tree, about eighteen
feet from the ground. Pensile, being attached to the ends of
the twigs. It is composed externally entirely of the fibers of
dead yucca leaves, and there are hanging to and built into the
walls four rather small dead leaves of this plant, that are partly
frayed, so that the fiber is used in weaving them into the structure.
The interior is lined with soft fine grasses, and only two or three
shreds of cotton-waste appear here and there in the lining. The
walls vary from a quarter to half an inch in thickness. The
whole structure is very symmetrical and is a half sphere in shape.
Inside the greatest depth is two and a half and the greatest
diameter four inches. The entire set of eggs was laid, as the
nest had been watched for a number of days ; and the female was
killed, when the nest was taken, and dissected. Three eggs
compose the set, and differ from those already described only
in being of a deeper bluish-white ground-color. They measure
•SS x .72, .9S x .70, -90 X 74, being therefore rather rounder
in general outline than any of the other sets. This nest is
attached to the twigs from which it hangs very much like that
ot a Baltimore Oriole ( Icterus baltimore) .”

Ten minutes’ walk from the house would have reached any of
these five nests, and three of them were within a hundred and
fifty yards of one another.

The first young that I met with, that had left the nest, were
seen on July 2, and on July 4 I saw many fully fledged, and
apparently shifting for themselves. The following note is dated
July 24: “Young males, fully fledged, evidently of the first
brood, were singing very softly.” “A young male taken, begin-
ing to moult from ‘first’ plumage ; the first noted in this condi¬
tion.”

The species here is a very common one, and it seems possible
that after a few years’ association with houses and people it may
no longer be the shy, suspicious bird of the present, but become
as familiar as others of the genus have. On their first arrival
they were constantlv in the oaks overhanging the house, and
only seemed alarmed if too closely observed.

That they do not always build in the yuccas, though doubtless
that is the favorite nesting place, the nest of July 1 proves, and I

•885-1

Hoffman on Indian Bird Names.

/

feel confident that certain Orioles’ nests that 1 have seen in the
misseltoe of the oaks, and others pendant from the oak boughs
themselves, are, from their general character, those of the species
in question.

BIRD NAMES OF THE SELLSH. PAH-UTA AND
SHOSHONI INDIANS.

BY W. J. HOFFMAN. M. I).

Most of the data herewith submitted were obtained from the
Selisli, or Flathead. Indians, in Western Montana, who occupy a
fertile l'egion known as the Jocko Valley, which is bounded on
the west by the Rocky Mountains. Other information was also
obtained from the Pah-Uta Indians in the vicinity of Pyramid
Lake, Nevada ; from the Uta Indians of Los Pinos. Colorado,
and the Shoshoni at Fort Hall, Idaho.

To obtain the names of birds from any aboriginal tribe is no
slight task. The living specimen, of any given species, may be
very familiar to them, but should the dead specimen be presented
for identification, there is uncertainty and doubt, and frequently
it will be impossible for the collector to receive any but a generic
term, if even that. The reason for this is, that Indians, whde
close observers regarding flight, habits, or voice of the bird, are
at a loss unless they kill a species and instantly pronounce their
decision, the association of their own name with it being based
upon one of these peculiarities. Some marked genera are readilv
identified by all the members of the tribe ; and even species have
peculiarities in color-markings, the shape of the bill, legs, etc., so
that one may not always find the difficulties referred to.

There does not appear to be a division of birds, among any of
our tribes, into Land Birds and Water Birds. But, on the
contrary, there is a distinction between large birds and small
birds. The latter are called tsia-ka'-la bv the Dakota ; si-su' by
the Washo ; nu-tsi-pa' by the Pah-Uta ; and ha'-wits by the LTta.
These names include even the Grouse and Wild Turkey, but
should raptorial birds be referred to. though smaller than the last-

8

| January

Hoffman otr Indian Bird Names.

named, the particular designation would at once be furnished
without reference to size, as the Raptores have, in each instance,
names of a generic and specific character, or perhaps one only,
implying something with reference to peculiarities of the beak,
the claws, or the manner of grasping the prey. An instance of
this may be observed in a Falco sp ? of the ‘ Crow ’ Indians, viz :
the Absdroka , after which the tribe is named. The word
Absdroka is derived from apita ; ap an arrow point, a hook, and
'ta to kill; i.e., to kill with an arrow-pointed mouth. The
latter portion of the word is not clear. The word for Crow
( Corvus) in the same language is pe-ri'-tshi , and signifies ‘ to
defile one’s self.’ With these few remarks I will proceed to the
list of names, under which further discussion will be continued,
when necessary. The orthography is phonetic, vowels having
continental sound, and but two characters are introduced for
which no representative sounds occur in English, viz : —

X, similar to the German ch in nacht , or rather the Spanish j
in mujer. Equivalent to the Arabic ghciin.

^similar to German ch in nicht. The letters S., Sh. , P.,
or U., in parentheses, refer respectively to Selish, Shoshoni,
Pah-Uta, and Uta.

t. Oreoscoptes montanus ( Towns.) Baird. Sage Thrasher. Tsd-
num (P.). — In the Pah-Ute mythology this bird was a. great soldier, but
on account of his being a cannibal, he was transformed into his present
shape, and is compelled to dodge beneath the sage-brush.

2. Cinclus mexicanus Swains. Water Ouzel. Si'-am-bo - gua-tsi
(Sh.).

3. Sialia arctica Swains. Rocky Mountain Bluebird. N’l-^kwi-
kwa'-ia (S.). This is also used as a generic term for all small birds of a
blue plumage. The Shoshoni generic term is 7 vo-gwit'-do-ia.

4. Pyranga ludoviciana ( IVils .) Bp. Western Tanager. IVa'-na-
wi-ni (P-). The* Shoshoni general term for red birds is enk'-hu-tshue
from enk. red, and hu'-tshu, bird.

5. Loxia curvirostra americana ( IVils.) Cones. American Crossbill.
Ai'-gu-sa' (S.). The distortion of the mandibles was caused by the
coyote. ( Myth. )

6. Xanthocephalus icterocephalus ( Bonaf .) Baird. Yellow-headed
Blackbird. S’ ke-k’ itsh-kla' (S.) ; pa-ko'-rop (P.).

7. Agelseus phceniceus {Linn.) Vieill. Red-and-buff-shouldered
Blackbird. K'itsh-kla (S.) ; * -a' -pan (P-), so called on account of the
spots of color upon the shoulders, as he was an officer long ago. ( Myth .)
Both terms above given are also used by the tribes as referring to black
birds generally.

8. Sturnella neglecta And. Western Meadow Lark. IVe-wit'-su-le

iSSs-]

Hoffman on Indian Bird Names.

9

(S.). In the mythology of the Selish, the coyote colored the Lark’s
breast with the yolk of an egg.

9. Corvus corax carnivorus ( Bartr. ) Ridgw. American Raven.
Me-la (S.) ; ■wi-ha (P.) ; to-gwo’-ri-ka (Sh.).

10. Corvus frugivorus Bartr. Common Crow. Tsa-a' (S.) ; a-da'
(P.); ta'-gu-uts (U.); kdk, kazvk, (Sh.). As above stated, the Absaroka
call this bird peritshi — that which defiles itself. Usually the term is
onomatopoetic in other languages.

11. Gymnocitta cyanocephala Max. Pinon Jay. Wi-a' (P-). This
was the daughter of the coyote. ( Myth .)

12. Pica rustica hudsonica (Scop.) Baird. Black-billed Magpie.
A’dn (S.) ; ma'-gwits (U.) ; kzvi'-ti-wut (Sh.)

13. Trochilus colubris Linn. Ruby-throated Hummingbird.
Som-zve' (P.) ; qo'-nhn-qo'-nim ^S.).

14. Cypselus saxatilis IVood/i. White-throated Swift. Mab'n-
kwit-sen (S.). — A name was given to me bj' the Shoshoni for one species
which frequents the water, but which was not identified. It is undoubt¬
edly another genus. They term it pah' -sho-gum -bits — ‘skim-over-the-
water.’

15. Phalaenoptilus nuttalli (And.) Ridgvj. Poorwill. Spas (S.) ;
wai'-ia-zvi (P.).

16. Melanerpes formicivorus bairdi Ridgzv. Californian Wood¬
pecker. Spu'-al'-\a (S.).

17. Sphryapicus varius nuchalis Baird. Red-naped Woodpecker.
Ho-to-to'-ro-pe (Sh.).

iS. Picus villosus harrisi (And.) Allen. Harris’s Woodpecker.
Stel-qu (S.).

19. Colaptes auratus mexicanus (Szv.) Ridgzv. Red-shafted Flick¬
er. Kul-kul-etsh' (S.) ; i’-tsa-ba'-ni (P.)..

20. Ceryle alcyon (Linn.) Boie. Kingfisher. Sma-tske iiq (S.).

21. Asio americanus (Steph.) Sharpe. American Long-eared Owl.
N’spu-ish' n-i-me (S.).

22. Scops asio (Linn.) Bp. Little Screech Owl. N'tshit-qe (S.) ;
ha-mi-tse (Sh.).

23. Bubo virginianus subarcticus (Hoy) Ridgzv. Western Horned
Owl. Sni'-ne-e (S.) ; mu-mbits (Sh.).

24. Speotyto cunicularia hypogsea (Bp.) Ridgw. Burrowing Owl.
Tin-tsan -in-de'-iq (Sh.). This is the prairie dogs brother-in-law.
(Myth.)

25. Falco peregrinus naevius (Gm.) Ridgzv. Duck Hawk. Ha-tat

(SO-

26. Pandion haliaetus carolinensis (Gm.) Ridgw. Fish Hawk.
Tsi-uq-fsuq (S.), the coyote’s cou.sin.

27. Circus hudsonius (Linn.) Vieill. Marsh Hawk. Pan-tsi (Sh.) ;
ki-ni' (P-).

28. Buteo borealis calurus (Cass.) Ridgzv. Western Red-tailed
Hawk. Tsel-tsel-tshi-mu (S.) ; sa'-na-kzvt'-na (Sh.).

IO

Hoffman on Indian Bird Names.

[January

29. Aquila chrysaetus canadensis (Linn.') Ridgw. Golden Eagle.
Mel’-ke-no' (S.) ; kivi-na' (P.). Kwa-nuts' (U.), is a term applied to
Eagles generally.

30. Haliaetus leucocephalus (Linn.') Savig. Bald Eagle. P’ kal-qke

(SO-

31. Cathartes aura (Linn.) Illig. Turkey Buzzard. Tsd ko-wi-a
(S.); to-gwo’-ri-ka — ‘snake eater’ (Sh.).

32. Zenaidura carolinensis (Limn.) Bp. Mourning Dove. Wa'-u-
ia’-uk (S.) ; hd-wd (Sh.). A generic term.

33. Meleagris gallopavo Linn. Wild Turkey. Ko’-io-nit (Sh.).

34. Canace obscura (■SVry) Bp. Dusky Grouse. W u ng-go’-wa (Sh.).

35. Bonasa umbella (Linn.) Steph. Ruffed Grouse. Ka'-\it’l-se
(S.) ; kivi'-iit (U.).

36. Centrocercus urophasianus (Bp.) Swains. Sage Cock. S’kd
(S.) ; hu-tsi’ (P.) ; hu-dsha (Sh.).

37. Lophortyx californica (Shaw) Bp. California Quail. Ka-ka-
pu'u (P-). The last syllable is almost silent and the head, in speaking, is
dropped downward on the breast. The Indians state that “this is the way
the bird calls himself.” Another instance of onomatopoeia.

38. Ardea herodias Linn. Great Blue Heron. Sd-ma-ku-e-V (S.)

39. Nyctiardea grisea nsevia (Bodd.) Allen. Black-crowned Night
Heron. Sma-tske-uq ( S.); ua-sha’ ( P.).

40. Numenius hudsonicus Lath. Hudsonian Curlew. Ha-wit’-ha -
wit’ (S.).

41. Numenius longirostris Wils. Long-billed Curlew. He-kon
(Sh.).

42. Fulica americana Gmel. American Coot. Stel-dk’-sha (S.) ;
sai-a' (P ).

43. Grus canadensis (Linn.) Temm. Sandhill Crane. Skwal-tshin
(S.) ; kor-de’-de'u (P.) ; ko’ -an-da-td (Sh.).

4P Olor americanus (Sharpless) Bp. Whistling Swan. S'p'h-a-tm"
(S.) ; uoid't (P.) ; -pali -do-ski' (Sh.).

45. Chen caerulescens (Linn.) Ridgiv. Blue-winged Goose. Ku-si'
uq (S.) ; ne'-git (P.) ; na'-gunt (Sh.).

46. Bernicla brenta (Pall.) Steph. Brant. Pe-gu-kua'-tsi (P.).

47. Aix sponsa (Linn.) Boie. Wood Duck. Pi- hi’ (P.) Also used as
a generic term for all Ducks.

48. /Ethyia americana (Eyt.) Bp. Redhead. No-so-shi-ne (S.).

49. Colymbus torquatus Briinn. Loon. O-su-l'uq (S.).

iSSs-J Drew on the. Vertical Range of Birds in Colorado. I I

ON THE VERTICAL RANGE OF BIRDS IN COLO¬
RADO.

BY FRANK M. DREW.

Colorado, lying between 370 and 410 north latitude and 102°
and 107° west longitude, is preeminently a mountain state. Of
its 104,500 square miles fully one-half is mountainous, the aver¬
age elevation of the State being 6000 feet, with extremes of 3=500
and 14,500 feet. Rising slowlv from the Missouri River, the tree¬
less plains, having already reached an altitude of 3500 feet at the
eastern border of the State, thence continue to rise more rapidly,
but yet gradually, to nearly half way across the State. There, at
an elevation of about 6000 feet, the outlying foothills throw up a
dam stretching north and south the full length of the State. Up
into these foothills surge the waves of bird migration in spring
to about Sooo feet — the altitude of the Great Parks which stretch
their huge treeless surfaces atop the hills. And down these hills
comes the return tide of birds in Dll, a few to linger near the
base, but by far the greater part passing on and down to an alti¬
tude lower than any found within the State.

Despite its latitude, which causes very hot summers, the aver¬
age temperature is below that of other States in corresponding
parallels. At an elevation of about 7000 feet, an approximate
average for the year gives a temperature of -j- 470 F. ; for
winter — December, January, February — of -|- 26°; spring —
March, April, May — of -)- 470 ; summer — June, July, August
— of — j— 69° ; autumn — September, October, November, — of
4~ 46". Missouri, in nearly the same latitude, has an approxi¬
mate mean annual temperature of -(- 550

The average temperature on the higher peaks, reaching up to
from 12,000 to 14,000 feet, usually ranges from 20° to 30° lower
than these figures, the difference being greatest in summer. Con¬
tinued observations at several stations give an average of about
-(- 4S0 for the mean annual temperature at 6000 feet, and of — |— 3S0
at 10.000 feet elevation. Timber-lijie, which varies from 11,000
feet to 12,000 feet, has an average annual temperature — according
to Gannet — of -j- 30°. Notwithstanding the heavy and long-
continued snows of winter, and the frequent rains in summer,

Drew on the Vertical Range of Birds in Colorado. [January

I 2

the mean annual precipitation will not exceed 20 inches, —
being 12 to 14 inches on the plains, and increasing to 32 inches
in the mountains.

As is well known, the flora of the plains is strongly character¬
ized by buffalo grass, sun flowers, and cacti, and as a natural result,
Fringillidse and Raptores predominate there over all other forms
of bird life.

Entering the foothills, which reach an average elevation of
8000 feet, the pinon ( Finns edulis ) and dwarf oak (Quercus
alba gunnisoni ) at once become abundant, and their matted
clumps and tangled underbrush make hiding places for many
Warblers. On the shoulders of the foothills rest the mountain
parks, with a mean elevation of Sooo feet. They are treeless and
plain-like, being covered with grass and sage, save where the
grass has been killed out by grazing herds ; then the shifting
sands prevent aught but sage from maintaining a foothold.

The bases of the main peaks have an elevation of about
8000 feet ; thence they rise rapidly, drawing themselves aloof
from the life of the plains. And, indeed, it is only those
birds which pass up into these uppermost levels which can
properly be called mountain inhabitants, the great parks thus
forming the real dividing ground between the summer camps of
the hardier lowland birds and the homes of those to the manor
born. Nor do the straggling migrants but rarely wander over
the mountains themselves, but, instead, into these parks.

The latitudinal range of birds in the United States has been
quite fully worked out, and notes on the close connection between
vertical and geographical distribution are not few ; yet, so far as
I know, no one has tabulated the vertical range. References to
elevations at which birds have been found in summer are quite
frequent. Especially is this the case in Allen’s ‘ Ornithological
Reconnoissance in Kansas,’ etc., and Ridgway’s ‘Ornithology of
the 40th Parallel,’ and many are given by Mr. T. M. Trippe in
Coues’s ‘Birds of the Northwest.’ I have freely borrowed from
these sources, as well as from Henshaw’s ‘ Report’ on birds in
volume V of Wheeler’s Surveys, and from Ridgway’s paper on
Colorado Birds in ‘Bull. Essex Inst.’, Vol. V, No. 11,

One working in different parts of the State will soon perceive
the floral limits to be quite sharply defined. To a certain, though
less extent, the birds also are shut in by almost intangible barriers.

Drew on the Vertical Range of Birds in Colorado.

13

*885.]

But so evident is it that food supply is the main factor in bird
distribution — this regulated by vegetation, and this in turn by
climatic influences — that it only needs be said that where food is,
there the birds will be found: as, e-g-, Creepers and Wood¬
peckers at 1 1 .000 feet in winter, and Ouzels at the same season
feeding in the icy torrents as high as 9000 feet.

Most birds range high up in summer and lower in fall ; some
have a range the reverse of this ; while others early reach their
nesting-sites and remain until the time for the complete semi¬
annual migration comes round.

Mr. T. M. Trippe, in ‘ Birds of the North-West.’ p. 228, has
noted the over-migration in spring of Oreoscoptes montanus.
This trait is common to many, if not all, birds in vertical migra¬
tion, though I believe not in latitudinal movements. Another
peculiarity of vertical migration is the upward range of many
birds during the Indian summer days of autumn, e.g ., Sturnella
neglecta. Scolecophagus cyanocephalus , Gymnocitta cyano-
cephala. This I believe to be the result of a scarcity of food at
lower levels, though a somewhat similar reverse migration has
been noted at the same season on the New England coast. (See
B. N. O. C., Oct., 1S80, p. 237, and Cones, B. N. W., p. 521.)

The following list, containing the results of five years’ work in
the State, is believed to be a complete one of the birds found
within the boundaries of Colorado. To the south, in New
Mexico, climate, and to the north lower average elevation of
the mountains, causes considerable variation in the vertical range
of birds. But in Colorado, I think, this range is nearly uniform,
there being but few birds of the list not of general distribution in
the State, and these are chieflv found in the southern portion.
Mountain ridges en echelon combine to catch many a straggling
bird. Several such are entered on but a single record, and while
showing nothing of distribution, yet may be of interest in future
work. Some of those accredited on scanty data are followed by
the name of the authority. In the parks are found the only apol¬
ogies for lakes which the State affords, and around them the
few Water Birds which remain during the summer cluster to
breed. In many of the upper valleys beaver streams often pro¬
vide suitable homes for isolated pairs of Ducks, but by far the
greater number of our Water Birds are migrants.

No claim of completeness is made, the notes being offered as
a basis on which to engraft other observations, and which,

H

Drew on the Vertical Range oj Birds in Colorado. [January

with further notes on temperature ahd the flora, may eventually
serve to show to what extent there is a correspondence between
vertical and latitudinal distribution. As most of the birds noted
are summer visitants, the column showing winter range is
mostly blank. The upper nesting limit is- usually easily deter-
minedj the lower not so readily, as many species, in suitable
localities, nest down to sea-level. But in some cases, as in
Lagopus leucurus , Reguliis calendula , and some others, quite
well-defined limits exist, above or below which few, if any,
of these birds are found during- the nesting season.

Lophortyx calif ornianns, Ortyx virginianus , and perhaps
some others, have been introduced in the vicinity of Denver, but
probably as yet their range does not extend above =;ooo feet.

The figures in the columns under the headings, ‘Spring,’
‘Summer,’ etc., refer to elevations in feet above sea-level. The
‘Breeding Range’ will give the full summer distribution of those
remaining through that season. In the records of spring and fall
migrants I have aimed to show how high the birds wander, and so
have merely noted the upper limit of the range of birds which are
generally distributed below the altitude given. But in the case
of birds of erratic or little-known distribution, both the upper
and lower levels inclosing their range are given. A ? follow¬
ing the figures in a few cases means probability amounting
almost to certainty. The ‘Plains’ include a large part of adjoin¬
ing Kansas.

The nomenclature is that of Ridgway’s ‘ Catalogue of the
Birds of North America.’ But if sub-species ‘ inontana ’ is
merely a modified form of Certhia familiaris rufa , why not put
it so, and let it be understood that the last-named form is merely a
modification of the preceding, as is now so well accepted in the
case of varieties of the first remove? The same applies to
Pipilo maculatus arcticus megalonyx.

*88S.]

Drew on the Vertical Range of Birds in Colorado.

15

Upper Limit of range in — Breeds —

1. Hylocichla fuscescens salicicolsi

2. Hylocichla ustulata swainsoni

3. Hylocichla unalashkae auduboni

4. Merula migraloria propinqua

5. Oreoscoptes montanus

6. Mimus polyglottus

7. Galeoscoptes carolinensis

8. Harporhynchus rufus

9. H. cinereus bendirei ( Brezvst .)
lu. Cinclus mexicanus

11. “Saxicola oenanthe” {Minot)

12. Sialia sialis

13. Sialia mexicana

14. Sialia arctica

15. Myiadesies townsendi

16. Polioptila cserulea

17. Regulus calendula

18. Regulus satrapa

19. Lophophanes inornatus griseus

20. Parus montanus

21. Parus atricapillus septentrionalis

22. Psaltriparus plumbeus.

23. Sitta carolinensis aculeata

24. Sitta canadensis
23. Sitta pygmtea

26. Certhia familiaris rufa montana

27. Salpinctes obsoletus

28 Catherpes inexicanus conspersus

29. Troglodytes aedon parkmani

30. Anorthura trog. hyemalis ( Ridgw.)

31. Telmatodytes palustris paludicola

32. Anthus ludovicianus

33. Mniotilta varia

34. Helminthophaga virginise

35. Helminthophaga ruficapilla {Ridgzv.

36. Helminthophaga celata

37. Helminthophaga peregrina

38. Paru'ia americana
39 Dendrceca ajstiva

40. Dendrceca coronata

41. Dendrceca auduboni

42. Dendrceca maculosa

43. Dendroeca cserulea

44. Dendrceca striata

45. Dendroeca graciae

46. Dendrceca nigrescens

47. Dendrceca townsendi

48. Siurus auricapillus

49. Siurus nasvius

50. Geothlypis macgillivrayi

51. Geothlypis trichas

52. Icteria virens longicauda

53. Wilsonia pusilla

54. Setophaga ruticilla

55. Vireosyivia gilva swainsoni

56. Lanivireo solitarius plumbeus

57. Lanius borealis

58. Lanius ludovicianus excubitoroides

59. Ampelis garrulus

60. Ampelis cedrorum

61. Petrochelidon lunifrons

62. Hirundo erythrogaster

63. Tachycineta bicolor

64. Tachycineta thalassina
6g. Cotile riparia

66. Stelgidopteryx serripennis

67. Prognesubis

68. Pyranga ludoviciana

69. Pyranga aestiva cooperi

70. Hesperiphona vespertina

71. Pinicola enucleator

Spring

Summer

A ut u mn

Winter

from

to

Sooo

5000

8000

6000

1 lOOO

9200

Plains

1 1000

9300

11300

10000

3000

11300

I OOOO

11300

13000

Plains

11500

6000

9300

95°°

**

9500

60 DO

Sooo

5000

“

Sooo

9200

Sooo

“

Sooo

7500

75bo

“

75°°

60OO

10000

11300

10000

9-6000

Sooo

10000

55°°

55°°

boon

7500

3000

75°°

6-10000

11300

13000

15000

1 1500

9500

11300

I 0-9000

Sooo

10000

7000

5000

7000

7000

11500

10000

7000

I IOOO

6000

I IOOO

10000

9000?

1 1 000

3000

9200

SOOO

5000

6-9500

11300

'3S°°

5-9000

Sooo

1 1500

Sooo

1 1 000

I IOOO

2-8000

Plains

10000

6300

“

7000

6000

1 1000

Sooo

1 1000

SjOO

5000

8000

10000

6000

10000

Ranges to timber line th

i year round

1 1 500

OOOO

12000

I sOOO

I Plains

12000

“Resident at 6000 ft.” — Aiken.

6000

7000

I IOOO

10000

Plains

I OOOO

6000

Sooo

9300

“

8000

9500

13000

14000

12000

1 3000

55°°

6000

75°°

8000

3000

75°°

6000

9000

6000

9000

55°°

SS°o

0000

Sooo

Plains

8000

9000

7S°°

I I OOO

9300

7S°°

I IOOO

3000

5000

6000

I IOOO

1 1 000

7000

6000

7000

9500

7S0O

55°°

SCOD

8000

10000

55°°

Sooo

Sooo

Sooo

6000

9000

9300

5000

9000

6000

6000

Plains

6000

6000

6300

“

6300

9500

12000

1 1000

6000

12000

6000

Sooo

Plains

Sooo

6000

10000

7000

3000

10000

6000

9000

75°°

5000

9000

6-10000

12300

*-9500

12000

9500

9S°°

Plains

950°

sooo

9000

55°°

9000

6000

1 1 000

95°°

10000

7000

1 1 000

10000

8000

1 1 000

10000

7000

I IOOO

95 00

3000

10500

6000

Plains

6000

6000

7000

7000

Sooo

6000

Sooo

6000

9000

I OOOO

6000

9000

S000

3000

8000

10000

11300

10000

*-10000

10000

11300

* Plains.

1 6 Drew on the Vertical Range of Birds in Colorado. [January

Upper Limit of range in — Breeds —

Spring

Summer

Autumn

Winter

from

to

72. Carpodacus cassini

6000

1 0000

9000

*-7000

7000

I OOOO

75. Carpodacus frontalis

8000

5000

4000

Sooo

74. Loxia curvirostra ainericana

. 6000

8000

Plains

5000

8000

75. Loxia leucoptera

10000

76. Leucosticte tephrocotis

6000

77. Leucosticte tephrocotis littoralis

5-S000

.

7S. Leucosticte atrata

5000

79. Leucosticte australis

12000

1350°

13000

6-10000

12000

DS00

80. _3Egiothus linaria

7-10000

*-IOOOO

81. Astragalinus tristis

6000

1 OOOO

5000

Plains

9000

S2. Astragal inus psaltria

5000

9500

9OOO

5Soo

9500

S3. Chrysomitris pinus

6-10000

11500

10000

*-10000

7000

11500

S4. P.ectrophanes nivalis ( Ridgivay )

S5. Centrophanes lapponicus

7500

5000

86. Centrophanes ornatus

5000

5000

S7. Rhyncophanes maccowni

6000

5000

88. Centronyx bairdi

5000

8000

7000

PI ns?

S9. Passerculus sandwichensis savanna

5000

5000

5000

90. Passerculus sandwichensis alaudinus

8000

12000

Plains

12000?

91. Pocecetes graniineus continis

4-10000

12000

12500

“

12000

92. Coturuicuius passermus perpallidus

60c 0

“

6000

93. Chondestes grannnicus strigatus

6-9000

I OOOO

9000

I OOOO

94. Z 'notrichia leucophrys

6-10000

12500

10000

6000?

8000

12500

95. Zonotrichia gambeli intermedia

6000

96. Spizella montana

9500

9000

97. Spizella domestica arizonae

6000

9000

9000

5000

9000

9S. Spizella pallida

6000

6000

Plains

6000

99. Spizella breweri

6-9000

Sooo

“

8000

100. luncoaikeni

5- 1 OOOO

9000

*-Sooo

101. [unco hiemalis

Sooo

*-7000

102. [unco oregonus

6000

1 1500

*-6000

103. junco annectens

6-10000

10000

5000

104. Junco caniceps

6-10000

12000

9000

5000

7Soo

12000

105. Ainphispiza belli ( Ridgway )

6500

6500

106. Amphispiza belli nevadensis

7000

7000

107. Melospiza fasciata fallax

6000

8000

5000

5000

8000

10S. Melospiza lincolni

6500

11500

9000

5000

ns00

109. Passerella iliaca schistacea ( Ridg .)

7000

7000

no. Pipilo maculatus arcticus megalonyx

9500

9000

Sooo

5000

5000

9000

111. Pipilo chlorurus

75oo

1150°

9000

5000

11500

1 12. Pipilo fuscus mesoleucus

5000

1 1 3 . Pipilo aberti

8000

8000?

114. Zamelodia melanocephala

6000

8000

Sooo

Plains

8000

115. Guiraca cierulea

5S°°

5Soo

116. Passerina cyanea (Ridgzvay)

117. Passerina amaena

6000

7000

7000

7000

118. Cardinalis virginianus

5000

119. Spiza americana

6000

6000

“

6000

120. Calamospiza bicolor

6-9200

Sooo

Sooo

8000

121. Dolichonyx oryzivorus

6000

122. Molothrus ater

6000

Sooo

“

8000

123. Xanthocephalus icteroceplialus

6000

95 00

9500

7500

124. Agelaeus phcrhiiceus

6000

9000

7000

8000

125. Sturnella neglecta

6000

9200

10000

“

8000

126. Icterus spurius

5000

“

6000

127. Icterus galbula

5000

6000

128. Icterus bullocki

6000

I OOOO

5000

I OOOO

1 20. Scolecophagus cyanocephalus

6000

10000

13000

4-9OOO

Plains

10000

130. Quiscalus purpureus aeneus

5000

“

5000

131. Corvus corax carnivorus

13000

14000

5-10000

132. Corvus cyptoleucus

6000

5000

4000

6000

133. Corvus frugivorus

0

1

0

l'-

7000

7000

134. Picicorvus columbianus

900C

1 1 500

13000

7-9OOO

6500?

11500

135. Gymnocitta cyanocephala

5°°c

8000

6-13500

6000

50C0

8000

136. Pica rustica hudsonica

900C

1 1 000

10000

3-QOOO

4000

10000

137. Cyanocitta stelleri macrolopha

6- 1 000c

1 1500

13000

5-10000

5000

1 1500

138. Aphelocoma woodhousei

500c

8000

9500

5000

5000

8000

139. Perisoreus canadensis capitalis

t

t

t

t

8000

1 1500

140. Eremophila alpestris leucolaema

5- 1 0000 1 13000

13000

5-9000

13000

* Plains.

f Keeps near tiinber-line the year round.

Drew on the Vertical Range of Birds in Colorado.

l7

ISSS-J

Upper Limit of range in — Breeds —

Spring

Summer

Autumn

Winter

from

to

141. Eremophila alpestris chrysoliema

7000

Plains

7000

142. Tyrannus carolinensis

7500

6000

6000

143. Tyrannus verticalis

6000

7000

“

7000

144. Tyrannus vociferans

6000

7000

“

7000

145. Myiarchus cinerascer^

7000

4000

7000

146. Sayornis sayi

6000

Sooo

Plains

Sooo

147. Contopus borealis

6000

12000

IOOOO

7000

12000

148. Contopus richardsoni

6000

11300

IOOOO

Plains

I IOOO

149. Empidonax dilficilis

6000

IOOOO

IOOOO

IOOOO

150. Empidonax pusillus

151. Empidonax minimus

6000

8000

8000

Sooo

132. Empidonax hammondi

6000

Sooo

“

Sooo

153. Empidonax obscurus

6000

10300

7500

10500

154. Trochilus alexandri ( Ridgway )

6000

6000

155. Selasphorus platycercus

3000

13000

9000

4000

I IOOO

156. Selasphorus rufus

15000

6500

10500

157. Cypselus saxatilis

6000

135°°

6000

12500

158. Cypseloides niger borealis

159. Phalsenoptila nuttalli

6000

14000

Sooo

14000

IOOOO

Plains

12000

Sooo

160. Chordeiles popetue henryi

3000

12000

9300

“

IIOOO?

161. Picus villosus harrisi

6-10000

1 1000

IOOOO

5-10000

4500

11500

162. Picus pubescens gairdneri

6-10000

12000

IOOOO

5-10000

4500

11500

163. Picoides tridactvlis dorsalis

164. Sphyrapicus varius ( Ridgtvay )

I OOOO

12000

IOOOO

IOOOO

Sooo

12000

165. Sphyrapicus varius nuchalis

8000

12000

9500

4000

12000

166. Sphyrapicus thyroideus

6000

IOOOO

7000

3000

IOOOO

167. Centurus carolinus ( Ridgway )

168. Melauerpes erythrocephalus

6000

I IOOO

3000

Plains

IOOOO

169. Melanerpes torquatus

6000

Sooo

7000

4-7000

3000

Sooo

170. Colaptes auratus mexicanus

6-10000

12000

12000

3-5000

Plains

12000

171. Ceryle alcyon

9300

9300

“

9500

172. Geococcyx californiainus

3000

5°00

5000

173. Coccyzus americanus

8000

4000

Sooo

174. Conurus carolinensis

t

t

t

t

Plains

173. Asio americanus

6000

II 000

IOOOO

♦-IOOOO

1 IOOO

176. Scops asio maxwellie

6000

3000

500a

4000

6000

177. Scops flammeolus

Sooo

8000

17S. Bubo virginianus arcticus

1 1000

11300

13000

♦-IIOOO

4000

11500

179. Speotyto cunicularia hypogrea

1

I

X

i

Plains

9000

180. Hierolalco mexicanus polyagrus

6000

IOOOO

IOOOO

**

IOOOO

181. Falco peregrinus mevius

IOOOO

IOOOO

182. Aisalon columbarius

9300

1S3. HJsalon richardsoni

6000

IIOOO

184. Tinnunculus sparverius

6-10000

11300

13000

11500

185. Pandion haliaetus carolinensis

9000

10500

9000

1S6. Circus hudsonius

6000

IOOOO

13500

“

IOOOO

1S7. Accipiter cooperi

6000

9000

“

9000

188. Accipiter fuscus

9300

9000

9000

189. Astur atricapillus striatulus

9500

IOOOO

9300

IOOOO

190. Buteo borealis calurus

I IOOO

12000

13500

♦-IOOOO

**

12000

191. Buteo cooperi {Ridgway)

192. Buteo swainsoni

6-10000

IOOOO

13000

<*

11500

193. Archibuteo lagopus sancti-johannis

6000

194. Archibuteo ferrugineus

6000

6000

IOOOO?

193. Aquila chrysaetus canadensis

6-10000

12000

14000

♦-IIOOO

6000

12500

196. Haliaetus leucocephalus

Sooo

Plains

197. Cathartes aura

6000

IOOOO

IIOOO

19S. Columba fasciata

7000

Sooo

8000

5000

Sooo

199. Zenaidura carolinensis

6000

IIOOO

12000

Plains

IOOOO

200. Melopelia leucoptera

' 1150°

201. Meleagris gallopavo americana

7000

6000

7000

202. Canace obscura

IOOOO

11300

12500

7-10000

11500

203. Bonasa umbella umbelloides

7000

7000

204. Lagopus leucurus

12000

1350°

12000

8-12000

1 1500

13500

205. Cupidonia cupido

3000

3000

5000

Plains

5000

206. Pedicecetes phasianellus columbianus

7000

7000

7000

*-7000

7000

207. Centrocercus urophasianus

9300

♦-7000

9500

20S. A i dea herodias

5000

§

5000

209. Garzetta candidissima

§

§

§

* Plains.

J: Resident and breeds up to 9000 feet.

f See B. N. O. C., Vol. II, No. 2, p. 50.

§ See American Naturalist, Vol. X, p. 430.

Drew on the Vertical Range of Birds in Colorado.

f January

18

Upper limit of range in — Breeds —

Spring

Summer

Autumn

Winter

from

to

210. Nyctherodius violaceus {Ridgzvay)

an. Botaurus lenliginosus

3000

7000

Plains

7000

212. Tantalus loculatoi ( R idgzuay )

213. Plegadis guarauna

7000

7000?

214. Cliaradrius dominicus ( Ridgzvay )

215. Oxyechus vociterus

9000

10500

10500

216. Podasocys montana

6000

Sooo

3000

“

Sooo

217. Gallinago media wilsoni

10000

I OOOO

sooo

6000

IOOOO

21S. Macroramphus griseus

6000

5000

3000?

219. Actodromas maculata

10500

220. Actrodomns bairdi

7000

13000

7000?

221. Actrodomas minutella

7000

7000?

222. Pelidna alpina americana ( Ridgzvay )

223. Ereunetes pusillus

7000

7000

7000?

224. Eimosa fedoa

7S°o

PI: ins

225. Tetanus melanoleucus

7000

7000?

226. Tetanus flavipes

7000

7000?

227. Rhyacophilus solitarius

6000

I OOOO

5000

IOOOO

22S. Symphemia seinipaluiata

6000

7000

7000

229. Bartramia longicauda

6000

6000

Plains

6000

230. Tringoides maeularius

6000

13000

9000

y y

1 1000

231. Numenius longirostris

3000

yy

5000

232. Lobipes hvperboreus

9500

Sooo

3000

255. Steganopus wilsoni {Ridgzvay)

6000

6000

234. Recurvirostra americana

3000

Sooo

Sooo

235. Himantopus mexicanus

3000

Sooo

Sooo

250. Rallus virginianus

3000

3000?

237. Porzana Carolina ( Ridgway )

7000

7000

2<$. Gallinula galeata ( Allen tk Brewster)

6000

230. Fulica americana

Sooo

“

Sooo

240. Grus americana ( Ridgzvay )

241. Grus canadensis

75oo

I4OOO

5000

75oo

242. Chen hyperboreus

Sooo

7500

243. Bernicla canadensis

10000

I OOOO

IOOOO

244. Bernicla canadensis hutchinsi

3000

243. Anas boschas

6000

10500

*-9300

5000

9000

246. A nas obscura (Ridgway)

247. Chaulelasmus streperus

Sooo

I OOOO

Plains

Sooo

24S. Datila acuta

6000

5000

6000

249. Mareca americana

Sooo

Sooo

“

Sooo

230. Spatula clypeata

6000

Sooo

Sooo

251. Querquedula discors

10000

Sooo.

10000

Sooo

252. Querquedula cyanoptera

6ooo

Sooo

10000

3000

Sooo

253. Nettion carolinensis

I OOOO

Sooo

10000

Plains

Sooo

254. Aix sponsa

Sooo

Sooo

253. Fulix marila

9000

236. Fulix affinis

9000

257. Fulix collaris

6000

255. yEthya vallisneria

3000

259. zEtliva americana ( Ridgzvay )

260. Clangula islandica

Sooo

Sooo

261. Clangula glaucium americana

9000

262. Clangula albeola

6000

263. Histrionicus minutus

I OOOO

10000

7000

IOOOO

264. CEdeinia americana ( Ridgway )

265. Erisinatura rubida

10000

1 1000

7000

IOOOO

266. Mergus merganser americanus

11300

267. Lopiiodytes cucullatus ( Ridgway )

26S. Pelccanus erythrorhynchus \Ridg.)

4000

4000

2S9. Larus delawareusis

6000

6000

9300

6000

270. Xema sabinei {Ridgzvay)

271. Sterna forsteri (Ail-en)

6000

6000

272. Hvdrochelidon lari, surinamensis

3000

273. Stercorarius parasiticus ( Ridgzvay )

274. Podiceps holboelli

I OOOO

273. Dvtes auritus californicus

7000

Sooo

Sooo

276. Podilvmbus podiceps {Ridgzvay)

277. Colymbus torquatus ( Ridgzvay )

* Plains.

•S8S-]

Goss on the Swallow-tailed and Mississippi Kites.

l9

OBSERVATIONS ON ELANOIDES FORF1CATUS
AND ICTINIA SUB CEER ULE A IN KANSAS.

BY N. S. GOSS.

The Swallow-tailed Kite is an irregular summer resident along
the timbered streams, being abundant some seasons and rare
others. It arrives early in May, and devotes the first few days to
courtship and mating, the next to selecting nesting places, which
I have so far found to be in the small branches near the tops ot
the tallest trees. By the last of the month the nests are com¬
pleted, and as the trees by that time are in full leaf they are
largely hidden from view. They are made of sticks loosely in¬
terwoven and lined sparingly with the soft, ribbon-like strippings
from the inner bark of old, decaying or dead cottonwood trees.
The eggs are oval ; the ground-color is cream white, irregularly
spotted and blotched with dark reddish brown, running largely
together towards the small end. The measurements ot three are
1.84 X 1.48, 1.87 X 1.50, 1.90 X 1-50.

As the nests are hard to reach, I have been able to examine
but four. Three of these had only one egg in each ; in the other
there were two eggs, nearly ready to hatch, and the shell of one
at the foot of the tree ; but I have it on good authority that in the
near vicinity a nest with four, and another with six, eggs have
been found. The males assist in building the nest, alternate in
sitting and in feeding the young, and, in fact, appear as attentive
as the females.*

April 27. 1876 (the earliest arrival noticed), a pair put in an
appearance at Neosho Falls, and as they continued to circle in
their graceful flights over the same grounds — the edge ot the
prairie and timber on the Neosho River — I became satisfied that
their nesting places w’ould be selected within the circle, and I
devoted my leisure moments to watching their movements. On
the 5th of May they were joined bv another pair, and later in the
day, to my great surprise and joy, tw o pairs of Mississippi Kites

* I saw a pair of these birds once in the act of copulation. They were sitting on a
small, horizontal limb close together and facing each other, when, quick as a flash, the
female turned or backed under the limb, the male meeting her from the top.

20

Goss on the Swallow-tailed and Mississippi Kites. [January

appeared and also joined in the circling flights. It was a beauti¬
ful and, to me, exciting sigh t to watch their various motions and
coqueting evolutions, sailing high in the air, swooping down with
partially closed wings, skimming along the prairie, lost for a
moment in the woods, ascending in spiral flights, gliding from
slow to swift and swift to slow without a flit or break, like
Swallows. For grace and symmetry of action I would rank
them first among the aerial birds, attaching the blue ribbon to the
Swallow-tailed. Unfortunately I was called away on the 8th and
did not return until the iSth. At first I thought the birds had
left, but I soon occasionally noticed one here and there flying low
down and often disappearing in the tree-tops. I lost no time,
but hastened, with glass and gun in hand, for the timber em¬
braced in their former flights, and in a short time had the
pleasure of finding a pair of the Swallow-tailed Kites building a
nest in the top of a large hickory tree, the nest being about two-
thirds completed ; by cautiously approaching and lying down
behind a fallen tree I was enabled to watch them unobserved,
and, with the aid of the glass, to plainly see them at their work.
When either came to the nest alone with a stick it would place
it hurriedly upon the nest, but when both met at the nest
they would at once commence fussing about, pulling at the
sticks and trying to arrange the material, first one getting upon
the nest, and then the other, turning around as if trying to fit a
place for their bodies. I think at one time they must have
worked at least ten minutes trying to weave in or place in a sat¬
isfactory manner a stripping from the inner bark of the cotton¬
wood. As builders they are not a success. After a little over
two hours of watching I turned my attention to hunting for the
nests of others. In this I failed, but found near by , sitting on the
dead limb of an oak, a pair of Mississippi Kites, busily engaged
in dressing up their feathers. My anxiety to secure a pair for
my collection overcame the desire for their eggs, especially as the
birds are rare in the State and the finding of their nest doubtful ;
I believed I could get both by shooting one from the tree and the
other on the wing as it left ; so I carefully crawled to within easy
shooting distance, sprang to my feet, shot one, and to my sur¬
prise the other did not fly, but with outstretched wings looked
down with astonishment at its mate fluttering upon the ground.
It was too good a shot to lose and I dropped it beside the other,

ISSS.J

Seton on Manitoba n Birds.

21

and proudly started for home, more than satisfied with my
success.

On the 27th of the same month I found the other pair of
Mississippi Kites nesting in the fork of a medium sized oak, about
forty feet from the ground. It was an old Crow’s nest fitted up
with a few extra sticks and green twigs in leaf for lining. In the
nest there was one egg. I returned on the 2d of June for the
eggs, found the nest robbed and the birds sitting in a tree nearby,
but they appeared to take no notice of, or interest in, the nest as
I approached it. On July 5, in strolling over the grounds, I
noticed one of the birds on the same nest. In it there was one
egg in an advanced state of incubation, but with care I was
able to save it. Color, pure white; measurements, 1.70 X 1.35.
This nest and the ones examined of E . forjicatus were on the
breeding grounds of the common Crow, which accounts for the
robbery and the few eggs found.

MANITOBAN NOTES.

BY ERNEST E. T. SETON.

On the 8th of May I found a pair of the Bubo virginianus
arcticus in possession of an old nest, in the ‘Big Swamp’ on the
Assinaboine River, south of the ‘Big Plain.’ This nest was in¬
distinguishable from that of a Red-tailed Buzzard. On the 15th
of May I went with my friend Dr. Gilbert and we brought
home the three young ones and the adult female. The nest con¬
tained two Partridges ( Bonasa ) and a hare. The young ones
appeared to be about three weeks old ; the largest weighed 1 lb.
5 oz., and was about the size of an ordinary pullet. One of the
young ones was but half the size of the others ; all were clad in
white down, with the rudiments of black and white feathers
showing in the wings and on the back. Their horns were
plainly visible in the form of down tufts.

The young ones favored us with the usual amount of bill¬
snapping and hissing, but did not use their tremendous claws.
One of them was injured and died before we got home, the

22

Sf.TOX on Manitoban Birds.

[ January

others thrived and readily ate from our hands from the first.
They solicited food by a short scream very like that of a Night-
hawk ; they menaced by snapping their bills and hissing, and
they expressed surprise and anger by a querulous, rattling
whistle.

By the time they were about two months old they were fully
fledged and could flv fairly well. In general color they were
pale bull' with black bars ; a little lighter than the typical Bilbo
virginianus , but considerably darker than the mother. At this
time the horns were less conspicuous than when in the down.

They ejected a pellet about five times per week, and if supplied
with more food than they require for present use they hide it
until they are hungry.

At first we (Dr. Gilbert and myself) were in hopes of taming
them, but their ferocity grew with their growth ; and when they
wrere able to fly, so far from submitting to handling, it was not
safe for a stranger to come near them. No better illus¬
tration of their temper could be given, than the fact that
on one occasion when they were left without food for a
longer time than usual, they killed and ate a fine, full-grown
Swainson’s Buzzard, which was confined in the same barn. And
on a second occasion they did the same with another Swainson’s
Buzzard which I had always thought quite strong enough and
quick enough to take care of himself.

At the age of about ten weeks, a perceptible change in their
plumage began to take place ; the huffy feathers of the breast
gradually giving place to the pure white of the old birds ;
amounting almost to a transition from the B. virginianus form to
that of the B. v. arcticus. They are now over four months old,
and are still growing. They require about half a pound of meat
per day, and eat with relish only that which is perfectly fresh ;
indeed, all that I have seen of them — their untameable ferocity,
which is daily more apparent, their magnificent bearing, their
objection to carrion and strictly carnivorous tastes — would make
me rank these winged tigers among the most pronounced and
savage of the Birds of Prey.

I find that the Common Harrier ( Circus cyaneus hudsonius)
indulges in a series of curious manoeuvres, which have hitherto
escaped the eyes of field-men. During the breeding season the
male often flies about over his own particular marsh, with

Seton on Manitoban Birds.

23

iSSS.]

excessively exaggerated undulations ; squeaking like a Snipe as
he rises, and dashing down silently. When at the highest point
he frequently turns a somersault. I have seen this many times,
and shot the bird in the act.

It may surprise some to learn that the Lapland Longspur
( Plectropha?ies lapponicus) is very abundant here in the spring
and fall.

Our Plectrophanes are : —

P. nivalis , abundant in winter — a few staying to breed.

P. Iapp07iicus , enormously abundant in May and September.

P. p ictus, very abundant, accompanying the last-named.

P. ornatus , abundant, breeding.

During the months of July and August the Bay-winged Bunting
(Pocecetes gramineus) ceases its usual vesper song, and vents his
feelings in a loud, wild, Lark-like chant, which is poured forth as
the bird rises high in the air; he begins to sing as he leaves the
prairie, and sings and soars till he has reached a height of fifty or
sixty feet, when he again returns to earth.

This air-song is not heard nearly as frequently as the common
perching-song is in its proper season, nor have I heard both at
the same time of year. The perching-song alone is heard during
May and June, and again after the fall moult there is a renewal
of the spring chantings — an aftermath of song, for the bird ceases
his soaring lay, and once more sings for the setting of the sun.

Another peculiar effusion of the Bay-wings is a prolonged
twittering, uttered after dusk, as the bird runs on the ground. It
is like a soft, continuous whispering of extracts from his various
other musical performances.

As little seems to be known about Leconte’s Sparrow ( Cotur-
niculus lecontii ) I may describe some of its habits. This bird
frequents the damp meadows which are a mixture of red-willows
and sedgy grass. It is commonly found in the willows at all
seasons, uttering its peculiar ventriloqual tvoeete tweete , whence
I knew it as the ‘ Willow-tweete,’ long before I ever heard of
Leconte or of any name for this bird. But in spring the male
may be seen perched on some low twig in the meadow, pouring
out his little soul in a tiny, husky double note, like reese reese.
This is so thin and weak as to be inaudible at thirty yards, yet in
uttering it he seems to labor hard, his beak being wide open and
pointed straight up to the zenith ; he delivers it with such unction

24

Kitchen on the Inferior Larynx in Birds.

[ January

that afterwards he seems quite exhausted, and sits very still until
at length the fit comes on again, as it is sure to do in about ten
seconds.

On the 26th of June, 1SS2, I found the nest and eggs, which I
believe were previously unknown. The nest was by a willow
bush in the damp meadow ; it was apparently on the ground, but
really raised six inches, being on the tangle of grass, etc. It was
composed entirely of fine grass. The eggs — three in number —
were of a delicate pink, with a few spots of brownish and of
black towards the large end. The pink was lost on blowing
them. One measured .75 X .50 inches. Yet I must confess I
did not shoot the birds at the nest ; I only saw them a few yards
off and heard their familiar tiveete. So that there is possibility
— though little probability — of error here.

ON THE FUNCTION OF THE INFERIOR LARYNX

IN BIRDS.

BY J. M. W. KITCHEN, M. D.

Assistant Surgeon to the Metropolitan Throat Hospital N. J~.

In looking over the literature pertaining to the comparative
anatomy and physiology of the vocal organs, we have repeat¬
edly met certain statements which we think are incorrect
physiological deductions, following the anatomical study that has
been given to the vocal organs of Singing-birds. The great
Cuvier was apparently one of the first scientists who gave this
subject much study ; and, with one exception, -all subsequent
writers whom we have read, whether French, German, or
English, have substantially reiterated Cuvier’s statements as to
this matter. Indeed, there has been such unanimity of expres¬
sion, and such similarity in the cuts shown in illustration of the
subject, that one is induced to believe that Cuvier’s exposition of
the subject has been copied in toto , without personal investi¬
gation on the part of the writers.

>S8S.]

Kitchen on the Inferior Larynx in Birds.

2 5

The essential part of these statements is that the inferior larynx
of birds, or syrinx as it is often called, is the principal agent
emplo}ed in producing the tones of bird-song, and that the
superior larynx is not a phonator, but only acts as a valve,
preventing air and food from passing the laryngeal fissure. S.
Messenger Bradley is the only writer whom we have read, who
dissents from this deduction ; and in this dissent we also take
part. To be sure, our dissent is only a matter of opinion, and
one that we are not prepared to substantiate by actual scientific
proof, but it is an opinion that is the outcome of a very consider¬
able study of the working of the human larynx, both in health and
in disease, and one capable of considerable sustenance through
analogous reasoning. It is an interesting subject on which more
light is needed, and when one considers that the physiology of the
human larynx is not yet fully understood, it will be conceded
that there is a wide field still open for study of the vocal appar¬
atus of birds. It is hoped that some one endowed with sufficient
leisure and enthusiasm may take up the subject and pursue it to
a successful issue.

The vocal mechanisms in man and bird differ very consider¬
ably, though there are analogous structures and functions in both
animals. Birds have true voice, and even speech, though the
speech of birds is very simple in character, and relates more to
the feelings than to the thoughts of these creatures ; but the so-
called singing of birds is not song as rendered by man, who has
no similar production of sounds, though an asthmatic wheeze
produced in the bronchial tubes, and whistling with the tongue
and teeth, or with the lips, approximate, in their mode of pro¬
duction, to the vocal efforts of the Song-birds. To thoroughly
understand the subject, one must have a fair idea of the anatomy
and physiology of the vocal apparatus in man.

It is presumed that the reader understands the ordinary laws
pertaining to acoustics ; that sound is the effect of air in peculiar
vibratory motion upon the auditory apparatus ; and that the
character of vocal sounds as to pitch, intensity, timbre, etc., are
due to the frecpiency and amplitude of the vibrations, and to the
peculiarities of the structures that originate them as to shape, den¬
sity, etc. The vocal sounds of man are produced by an appar¬
atus that in gross, is substantially as follows: (i) A bellows or
air propeller, consisting of the lungs, surrounded by the chest

26

Kitchen on the Inferior Larynx in Birds.

[January

walls at the sides, and by the diaphragm at the bottom. The
muscular motion in these parts alters the shape of the chest,
alternately enlarging its cavity and drawing air into the lungs ;
and then compressing those organs, driving out the air via the
bronchial tubes, trachea, larynx, nasal passages, and mouth. (2)
The phonating structure, which is the larynx, having a frame¬
work of cartilages known as the thyroid, the cricoid, and the two
arytenoids ; but whose essential parts are the two fibrous lips, or
projections from the sides of the larynx, known as the vocal cords
or ligaments, and the muscles that are attached to these liga¬
ments and cartilages, for the purpose of rendering the former
more or less tense, of drawing them apart, or of approximating
their edges to various degrees, and of regulating their shape.
The interposition of these vocal ligaments in various degrees of
tension, approximation, etc., in the tract of the air-blast coming
from the lungs, is the means of breaking up the air-column into
the vibrations which produce the effect upon the ear known as
vocal sounds. (3) The resounding cavities, which modify the
sounds as to their power and other qualities. These cavities are
the trachea and bronchial tubes, which reverberate the chest
tones, and the throat, mouth, and nasal passages, which are in¬
strumental in forming the head tones. The various positions and
actions of these latter cavities and their contained parts, such as
the tongue and soft palate, give the various effects of articulation
to speech, as well as song. It must be noted that there is no di¬
viding line between speech and song, the one gliding into the
other, and that articulation is distinct from phonation. A whis¬
per may be articulated speech, without sound being produced by
the larynx.

This in brief being the structure of the human vocal appar¬
atus, how does that of birds differ from it? (1) In the respira¬
tory method, and in the structure of the respiratory mechan¬
ism. Almost the whole body of the bird is the air-bellows
and reservoir. Thei'e is no diaphragm separating the chest
cavity from the abdominal cavity, or at least it is very rudimen¬
tary, excepting in some birds like the Apteryx, where it is more
nearly like that of mammals. Air passes through the bird’s lung
and out of it by numerous apertures on the pulmonary surface,
to the various air cavities of the abdomen, neck, bones, etc.
Here is a very large pneumatic storage cavity. In birds, the

■SSs.J

Kitchen on the Inferior Larynx in Birds.

27

expiration of air is effected by a decided muscular effort, drawing
the largely developed breast-bone towards the spine, and this
forces the air out of the body, while inspiration, or the drawing
of air into the body, is the result of the resilient recoil of the
breast-bone, and the rest of the tissues making up the chest walls.
This action is just opposite to the respiratory method in man,
where ordinary inspiration is effected by decided action on the part
of the respiratory muscles, especially of the chief respiratory
muscle, # the diaphragm. This physiological peculiarity in birds
gives them the ability to emit such powerfully loud and long-
continued notes with little apparent effort. This is particularly
to be noticed in small birds, such as the Canary and Black-poll
Warbler. (2) The resounding cavities and articulating structures
are very different from those in man. The trachea is a very
much more distensible tube. Its rings are bony and complete.
It is formed so as to be retracted or distended to a remarkable
degree, through the action of the peculiar external tracheal mus¬
cles. This construction enables the organ to produce the effects
of pitch or range in the notes of the musical scale, and also makes a
good resounding medium, being in this respect analogous to an
organ pipe. In the throat and mouth we find no soft palate, or
pharyngeal vault, and hardly a trace of an epiglottis. Birds are
very deficient in their powers of articulation, owing to the pecul¬
iarities of construction in the throat and mouth. The fleshy
tongue of the Parrot gives that bird exceptional powers in this
respect; but even the stiff’, horny, and comparatively immobile
tongue of other birds is capable, by its action, of producing the
‘twittering,’ ‘whistling,’ and other effects. The muscular floor¬
ing of the mouth, by its ability of contracting in a rapid flutter¬
ing manner, is very evidently capable of producing the ‘warbling’
effect. (3) The third and most marked deviation in birds from the
vocal mechanism of man, is in the phonating or tone-producing
structure. Instead of having one concentrated ‘vocal box,’ located
at the top of the trachea, and which in itself contains all the parts
necessary for regulating the pitch and some other qualities of the
tone produced, birds have two larynges : the superior larynx
being located as in man at the top of the trachea, while the
inferior larynx or syrinx, is located at the inferior extremity of
the trachea, at its point of bifurcation into the right and left bron¬
chial tubes. This complex construction, that may be used for

Kitchen on the Inferior Larynx in Birds.

[ January

vocal purposes, at first view seems very much like certain musi¬
cal wind instruments. The true rima glottidis at the upper
part of the windpipe simulating the outlet of the instrument,
while the bronchial larynx is furnished with a peculiar tense
membrane that looks as if it might perform the same duty as the
reed in a clarionet. This is probably true in a certain degree,
but no instrument has ever yet been able to imitate the best of
bird-song.

The superior larynx is noted for its simplicity of construc¬
tion and moderate functional action, in comparison with the
larynx of man. As one examines it, the rigidity of the organ is
conspicuous. Several of the upper tracheal rings are fused
together and represent the human cricoid cartilage. Resting on
this, forming the anterior part of the rim of the structure, is an
oval or triangular thyroid cartilage. But at the rear of the organ,
in place of the two pyramidal arytenoids, as in man, we find a
large broad sesamoid plate running across the posterior wall, and
on either side are two small cartilages connecting this plate with
the thyroid, thus completing the circle of the laryngeal frame¬
work. The two arytenoids rest on top of this framework on
either side, running well forward, and their inner margins
form the rima glottidis, and this rim is the only substitute for
the vocal cords of man. As we look inside of the organ we find
no trace of those ligaments. The muscles of this structure are
two. A surrounding sphincter muscle which closes the rim of
the organ more or less tightly ; and a pair of thyreo-arytenoidei
which open the laryngeal fissure by drawing apart its rims.
This fissure, in opening, is drawn furthest apart anteriorly, while
in the human larynx the attachment of the vocal ligaments are
close together in front, and they open widely at the back of
the organ when the glottis is dilated during inspiration.
Although this simple larynx lias small functional ability, it is
the point at which the true voice of birds is formed ; especially
the voice that is analogous to that of man ; the voice that is
peculiar to all the Clamatores. The Oscines are really not
singers in the fullest sense of that word. Besides being able to
break up the outgoing current of air into the vibrations which pro¬
duce the rather coarse, harsh, and monotonous voice of the
Clamatores, the rim of the glottis, in certain degrees of approxi¬
mation, can produce the ‘hiss’ and a sort of ‘whistle’ similar to the

isss.]

Kitchen on the Inferior Larynx in Birds.

29

sound produced by the double concave, perforated tin mouth¬
piece of the children’s toy that is frequently seen. This rim, by
its vibrations when articulated by the highly developed tongue
of the Parrot, produces the nearest approach to human singing
of which birds are capable. Of course the much repeated ditty
of a trained Polly is nearly destitute of variation in the pitch of
the tones produced, any range in this respect being produced by
differences in the strength of the air-blast, distension of the
trachea, and change in shape of the mouth cavity. There is no
muscular apparatus furnished for making any tension on the ex¬
tremities of the rim of the glottis in birds.

The inferior larynx , or syrinx , is an organ peculiar to birds.
Its parts are merely' a different evolution and functional develop¬
ment and modification of the cartilaginous rings, mucous mem¬
brane, and muscular fibres seen in the trachea and bronchi of
mammals. The structure varies widely in different birds, being
most complex as a rule in the most able songsters. It may be
highly developed in birds which are not ranked among the
singers. This organ seems to have originally been called forth
as a secondary valve, acting as an auxiliary to the superior larynx
in closing the air passage leading to the lungs, during submersion
of the heads of the aquatic birds. In most Ducks the lower larynx
is expanded into an irregular bony case, divided into two unequal
cavities. These cavities would undoubtedly add resonance to
voice formed at the superior larynx. They would also act as a
float, tending to make the upper part of the chest more buoyant.
The inferior larynges in those birds examined by the writer are
so constructed that some of the parts are very delicate, thin, and
easily folded, thus enabling a closure of the air tract at this point
to be easily accomplished, even by a simple recession of the neck.
The bronchi are especially compressible and easily lacerated.
They are strengthened by half-rings on the outer side, the inner
being formed by a membrane that has been called the membrana
tympaniformis. In most vocal birds the syrinx has a double
glottis, one on either side of a bony bar, called the os transversale
which runs from before backward at the apex where the inner
sides of the bronchi join. It supports a thin membrane which
ascends into the trachea, and terminates in a thin, concave mar¬
gin, called the membrana semilunaris . This is most developed
in singing birds, and being vibratile forms an important part of their

Kitchen on the Inferior Larynx in Birds.

f January

3°

‘trilling’ apparatus, the air passing to and from the lungs on each of
its sides. Some of the outer bronchial half-rings are susceptible
of a rotary motion on their axes, and are important agents in
modifying the voice. Opposite the os transversale , on the outer
sides of the bronchi, is a sort of fold of mucous membrane that
presents a lip or projection something like the vocal ligament in
the human larynx. There is one to each bronchus. This pro¬
jection is probably formed by the process of the shutting up of
the syrinx when the neck is retracted, and is really more the
analogue of the ventricular fold in the mammalian larynx than
of the vocal cord. There is no doubt but that this lip, when
approximated to the ‘cross-bone,’ is capable of throwing the air
current coming from the lungs into vocal, or rather sound vi¬
brations. Every one has heard the ‘squeak’ that a fowl often emits
when hopping about with its head cut of!', and it is probable that
the sound is produced by the syrinx. Several small muscles,
varying in number from two to five, and which appertain to the
lower larynx exclusively, coil around it, and enable it to make
tense the tympaniform membrane, to close up the glotti, and to
rotate its framework. An examination of the syrinx indicates
that it undoubtedly may have an influence in the modification of
the voice in its intensity, and in production of the ‘trill.’ The
valve being shut, and the muscles of expiration being brought into
play, a greater air pressure in the body can be brought to bear on
the structures which throw the air-blast into vibration, and the
gradual opening and shutting of this valve would give crescendo
and decrescendo effects to the notes. It is even probable that
some of the notes originate here, and are only modified on their
way to the outer world through the upper air-passages, but this
cannot lie to so great a degree as is widely stated. The Blackbird
has a curious ‘querl’ in its song, that seems as if it originates as
deep down in the bird as this organ is located. We have spent
many a spare moment observing the Blackbird in the Aviary at
Central Park, trying to detect the exact location of the production
of this sound. It is related that Cuvier cut the trachea across the
neck at the middle, and even took away the upper part of the
trachea in the Magpie, and yet, it is stated that the bird contin¬
ued to cry as before the operation, the voice not being less strong
or sharp. We should want to thirst for a knowledge of compar¬
ative physiology more than at present before repeating so cruel

>SSS.]

Cooke on Rare Birds in the Mississippi Valley.

3 1

an experiment; but we doubt the accuracy of this narration,
and we should want to hear the subject of such an experiment
really sing before believing that the syrinx is the seat of tone
production. It would be enormously difficult to keep a bird
alive after such an operation, to say nothing as to its regaining
a condition of full health, or a condition in which it would
feel like singing. A mere production of audible sound from
the inferior larynx would not be accepted as the song tones of
the bird. Man can produce a tone by the vibrations of the lips,
but the vocal ligaments are the voice phonators for all that. The
syrinx of a bird may be able to make a noise, but that does not
prove that the superior larynx has nothing to do in the formation
of the song of birds. However, we are open to conviction, and
would gladly be set right by proof positive that our opinion
as to this matter is wrong.

NOTES ON THE OCCURRENCE OF CERTAIN
BIRDS IN THE MISSISSIPPI VALLEY.

BY W. W. COOKE.

During the progress of my studies of migration, I have been in
correspondence with most of the active ornithologists in the Mis¬
sissippi Valley. Among the notes they have contributed are
some which seem worthy of being put on record. They may
not all of them be first records for their section of country, but
the occurrences are at places remote enough from the ordinary
habitat to be' worthy of note.

Hawk Owl in Northeastern Mississippi. — Among a list of birds occur¬
ring at Corinth, Miss , sent me by Dr. Rawlings Young, was the name of
the Hawk Owl ( Surnia funerea ). Upon asking for the particulars of its
capture, I received the following letter : —

“In reply to your question, I would say that I have never heard of but
one being killed near here and that I shot myself. In 18S2 I was shooting
.Quail over a brace of setters in thick sedge grass, three or four hundred
yards from the timber, and while working up a scattered bevy the dogs
pointed. Walking in, the Hawk Owl, much to my astonishment, got up
from the grass, right under the dogs’ noses. As he went off I cut him
down and had no trouble in identifying him from the cuts seen in Wilson.”

3 2

Cooke on Rare Birds in the Mississippi Valley.

[ January

Abundance of Black-bellied Plover ( Sqnatarola helvetica ) in Eastern
Nebraska. — In the bird list sent by F. Powell, Alda, Neb., occurs the
item : “Black-bellied Plover, usually rare, but May 21, 1883, I saw thou¬
sands of them on the Platte River.” In reply to further questions he
writes: “The weather had been rainy for a few days before I saw the
Black-bellied Plover, with the wind from the south, but on that day the
wind blew stiff from the north, with broken clouds flying and the air
pretty cold. The birds were on the hay flats on the south side of the
river. I drove up the valley seven or eight miles and was not out of sight
of large flocks any of the time. They were very wild and I only killed
three.”

Perissoglossa tigrina in Nebraska. — The same observer also states :
“On May 12, 1883, I took a Cape May Warbler, an old male in good plu¬
mage. A few .days later, I thought I saw three more, but had no gun
with me.”

Protonotaria citrea in Wisconsin. — In Dr. P. L. Hatch’s 1880 list of
Minnesota birds this Warbler is not given, nor can I find any Wisconsin
record. It is therefore with the greatest pleasure that I am able to record
that Dr. J. C. Havoslef of Lanesboro, in Southeastern Minnesota, shotone
on Aug. 16, 1S74, near the mouth of the Root River, on the Wisconsin
bank of the Mississippi.

Lark Bunting in Southeastern Minnesota. — In the same list of Minne¬
sota birds Calamospisa bicolor is given as occurring in the northeastern
part of the State. Since then it has been found — whether accidentally or
not remains to be seen — in the southeastern part. Dr. Havoslef sends the
following particulars: “Saw one, a magnificent male, on the very high
prairie seven miles north of Lanesboro, June 19, 1883. It was n°t at all
wary, so that I very easily got within a few yards of it, and could even see
the peculiar shape of the bill. My shot, however, was not successful, as the
weapon was only a small pistol, and the wind was blowing a gale. Busi¬
ness prevented my returning with a shot gun.” This spring he writes
me that “May 11, on the high prairie, nine miles east of Lanesboro, I
again saw a Calamospisa bicolor-, there was only one and it was wild,
while the one I saw a year ago was quite the reverse.”

Junco aikeni in the Indian Territory, Kansas, and Wisconsin. — While
standing at the window of my house in Caddo, Ind. Ter., which is in the
southeastern part, about thirty miles from the Texas line, my attention
was drawn to a small party of Fringillidae in the yard, about fifteen feet
from me. There were half a dozen Tree Sparrows, a few Juncos, and a
stray Passe rculus , but what attracted my attention was one of the Juncos.
It was slightly larger than the others, much darker, and across its wings
stretched two broad bands of white. I had heard and read of the White¬
winged Snowbird, but had never seen one. As I watched it intently it
spread its tail and revealed at least four feathers entirely white, and ap¬
parently white spots on four more. Turning now to the others I found
that one very dusky individual had faint wing-bars and the extra white tail
feathers. The moment I started for a gun the whole party left. On men-

'S8J.]

Chamberlain on the Cape May Warbler.

33

tioning the fact to my wife, she told me she had also noticed one in the
forenoon, but knew not that it was of special interest. This was Feb. 14,
1884. The next day I examined over fifty individuals ofjunco but never a
wing-bar was visible. Under Feb. 21, I find the following entry in my
diary: “At 8.30 a. m. I shot in my yard a White-winged Snowbird. It is
in worn plumage, but appears to be a typical bird ; both wing-bars show
plainly, the tail has two feathers on each side pure white, and the third
one more than half white. It was in company with a second which ap¬
peared to be in brighter plumage. This makes five specimens seen, two
bright and three dull ones. They were each time associated with a party of
Tree Sparrows that has stayed around my premises all winter, so that
there may have been but two individuals and the same ones seen several
times.” On March 7 a single one was seen. This completes the record
for Caddo.

Late in the winter a box of skins arrived from Wisconsin which I had
prepared the previous spring. On comparing my new Snowbird with
the old ones, I was not a little surprised to find among them its coun¬
terpart. This second specimen bore a tag which showed its history
to be as follows. The morning of Jan. 14, 1883, it was found alive in my
woodshed at JefierSon, Wis., in the southern part of the State. It was
kept alive three days, and when it died its skin was saved. Both speci¬
mens are still in my possession.

This species was originally described by Mr. Aiken in 1872, from speci¬
mens taken in the mountains of Colorado, where the species is abundant.
Three years later it was taken at Ellis, in Western Kansas, by Dr. L.
Watson. It has been found nowhere else. The past winter Dr. Watson
again found the species in the same locality, so that it may be considered
a regular winter visitant to Western Kansas, but its occurrence in the
Indian Territory, and especially in Wisconsin, is probably fortuitous.

THE NESTING HABITS OF THE CAPE MAY
WARBLER ( DENDR CE CA TIG RINA ) .

BY MONTAGUE CHAMBERLAIN.

My first acquaintance with the Cape May Warbler in its home
was made during the summer of 1882, when our party secured
several specimens in the heavy woods back of Edmnndston,
near the northern boundary of New Brunswick. Previous to
this I knew nothing of the occurrence of this species in this
Province except what I had learned from Mr. Boardman of its

34

Chamberlain on the Cape May Warbler.

[January

occasional appearance near the Maine border during the breeding
season. A year later, in July, 18S3, Mr. Arthur P. Chadbourne
captured a solitary example at Rothesay, some nine miles east of
this city (St. John), and this completed the record until June,
1884, when the nest and eggs were discovered just outside the
city limits by my friend and co-worker in this locality, Mr. James
W. Banks. For this is Bank’s story that I am telling, he, with
characteristic generosity, desiring my name to be associated with
its rehearsal.

The birds seen and heard at Edmundston were invariably on
the topmost branches of the tallest evergreens (usually spruces)
growing in the neighborhood. Our experience furnished us with
good and sufficient reason for remembering this fact. As the
birds were constantly singing, their general whereabouts was
easily discovered, but no small amount of patient searching was
required to catch sight of them ; and we soon found out that after
sighting and shooting a bird there was still much to be gone
through before it was in hand ; for after tumbling a short distance
it usually staid. The trees were too stalwart to be moved by any
shaking power we could command, so every successful shot en¬
tailed a climb — and such a climb ! The branches of these spruce
trees were so close together we had to call up all our reserve of
muscle and skill to squirm through ; and in addition to this we
had to encounter the annoying twigs — rough, sharp little things,
with which the branches were thickly studded, and which tore
clothes, scratched faces, pricked the flesh as they rolled down
underneath our flannels, and made themselves generally disagi'ee-
able. And so it came about that the Cape May was associated
in my mind with the stately trees and the solitude of deep forests
— a solitude broken by the merry notes of these songsters, the
chatter of squirrels, the sigh of the swaying boughs, and by the
strong language of exhausted and exasperated collectors ; and,
because of these recollections, I was altogether unprepared for
my friend’s announcement that a pair had built in a location of
an almost exactly opposite character. This nest found by Banks
was hid among a cluster of low cedars growing in an exposed
position, on a rather open hill-side, near a gentleman’s residence,
and within a stone’s throw of a much frequented lane. The nest
was placed less than three feet from the ground and within six
inches of the tips of the branches, amid the densest part of the

Chamberlain on the Cafe May Warbler.

35

18850

foliage, by which it was well screened from observation. It was
fastened to two of the tiny branchlets — pendent from one and rest¬
ing upon the other — and secured to each by strawberry vines and
spider silk.

On June io Mr. Banks was sauntering past the cedar and
quite accidentally brushed the branches aside, disclosing an in¬
complete nest, and he observed on a bush near by a bird whose
appearance was unfamiliar, apparently not much disturbed, but
evidently interested in Bank’s presence. At that time the day¬
light was too far gone to admit of any accurate account being
taken of the form or color of the bird, but sufficient was noted
to identify it afterwards as a female Cape May Warbler. And
here I may add that though the nest was frequently visited during
the following week, the male was not seen, nor was the song
heard.

On June 13 the nest was completed and two eggs were laid.
During this visit the female was near at hand, and when Banks
and a comrade withdrew to the shade of an adjoining tree she
followed them and gave ample opportunity for a close and sat¬
isfactory examination — coming within a couple of yards and
coolly pluming the feathers of wings and tail, all the time keeping
her eye upon the intruders, but exhibiting no alarm nor uttering
a single note.

On June 16 the ben was discovered on the nest and was driven
off. She did not fly more than a few yards, and then perching
on a bush plumed her feathers while watching her disturbers,
occasionally uttering a faint chirping note. This note did not
seem like a call, nor an alarm ; nor did the bird appear at all ex¬
cited.

To insure the identification being perfect the bird was secured
before the nest was taken. This structure and the completed
clutch of four eggs are before me as I write. The walls of the
nest are composed of minute twigs of dried spruce, grasses, and
strawberry vines, with spider’s webbing interwoven with the
coarser fabrics and knotted into numerous little balls, which are
bound upon the surface as if for ornament. The exterior is rather
roughly made, but is more compact, and bears evidence of more
art than is shown in the nest of the Magnolia Warbler, which it
somewhat resembles. The interior, however, is much more neat¬
ly and artistically formed in the Cape May’s than in its congener’s.

36

Dutcher, Bird Notes from Long Island , N. T.

[ January

The lining is composed entirely of horsehair, and this is laid with
precision, and shaped into a prettily formed cup, the brim being
turned with exquisite grace. The dimensions of the nest are,
outside, 2\ inches high and 2 1 to 3 inches across the mouth ;
inside, 1^ inches deep and if inches wide.

The eggs are of much the same dull white ground-color, of a
slightly ashen hue, as that of the Magnolia’s. The form of the
egg is different, however, the Cape May’s being less pyriform —
the point less acute. The markings are of light and dark lilac, and
yellowish and reddish tints of brown ; the brown being on the sur¬
face and the lilac underneath, the coatings of shell producing the
various shades. As a rule the spots are circular and very small —
many being quite minute — and are irregularly distributed, no two
eggs bearing the same pattern, though in all four there is decided
tendency to concentration in a ring near the large end; but on
some there are spots over the larger part of the entire shell, while
the small end of others is immaculate. The measurements
are .69 x .49, .65 x .49, .66 x .49, .66 x .4S.

BIRD NOTES FROM LONG ISLAND, N. Y.

BY WILLIAM DUTCHER.

i. Passerculus princeps Maynard. Ipswich Sparrow. — Wishing to
ascertain whether this species is as rare as it has been generally supposed
to be, or was overlooked from the inaccessibility of its winter habitat, I
arranged with two of my correspondents to send me all the individuals of
this species that they could secure. Both of them spend the winter
months on the beach, one at Fire Island Inlet and the other at Shinne-
cock Bay, which is some forty miles further east. That they might be
perfectly familiar with these birds, I sent them early in the autumn a skin
of one as a sample. December 29, 1883, I received from my Fire Island
correspondent twenty-nine specimens which he shot between December
17 and 29. He informed me that he had looked carefully but unsuccess¬
fully for them until December 17, when he found six and secured them all.
Subsequent to that time and prior to the 29th he secured twenty-three
additional specimens. He also added that he usually observed them in
pairs, although sometimes there would be three or four together. They
were always found feeding on the seeds of tall grasses and weeds that

Dutcher, Bird Notes from Long Island , N. T.

37

*88S.]

were above the snow level. January 30 he wrote, “I have not seen any
Sparrows lately.” My Shinnecock Bay correspondent did not succeed
in getting any specimens until February 4, 1884, when he sent me four,
and also stated, “these birds are very scarce.” February 27, 1884, he suc¬
ceeded in securing two additional specimens, which he sent to me, and
again directed my attention to their scarcity. February 22, 1884, I hunted
carefully for this Sparrow on Rockaway Beach, but unsuccessful!}'. I am
quite positive, however, that I saw three or four individuals, but they were
so wild I could not secure them. March 7, 1884, my correspondent at Fire
Island wrote that he had seen but one Sparrow since the first cold spell
when he sent me twenty-nine, and that he was at a loss to know whether
he had killed them all or whether they had gone away. Of the thirty-
five specimens received five measured 6.75 inches in length, and only two
were under 6. 15 inches. The largest and smallest birds measured respect¬
ively :

Length, 6.75; extent, 10.50; wing, 3.20.

“ 6.10; “ 925; “ 2.65.

The average of the thirty-five specimens was : length, 6.49; extent, 10.02 ;
wing, 3.03.

2. Nyctea scandiaca (Linn.) Netut. Snowy Owl. — The entire absence
from Long Island during the winter of 1883 and ’84 of this Owl is note¬
worthy. During the winter of 1SS2 and ’83 it was, on the other hand,
remarkably plenty. None of my correspondents, about thirty in number,
record a single individual seen. These Owls, being so much sought after
for ornamental purposes, are watched for very closely by the professional
gunners, and thus rarely escape being at least noted if they are not
secured.

3. Aigialites melodus ( Ord ) Bp. Piping Plover. — March 24, 1884,
Mr. Newbold T. Lawrence, while at Shinnecock Bay, saw one of these
Plovers which had been shot that day by a sportsman stopping at Capt.
Lane’s. Noted as an early date.

4. Macrorhamphus griseus scolopaceus (Say) Cones. Red-bellied
Snipe. — July 23, 1884, while shooting at Shinnecock Bay, three individ¬
uals of this species came to my stools at the same time, two of which
were secured. I sent them to Dr. A. K. Fisher of Sing Sing, N. Y. , with
particulars of their capture. He wrote me as follows : “I should consider
No. 55 a fair example of M. griseus scolopaceus. No. 56 is one of those,
doubtful; just on the line; but if the note was different it might be con¬
sidered the mate of No. 55, as they were male and female.” The bill of
the larger specimen measured 2.83 inches and of the smaller 2.38 inches.

5. Larus glaucus Briinn. Glaucous Gull; Burgomaster. — March
11, 1884, I purchased one of a pair of Gulls of this species, which had
been shot by a gunner at South Oyster Bay. The specimen I bought is
in very nearly the same plumage as the one recorded by Dr. E. A. Mearns
in the ‘Bulletin of the Nuttall Ornithological Club,’ Vol. V, p. 189. The
other one is a younger bird.

3«

Dutcher, Bird Notes from Lotig Island , N. T. [January

6. Sterna anglica Montag. Gull-billed Tern. — I shot a female in
full plumage July 8, 1884, at Shinnecock Bay, while watching for Litni-
colse. There were five in the flock, it being without doubt a family of two
adults and their brood of the present year. They were migrating west¬
ward along the coast and must have bred further east than Long Island.

7. Utamania torda Leach. Razor-billed Auk. — January 15,

18S4, I received from a correspondent at Southampton, a specimen of this
species accompanied by the following note : “The bird I send you was
found dead on the seashore. It is likely it was drowned in the heavy surf
we had just before. It was a new bird to me.” February 2, 1884, I re¬
ceived another from a correspondent at Smith’s Point, which was also
found dead on the beach. February 6, 1884, I received still another from
Southampton, not, however, from the same correspondent who sent me
the one January 15. With it came the following interesting note: “I
found this bird on the beach last night while on my patrol, and as it was
a stranger to this coast I send it. I have been in the Life-Saving Service
nine years and have never seen one before.” All three birds were
remarkable for the poor condition they were in, and also for the total ab¬
sence of food of any kind in their stomachs.

8. Lomvia arra bruennichi ( Sch .) Ridgzu. Brunnich’s Guillemot-
— Between January 8 and March 24, 1884, I obtained twelve specimens
and noted about thirty additional individuals of this species from the
south side of Long Island. A large majority of the specimens obtained
were either found dead on the beach, generally frozen, or else so weak
from hunger that they were easily captured by hand and died within a few
hours. The only exception to the above was two that were shot by a
gunner at Rockawav, who had them come to his Duck decoys. Dr. C.
Hart Merriam mentions the same circumstance of starvation in connec¬
tion with the Foolish Guillemot in his ‘List of Birds ascertained to occur
within ten miles from Point de Monts, Province of Quebec, Canada.’*
“They were all in very poor flesh, some being little more than animated
skeletons, and a great many died and were washed ashore.”

The notes accompanying the specimens indicate that this species is
a very uncommon winter visitor to the western end of Long Island, and
an irregular winter visitor to the extreme eastern portion of the Island.
From a correspondent at Ditch Plain, which is very near the eastern
extremity of the Island, I get the following note : “The bird sent was
picked up dead on the beach after an easterly storm. At such times we
have quite often found them, and have also seen them alive. I think
they are driven on our shore by severe northeast gales, as after such
storms is about the only time we find them.” Another correspondent,
from Shinnecock Bay. which is about thirty miles west of Ditch Plain,
writes : “They are rather a rare bird on this coast, but during the winter
in severe storms you will see one occasionally.” A correspondent from
Smith’s Point, which is about midway between New York City and Mon-

* Bulletin of the Nuttall Ornithological Club, Vol. VII, p. 242.

■S3S.]

McKinlay, Field Notes from Pictou County, N. S.

39

tauk Point, says, “Do not see them every winter. They appear to be a
very dumb bird. I picked this one up on the beach alive, and was going
to send it to you that way, but it died before I could do so. The Captain
of our Station says ‘to the best of his knowledge he has never seen one
before.’ He has been in the Life-Saving Service twelve years.” At South
Oyster Bay and Rockaway, which are but a few miles from the western
end of the Island, the gunners and Life-Saving men had never seen them
before, and at the former place the single one shot was considered so rare
that it was preserved and mounted.

FIELD NOTES FROM PICTOU COUNTY, NOVA
SCOTIA.

BY JAMES MCKINLAY.

Shortly after the commencement of the present century the
Pictou Academy was founded, and its first superintendent was Dr.
Thomas McCulloch, a gentleman of high literary attainments,
who numbered among his friends the illustrious Audubon. With
a view to promote the various branches of scientific research he
early directed his attention to the establishment of a museum in
connection with the Academy, intending among other objects to
gather there a complete representation of the zoology of the
Province of Nova Scotia, especially that of the eastern portion, at
that time called the District of Pictou. So energetically was the
scheme prosecuted that little more than a quarter of a century
had elapsed ere the enterprise had attained a high degree of ex¬
cellence, and the collection was pronounced by Audubon, who
visited it, to be surpassed by none other, at that time, in Ameri¬
ca. Unhappily, however, that valuable collection was suffered
to pass entirely out of our Province, which is the more to be
regretted as many of the species represented have since become
extinct or extremely rare to our fauna.

This applies to the mammals as well as to the birds, but the
change is most marked numerically in certain aquatic species of
the feathered race, for instead of the vast multitudes which in
former days were wont to visit our bays and harbors in early
spring and in autumn, now we meet but a few small and scat-

4o

McKinlay, Field Notes from Pictou County , N. S. [January

tered flocks. Their remarkable declension may be mainly attrib¬
utable to over-much annoyance and disturbance by the increased
traffic of vessels, and perhaps more especially by the unrestrained
and incessant use of firearms by an increasing class of gunners,
whose aim is to destroy fowl of every description irrespective of
the season, merely to gratify an ungovernable propensity for
destruction, and without heed of the consideration that such prac¬
tices must result in the annihilation of entire tribes.

Among the ranks of the graminivorous and insectivorous species
of birds the numbers that annually visit this locality appear
much the same as they were half a century ago. These are rarely
found within the deeper forests, but spread over the more open
country bordering on the settlements, some species taking up
their abode in our gardens and byways.

The numbers of the Rafted Grouse have been seriously dimin¬
ished, but I notice that in those districts where they are most
harrassed they have become exceedingly wary and cunning. I
have also observed that among these birds the size of the brood
has decreased, for instead of clutches of nine, ten, or a dozen, I
now rarely find one-half that number.

The Eskimos assert that during the period of incubation the
Ptarmigan cease to give off any scent by which they can be
traced ; and my experience leads me to think that our Ruffed
Grouse possess the same peculiarity, else how coidd they so
universally escape alike from furred and feathered foes, as they
certainly do at this season.

The several species of the ‘noble order’ of. birds are not so
numerously represented here as formerly, influenced, I think, to a
very great extent, by the destruction of our forests by fire and
other causes.

Perhaps no bird is more regretfully recalled by our older
sportsmen than is the Wild Pigeon. The first inhabitants of this
Province found this elegant and savory member of the Columbidae
abundant everywhere.

Their spring arrival usually occurred early in the month of May,
and the bulk seldom made their autumnal exit until the middle
of October. They constructed their simple nests in the branches
of lofty trees, especially hemlocks, beneath whose foliage they
found a grateful shade from the midday sun, and from which they
seldom issued except at early dawn or at evening. In olden

■SS5.J

McKinlay, Field Notes from Pictou County , N. S.

41

times their food was very abundant, and consisted chiefly of straw¬
berries, raspberries, and blueberries, which now-a-days are, un¬
accountably, found only in very meagre quantities, quite too
limited to supply the vast flocks of Pigeons which formerly
resorted here. This failure in their provisions appears to me the
best reason to give for their withdrawal from this section, and is
the same reason given by Audubon for their leaving some more
southern localities. *

I can not so readily account for the marked decrease in the
numbers of Plovers visiting 11s. These swift and graceful fliers
usually made their first appearance about the end of August, or
much earlier in seasons that were wet and stormy, with prevailing
northerly gales. The major part, however, usually delayed until
the first week in September.

Contemporary with these heavier flocks, composed entirely of
the Black-bellied species, came the Eskimo Curlews, which some¬
times intermingled with their smaller congeners. The Golden
Plover was usually the last of the Charadriidas to depart, staying
until the latter end of October. This species was never so
numerous here as was the Black-bellied, but both are rarely met
with here now. The Long-billed Curlew has forsaken our shore
entirely, save a few stray birds which drop in upon us about the
first of September, or a small flock is started in some remote and
sequestered beach. They rarely venture upon the uplands, as I
can remember them doing years ago. None of the family ever
visit us in the spring now-a-days ; it is only in their autumnal
migrations that they favor us with a visit, and even now flocks
are seen passing over the country high in the air and steering due
south. I can remember when Wilson’s Snipe came here in im¬
mense flocks, but about a quarter of a century ago they began to
lessen in numbers, and now they are far from common. Wood¬
cock on the other hand, are more plentiful now than they were
fifty years ago. When Pictou County was first settled none were
found here, and in 1S30 the first specimen was placed in the mu¬
seum of the Academy. From this date they increased rapidly until
about fifteen years ago, when their numbers appeared to decrease,
from what cause I can only conjecture. Almost every season a
few of this species are met with here in March, when the earth’s
surface is frozen and covered deep with snow, excepting in a few
favored spots. These spots are, however, spied out by these

42

McKinlay, Field Notes from Pictoti County , N. S. [ January

hungry birds, and they may be seen here diligently probing for a
dinner.

Pictou, owing to its geographical position, lies within the line
of bird migration, and is annually visited by many of the aquatic
species.

The earliest to arrive here during the vernal migration is the
Canada Goose, and even if the weather has been stormy the advance
guard usually put in an appearance during the first week in
March, followed by a large flock some ten days later. Should south¬
erly winds prevail, other large flocks appear, moving at a much
greater altitude than did the first comers. About the Sth or ioth
of April the bulk have reached here. From this point northward
their movements seem to be much influenced by the weather, and
often after leaving here and encountering ice and head winds they
have returned. About the 20th of April the main portion are
usually away, though a few stragglers are met as late as the
middle of May. Those which tarry longest with us often pair
before proceeding northward.

In the autumn, should the temperature suddenly lower and cold
north winds prevail, the first comers — small parties, mainly
young birds — are seen as early as the first week in September,
and their appearance is considered a sign of an early winter,
though this does not always prove correct. The largest flights
pass us from the first to the middle of October. A large number
generally withdraw to some favorite feeding ground in a well
screened cove, and feasting on nutritious sub-marine plants, reach
the extraordinary weight of eighteen pounds. Many of these
stay until the waters are on the point of freezing, and occasionally
some which have tarried for the last possible mouthful have been
seen as late as Christmas, hurrying southward at a great height.

The Brants arrive here in the spring, later than the Geese, and
remain a month longer. On their first arrival they are in very
poor condition and do not appear to recruit much before the mid¬
dle of May,- after which their obesity increases perceptibly, and
by the first of June they attain their highest state of edible per¬
fection.

For a few days previous to their starting northward they visit
the seashore and sand-beaches where they can obtain small
quartz pebbles, locally termed ‘ballast,’ and then, congregating at
one central rendezvous, they await for a southerly breeze, when,

885-]

43

Stejneger, Analecta Omithologica.

the entire body rising together, after a few circuits in the air,
they fly directly north. Their customary time to leave us in the
spring is exceedingly precise, rarely varying more than from the
9th to the 1 2th of June.

The Eider Ducks, called by our gunners ‘Sea Ducks,’ visit 11s
in the autumn in immense throngs. Flying close to the water
in horizontal lines, they pass along our shore early in Novem¬
ber, and continue on through the Straits of Canso and along
the eastern shore of Nova Scotia to the mouth of the Bay
of Fundy. Occasionally, however, a flock with more sagacity
has been seen to mount into the air and fly across the land to
the head waters of the Bay. None of this species have been
observed on our coast during the spring months, when their
line of flight is said to be along the north-eastern shore of Cape
Breton and to the Straits of Belle Isle. In all the throngs of this
species that pass us no adult males are ever seen.

Occasionally birds have been met with in this vicinity that
have evidently been driven oft' their usual haunts. For instance,
some twenty years ago considerable numbers of Scarlet Tanagers
were found here about the 10th of May. Some were dead, and
all were in an emaciated condition. None have been seen here
since.

About the same year the Glossy Ibises were seen on the
margin of a small lake near here, and one was captured by a
countryman.

ANALECTA ORNITHOLOGICA.

Fourth Series.

BY LEONHARD STEJNEGER.

XVII. On the Origin of the Word Quiscalus.

The words Quiscalus of Vieillot and quiscula of Linnaeus*
seem to have perplexed ‘ornithophilologists’ considerably, and

* Both combined in the terms Quiscalus quiscula (Lin.), Quiscalus quiscula aglceus
(Baird), and Quiscalus quiscula emeus (Ridgw.) for the Purple Grackles (Ridgw.,
Nomencl., Nos. 278, 278 a, and 278 b ).

44 Stejneger, Analecta Ornithologica. [January

Professor Newton says that he has not been able to trace the latter
further back than to Linnaeus’s 10th edition (cf. Coues’s second
Check-list, p. 64, where he enlarges upon the subject). The
word \uiscula is, however, to be found as early as the middle of
the 1 6th century, for Gesner gives among the names of the Quail
( Coturnix coturnix) U^ualea cf* Quiscula Recentioribus”
and Pater Rzaczynski in his ‘Historia Naturalis curiosa Regni
Polonise,’ etc. (1721, p.376), names it “ Coturnix seu Sfuiscula,
Quisquila." The word is probably an onomatopoieticon, and
the different names Quail, Quatla, Quaglia, Caille, Cuaderviz,
Quackel have perhaps a kindred origin. I also find quoted as
late Latin “ quaquila , quaquilia , qualia and qualea ,” while
‘ calhcC and ‘ quisquilci are given as Portugese vernaculars of the
Quail ; and Ph. Statius Muller (S. N., II, 1773, p. 196) says:
“Der Linnaeische Name Quiscula Konnte eine Wachtel be-
deuten.” The Mexican origin, as suggested by some ( cf . Auk,
18S4, p. 57), seems not probable in view of the above.*

XVIII. Colinus , not Ortyx.

Good taste and common sense should have prevented a not un¬
frequent usage among older writers of adopting a classic Greek
or Latin name of a well-known European species as generic
term for an exotic or even Neogsean group of birds. That the
early immigrants from ‘the old country’ transferred the names of
familiar birds to the species of similar appearance in their new
home, was natural and cannot be blamed ; that they called the
‘Bob-white’ Quail is just as natural as the course of Stephens
in imposing upon the exclusively American genus the classic
name Ortyx is condemnable ; for oprv^ is the ancient Greek name
for the common European Quail {Coturnix coturnix) .

Still, this consideration would not affect the availability of
the name as a generic appellation, and when we now propose
to give it up it is because we are compelled to do so for other
reasons. The fact is that Ortyx is preoccupied.

As I have no means of looking up the reference “ Ortyx Oken,
Lehrb. Naturg. , VI, 1816, p. 611,” which I suppose is used by

* It should also be mentioned that Quiscalus is used in botany, for which reason
Swainson substituted Scapkidurus.

ISSS.]

Stejneger, Analecta Ornithologica.

45

him in lieu of Coturnix ,* I shall only call attention to Ortygis
Illiger, 1S11. Bestowing this name upon the genus best known
as Turnix he evidently transliterated the Greek op™j;, which he
quotes in parenthesis after the Latin appellation. There are
other Latin transcriptions of the same name, Ortygia and
Ortyga , and the reason why Illiger did not select the strict trans¬
literation Ortyx was probably that in ancient Latin the latter is
only used for a plant.

Ortygis and Ortyx are identical in meaning and derivation,
only differing in their grammatical ending, and consequently the
latter will have to give way.

The next name for the genus is Lesson’s Colinus (Nuttall’s
Colinia was given four years later without knowledge of Lesson’s
name) , derived from the vernacular French name Colin “con¬
tracted by Buffon from the barbarous appellation of some Mexi¬
can species,” for instance Acolin, Cacacolin, Ocacolin, etc.

The synonymy of the genus stands as follows :

Genus Colinus Lesson.

1819. — Ortyx Stephens, Gen. Zool. XI, p. 376 (type O. borealis — vir-
ginianus Linn.) (nec Ortyx Oken 1816, nec Ortygis Illig.
1S11).

1826. — Ortygia Boie, Isis, 1826, p. 977 (same type).

1828. — Colinus Lesson, Man. d’Orn. II, p. 190 (same type).

1832.— Colinia Nuttall, Man. Orn. Landb. p. 646 (same type).

1854. — Philortix Des Murs (nec Gould 1845).

The names of the North American species are therefore :

4So.f Colinus virginianus (Linn.). Bob-white.

480 a. Colinus virginianus floridanus (Cones). < Florida
Quail.

480 b. Colinus virginianus texanus (Lazur.). Texan
Quail.

48o.x Colinus graysoni (Lazvr.). Grayson’s Quail.

Any one having the opportunity of ascertaining the true nature of the above
quotation would confer a favor upon the author by publishing a brief statement of it
in the next number of ‘The Auk.' — Since the above was written Mr. Allen has been
kind enough to look the matter up, and has communicated to the author an extract
from Oken’s work, from which it is evident that he used Ortyx instead of Turnix , and
not, as I supposed, for Coturnix. It is only necessary to quote the following: “I.
Gattung. Ortyx , Turnix, Tridactylus, Queil ; Hiihnerschn. massig, schmachtig, Nasi,
in Mitte, Kopf befiedert,” etc. Oken simply ‘emended’ Uliger’s Ortygis.

t Ridgway’s ‘Nomenclature,’ 1881.

46

Stejneger, Analecta Ornithologica.

[January

XIX. Is the Name Ortyx massena tenable ?

In the synonymies of the species known as the ‘Massena
Quail’ the earliest name is quoted as “ Ortyx massena Less.,
Cent. Zool., 1830, 189,” this name taking the ‘ preference over
'•'•Ortyx montezumce Vig., Zool. Journ. V, 1830, 275.”

In turning to Lesson’s work, quoted above, we find first that
Ortyx massena is a mere nomen nudum. The following is all
that is said about it: “Ce colin [ O. elegans Less.] provient de
la Californie, ainsi qu’une autre belle et nouvelle esp&ce, que nous
avons nominee ortyx Massena , et qui se trouve dans la collection
de M. le due de Rivoli. Les ortyx elegans et Massena sont tr6s-
distincts des ortyx pi eta et ortyx Douglasii , d6crits dans le tome
16 (pag. 243) des Transactions de la soci6t6 Li nn6enne de
Londres.” The name does not occur in the same author’s
‘Trait6’ published in 1831.

But, even apart from the unavailability of Lesson’s name
because unaccompanied by a diagnosis, description, or figure,
there seems to be little doubt that Ortyx montezzance has the
priority. The title-page of Lesson’s ‘Centurie Zoologique’
certainly bears the date 1S30, and the dedication to M. Geoftroy-
Saint-Hilaire is dated, '‘Janvier 1830.” The work seems to have
been issued in parts, the title-page and the dedication having been
annexed to the first part, which may have been published in 1S30,
for the title on the paper-cover has the year 1832, and the ‘Post-
Scriptum’ on p. 229 is written in “Fevrier 1S31.” The article
from which the above quotation is taken pretends to be written
in June 1830, according to a remark at the bottom of the page,
but on the same signature and four pages earlier is an article
written in November of the same year, so that it is safe to pre¬
sume that the part containing the name ortyx Massena was not
printed and published before 1831.

Therefore, the Massena Quail, or, perhaps better, the Massena
Colin, should stand as

485. Cyrtonyx montezumae (Vtg’-)-

XX. Cyanolesbia , ‘strictly correct’ !

The Trochiline genus Cynanthus , as at present accepted by
‘plurimis auctoribus,’ offers a curious transposition of types, not

18S5.J Stejneger, Analecta Ornithologica. q7

less remarkable for the fact that the transposition has been gener¬
ally admitted.

In his ‘Synopsis of the Humming-birds’ Mr. Elliot remarks in
a footnote (p. 150) : “This genus was first established by Swain-
son in 1S27, Zool. Journ., p. 357, and contained species belong¬
ing to various genera, all of which he called types. In 1S37
(Cl. B., II, p. 330), he ejected the species from Cynanthus,
which he had previously placed in it, and inserted T.
forjicatus , Linn., only, which now stands as the type of the
genus.” From this quotation it is evident that a species
has been selected for type which was not originally included
in the genus when established, and that none of the species
first placed therein — one of which, of course, must be the type —
was admitted into the new genus Cynanthus of 1837. What¬
ever may be Swainson’s Cynanthus of 1S27, certain it is that it is
not the genus of which Trochilus forjicatus Linn, is the type.

As no other already proposed name 'seems to be available for
that group I have called it

Cyanolesbia,

derived from cyaneus and lesbia , on account of the blue reflec¬
tions on the tail, and the near relationship to the typical species of
the genus Lesbia , which have the metallic gloss on the tail
greenish.

It includes Cyanolesbia forficata (Linn.), the type, and
Cyanolesbia smaragdina (Gould) (= C. mocoa) .

XXI. Concerning the Names of some North American

Spizin^e.

A few more of the names of the North American Spizime re¬
quire a revision, as will be apparent from the following remarks.

As Spermophila Swains., 1S27, is preoccupied by Spermophi-
lus Fleming, 1S22, we will have to adopt Cabanis’s SporophilaJ
and our species will stand as

R. 252. Sporophila morelleti ( Puch .) Cab.

Professor Cabanis has persistently used the generic term
“ Euethia Reichenb. 1S50” in preference to the commonly adopted

* Deriv. cnropo?, seed, and I love.

48

Stejneger, Analecta Ornithologica.

[ January

“ Phonipara Bonap. 1850,” and a close examination shows that
he is right in using the former. Although based upon different
types, the two names apply strictly to the same genus, and Reich-
enbach’s Euetheia has a slight priority of nearly two months
over Phonipara.

The synonymy of the genus stands thus :

Genus Euetheia* Reichenb.

Euetheia Reichenb ach, Av. Syst. Nat., Knacker, pi. lxxix “June 1,
1850” (type E. lepida Linn.).

Phonipara Bonaparte, Consp. Av. I, p. 494, “July 30, 1850” (type
Loxia canora Gm.).

Etiethia Cabanis, Mus. Hein. I, 1851, p. 146 (emend.).

The species entering the North American Fauna must be
called

R. 253. Euetheia bicolor {Linn.) Gundl.

and not Euetheia zena (Linn.). Linmeus, in the tenth edition,
described two different species under the very same name
Eringilla zena,-\ our bird being the last one of the two.
It will therefore have to give way for E. bicolor , a name substi¬
tuted by Linmeus himself when becoming aware of his careless¬
ness. I quote the following from the synonymy of the species:
1758. — Fringilla zena Linn., S. N. 10 ed. I, p. 183 ( nec op. ej. p. 181
quce Spindalis zena).

1766. — Fringilla bicolor Linn., S. N. 12 ed. I, p. 324.

1874. — Etiethia bicolor Gundlach, Journ. f. Orn. XXII, p. 312.

* Deriv. evqGeta, tj, simplicity. It is not to be confounded with Eutheia, 1830,
applied to a coleopterous insect by Stephens, and derived from evGvs, ela, v,
meaning straight.

t Zena, if a Greek word, may have been intended for Xena, £evtj, a (female) guest
or stranger, Ja not infrequent corrupt transliteration, e.g., Zenia Gray, Zenopeltis Roie
Zenophasia Sw., Zanthomyza Sw., Zenitis Boisd., Ziphius Cuv., Ziphorhynchus Sw., Zi-
photheca Val. & Cuv., Zyphothyca Sw. for Xenia , Xenopeltis, Xenophasia, etc. Against
this is the fact that Linnaeus in both instances wrote Zena with the initial letter capi¬
talized. Zfjva is the objective case of Zeus, Zeus, Jupiter. I find that Pater
Rzaczynski (p.370, vide anted), among other names, quotes 'Zena Belonii' for the
European Goldfinch ( Carduelis carduelis), and also that the same bird was styled
'Fringilla Jovis', i. e., Jupiter’s Finch, by Klein (Hist. Avium Prodr. 1750, p. 97). Cj.
Coues, 2d Check List, p. 59.

Stejneger, Analecta Ornithologica.

49

iS8S.]

It will be seen that the name applied by Townsend to the
Lark Bunting, viz., Fringilla bicolor , was already disposed of
by Linnaeus, and is thus unavailable for any other bird. As there
seems to be no synonyms, a new name will he required, for
which I propose

R. 256. Calamospiza melanocorys.* Lark Bunting.

XXII. The Correct Name of the American Cowbird.

In ‘The Ibis’ for 1SS3, p. 5 S3, Dr. Sclater has a note headed as
above, in which he concludes that it should remain pecoris and
not he changed to ater as proposed originally hy Gray and,
later on, by Cones, and adopted by Ridgway. The following
are my reasons for not agreeing with him.

PI. Enlum. 534 is identified and named hy Boddaert (Tabl.
PI. Enl. p. 31) thus :

“534. Trupiale noir Buff. V. p. 301. Briss. II. p. 103. Oriolus niger
mihi Linn. Gen. 52.0.”

On p. 37 he identifies PI. 606, fig. 1 (which represents the
bird in question) thus :

“606. 1. Petit Troupiale noir, Buff. V. p. 303. Briss. Ornith. II. p.

103. pi. XI. Linn. Gen. 52.0. Oriolus ater , black oriole Lath.
birds I. p. 445. 11. 37.”

Now, Dr. Sclater reasons thus (/. c.) : “On reference to Bod-
daert’s Table, p. 37, it will be observed that he does not propose
to give a new name , ‘ Oriolus ater ,’ to Daubenton’s ‘ Troupiale
de la Caroline ’ (PI. Enl. 606. fig. 1), but merely quotes (as a
synonym of Daubenton’s figure) ‘ Oriolus ater , Black Oriole,
Lath. Birds, i. p. 445. n. 337 - ’ But the synonym is incorrect,
for Latham’s ‘Black Oriole’ is quite another bird. Moreover,
when Boddaert intends to make an original name he usually adds
after it the word ‘mihi.’ ”

We now turn to Latham, and find nowhere the name ‘ Oriolus
ater.' It is therefore clear that Boddaert does not quote ‘ 4 Oriolus
ater , Black Oriole, Lath.,” etc., as a synonym, hut simply the
latter part of it, imposing the name Oriolus ater upon the bird
represented on the plate, and not named systematically either by
Buflfon, Brisson, or Linnaeus. That he adduces Latham’s ‘Black
Oriole’ wrongly as a synomyn does not invalidate the name which

Deriv. pAas genit. |xt\avos, black, and KopuSos, contr. Kop*>9, a Lark.

5°

Stejneger, Analecta Ornithologica.

[January

is based upon the plate 606. It seems, moreover, evident, that
his quotation of Latham’s ‘Black Oriole’ is not due to a misiden-
tification of Latham’s description, but rather to a lapsus of the
pen, for under the ‘Black Oriole’ Latham quotes PI. Enlum. 534,
the same figure which Boddaert a few pages earlier (p. 31, see
above) named Oriolus niger , while again Latham quotes PI.
Enl. 606, f. 1. under the ‘Lesser Black Oriole,’ the bird in ques¬
tion, to which Boddaert, therefore, most probably intended to
refer.

That ‘ Oriolus ater ’ lacks the appendix mihi is totally insignifi¬
cant. A few examples, picked up at random, are sufficient to
show that: Hirundo albiventer (pi. enl. 564. 2, Bodd. p. 32),
Pluscicapa fusca (574? L p- 34) , Muscicapci eques (S31, 1, p.
51)? Tringa tniles (S35, p. 5 1 ) 1 Formicarius cayanensis (S21,
p. 50), Motacilla naevia (752, 1, p. 47), Motacilla eques (730,
p. 46), Tanagra nigricula et T. pileata (720, 1 and 2, p. 4^),
Tanagra grisea (714, 1, p. 45), Tanagra rufa (71 1, p. 45),
Parus cinctus (708, p. 44), etc. The last seven are particularly
interesting as compared with the name given to the bird on plate
712. The latter is based upon exactly the same authorities and in
precisely the same manner as the above, to which ‘ mihi ’ is not
appended, and still the species figured on pi. 712 is called
“Alauda capensis mihi*

Somebody might perhaps object, that ‘ Oriolus ater belongs as
a quotation to ‘black oriole’ (see Boddaert’s text as quoted above)
because only separated from it by a comma. In reply I shall only
refer to Bodcl., p. 44, and the following quotation to prove that
the comma is of no account :

“704. 2. Figuier Protonotaire, Buff. IX. p. 465.BRISS. Ornith. III. o.

Motacilla citrea , Linn. Gen. 114. o.”

On the same page are two examples, 701, 2, and 706, 1.

There is, therefore, in my mind no doubt but what Dr. Coues
was perfectly justified in proposing the change from Molothrus
pecoris to Molothorus ater for the American Cowbird.

* Numerous similar examples might be quoted, as pi. 700. 1 and 2, compared with
701, 2, 702, 703, 1 and 2; 706. 1 compared with the same pi. fig. 2, all these on p. 44. In
many of these cases the absence of 'mihi is very notable, as both the generic and the
specific names were new and given by Boddaert.

iSSs-3

Stejneger, Analecta Or7iithologica.

51

XXIII. Remarks on the Generic Name Sayornis and
on Sayornis phcebe.

Sayornis , as composed of the name Say and ornis , may be
either masculine or feminine, for we find both o opvis and rj opvis.
It might perhaps be urged that the addition of Thomas Say’s
name makes the gender masculine, but holding that the author
who first indicated the gender is entitled to settle the question, I
contend that Sayornis is feminine. Bonaparte, when establish¬
ing the name (Coll. Delattre, 1S54, p. S 7 ; I can find no other or
earlier reference) gave no clue, as he combined it with the spe¬
cific name nigricans , but Sclater who next adopted the term, in
1S55, indicated his preference bv writing Sayornis ardosiaca
(P.Z. S., 1855, p. 149), and has consistently followed this course
in all his later writings.

As to the specific names of the North American species, I have
to remark that Gmelin’s name Muscicapa fusca cannot stand for
the Pewee, as not less than two other authors, independent of
each other, had disposed of that name for two other birds previ¬
ous to 17S8. Nor can the same author’s Muscicapa atra be em¬
ployed, for a similar reason, as is apparent from the subjoined
synonymy. The next name in order seems to be Latham’s
M. phoebe , which will give us the name Sayornis phoebe , a very
fortunate change, when change must be made !

The synonomy will stand thus :

R. 315. Sayornis phoebe ( Lath .). Piicebe ; Pewee.

Muscicapa carolinensis fusca, Brisson, Orn. II, p. 367 (1760).

Dusky Flycatcher, Pennant, Arct. Zool. II, p. 389 (1785).

1788. — Muscicapa fusca Gmelin, S. N. I, p. 931 (based on Briss. l.c. ;

nec Muller. 1776, quae PI. Enl. 568 fig. 2; nec Boddaert,
1 7S3, quae PI. Enl. 574 fig. 1).

1788. — Muscicapa atra Gmelin, S. N. I, p. 946 (based on Pennant,
1. c. ; nec Muller, 1776, quae PI. Enl. 572 fig. 3).

1790. — Muscicapa phoebe Latham, Ind. Orn. II, p. 489 (based on Pen¬
nant, 1. c.).

1810. — Muscicapa nunciola Wilson, Am. Orn. II (p. 78, pi. xiii, fig. 4.).

XXIV. On the proper Generic Name of the Pile-
ated Woodpecker and Allies.

The generic name Hylotomus for the Pileated Woodpecker
cannot stand, because preoccupied by Hylotoma Latreille

5 2

[ January

Stejneger, Analecta Ornithologica.

(given to an hymenopterous insect in 1S04). Cabanis was
aware of the feet and changed the name in 1862 to Ceophloeus , in
which genus he placed lineatus , scapularis , erythrops , and
pileatus , with the first mentioned as ‘ty pus generis.’ The fol¬
lowing year, however, he separated pileatus from the others,
bestowing upon it the name Phloeotomus. As Mr. Ridgway
has convinced me, pileatus and lineatus are strictly congeneric,
and, consequently, the generic appellation of the latter applies
as well to the former.

Genus Ceophloeus* Cab.

<^1831. — Dryotomus Swainson, Faun. Bor. Am. II, pp. 303 & 104 (type
P. martens).

<^1849. — Dryopicos Malherbe, Mdm. Acad. Metz, 1849, P- 32° (same
type).

<1850. — Dryopicus Malherbe, Classif. Picin. Sept. 1850 (same type).

X 1854. — Driopicus Bonaparte, Consp. Zyg. Estr. At. Ital., No. 8, May
1:854, P- § (type pileatus) .

=1858. — Hylatomus Baird, B. N. Am. p. 107 (type pileatus).

= 1862. — Hylotomus Cabanis, Journ. f. Orn, 1S62, p. 176 (emend.).

=1862. — Ceophloeus Cabanis, Journ. f. Orn. 1862, p. 176 (type lineatus).

^>1863. — Phloeotomus Cabanis, Mus. Hein. IV. p. 102 (type pileatus).

At first sight it might seem as if Malherbe’s Dryopicos would
be available, hut a closer investigation shows that this author
only emended Boie’s Dryobates and Swainson’s Dryotomus to
suit his new nomenclature, in which all the four-toed Wood¬
peckers had names ending in ‘•picas' or ipicos’( !). The two
generic names just referred to have expressly martins for type,
and Dryopicos may therefore he considered as having the same
type.

The North American species will stand as

R. 371. Ceophloeus pileatus (Linn.) Cab. Pileated
Woodpecker,

the authorities being

1758. — Picus pileatus Linn., S. N. 10 ed. I. p. 113.

1862. — C[eophloeus~\ pileatus Cabanis, Journ. f. Orn. 1862, p. 176.

Smithsonian Institution,

Washington, D.C., Dec. 1, 1884.

* Deriv. ksw = I split, 4>\oios = bark.

!88$.]

Merriam, Preliminary Report on Bird Migration.

53

PRELIMINARY REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE
ON BIRD MIGRATION.

BY C. HART MERRIAM, M. D.

Owing to the large quantity of material in possession of the
Committee on Bird Migration, the several superintendents, with
two exceptions, have been unable to complete tbe reports for
their respective Districts. Hence it is impossible, at this time,
to do more than call attention to the extent of the work of the
Committee, and to present a few brief examples of the results thus
far attained. Any attempt, on the part of the Chairman, to
generalize upon the as yet meagre amount of classified data at
his command, would obviously be premature.

It is unnecessary to dwell upon the labor involved in the distri¬
bution of six thousand circulars, by which means the Committee
has secured the co-operation, in addition to the keepers of lights,
of nearly seven hundred observers, of which number twenty-five
are women — and very excellent observers they make. These
observers are distributed as follows : Mississippi Valley District,
Prof. W. W. Cooke, Superintendent, 150; New England Dis¬
trict. John H. Sage, Superintendent, 144; Atlantic District, Dr.
A. K. Fisher, Superintendent, 12S; Middle-Eastern District,
Dr. J. M. Wheaton, Superintendent, 92 ; Quebec and Maritime
Provinces, Montague Chamberlain, Superintendent, 56 ; District
of Ontario, Thomas Mcllwraith, Superintendent, 38 ; Pacific Dis¬
trict, L. Belding, Superintendent, 40; Rocky Mountain District,
Dr. Edgar A. Mearns, Superintendent, 15 ; Manitoba, Prof. W.
W. Cooke, Superintendent, 10 ; British Columbia, John Fannin,
Superintendent, 5 ; North-West Territories, Ernest E. T. Seton,
Superintendent, ^ ; Newfoundland, James P. Howley, Superin¬
tendent (returns not yet received).

Throygh the courtesy of the Hon. Wm. Smith. Deputy Minis¬
ter of Marine and Fisheries of Canada, and of Commander Henry
F. Picking, IT. S. N., Secretary of the Lighthouse Board of the
United States, the Committee has secured the co-operation of
these departments, which, it is hardly necessary to add, is indis-
pensible to the success of the undertaking. The Department of
Ma rine and the Lighthouse Board have distributed over one

54

Merriam, Preliminary Report on Bird Migration. [January

thousand sets of blank schedules and circulars to the lighthouses,
lightships, and beacons of the United States and British North
America. Several hundred of these schedules have already
been returned to the Committee, and almost every mail brings
one or more. A large number of the heads and wings of birds
which dash themselves against the lights have been sent to the
Chairman for indentification. Among them is one of the rarest
of North American birds — Swainson’s Warbler ( Heloncea
swainsoni) — which was kindly forwarded by the keeper of the
lighthouse at Sombrero Key. The schedules entitled “Birds
striking the Light” contain data of an exceptionally valuable
character, and throw much light on several problems not within
reach of the ordinary observer.

The Committee has now established observation stations in
every State in the Union, and in every Territory, excepting
Nevada ; and it is gratifying to know that returns have already
been received from nearly one thousand observers. Compara¬
tively few of these observers are ornithologists, or even bird col¬
lectors, the great bulk being intelligent farmers, tradesmen, and
light-keepers. Those who know only the commonest birds, such
as the Robin, Bluebird, or Chimney Swift, can contribute data of
great value, and their services are eagerly sought.

The area over which the observation stations are scattered is
co-extensive with the boundaries of the inhabited portions of the
North American Continent. In the East, the southernmost
station from which returns have been received is Sombrero Key,
oft' Southern Florida (latitude 240 37') ; and the northernmost,
Belle Isle, off Labrador (latitude c;i° 53'). In the West, reports
have come to hand from Arizona and Southern California, and
from Point Barrow, the most northerly point of Arctic Alaska
(latitude ^1° 18'). The easternmost station from which data
have been received is St. John’s, Newfoundland (west longi¬
tude 520 45') , projecting well into the Atlantic; while on the
Pacific the Committee has observers at various points in Cali¬
fornia, Oregon, Washington, and British Columbia.

Hence it appears that the migration stations of the American
Ornithologists’ Union are sprinkled over 46° 41' of latitude
(approximately three thousand two hundred miles in a north and
south direction) , and 720 15' of longitude (approximately three
thousand five hundred miles in an east and west direction). The

Merriam, Preliminary Report on Bird Migration.

55

>8»S.]

distance in a straight line between the most remote points (Som¬
brero Key and Point Barrow) is about four thousand three
hundred miles.

The amount of material now on hand is so great that the Com¬
mittee cannot hope to fully elaborate it without considerable
pecuniary assistance. Reports on the Robin ( Mertila migra-
toria), Catbird ( Minins carolinensis) , Martin (Progne sub is) ,
Baltimore Oriole {Icterus galbula) , and Nighthawk ( Chordeiles
popetue ), have already been prepared by the superintendents of
the districts east of the Rocky Mountains, and were presented at
the last Congress of the Union.

At the end of this article will be found a summary of the
records of the Martin, together with Professor Cooke’s report on
the northward movement of the Baltimore Oriole in the Miss¬
issippi Valley.

Mr. John Murdoch, Superintendent of Alaska, has completed
a very interesting report upon the times of arrival and departure
of the species that visit Alaska, supplementing his personal
observations (which will be found appended to the present paper)
by the published records of previous explorers.

The most valuable report yet received is that of Mr. L. Belding,
Superintendent of the Pacific District. It contains notes on no
less than two hundred and eighty species, and is such an impor¬
tant contribution to the ornithology of our western coast that the
Committee hopes to publish it in full at an early date.

Professor Cooke’s report for the Mississippi Valley will soon be
ready for printing, and contains a vast amount of useful informa¬
tion. In addition to the report proper, consisting of original
notes on three hundred and eighty-three species (which fills
about four hundred pages of foolscap), there is a supplemental
annotated list of one hundred and twenty-six species which have
been found in the Mississippi Valley, but which have not as yet
fallen under the notice of the Committee’s observers. The total
of birds known to visit the Mississippi Valley is thus increased
to the surprising number of five hundred and nine species. But
this by no means concludes the report, for Professor Cooke also
traces the ‘bird-waves,’ treats of the rate of speed at which
certain species migrate, and gives a tabulated statement of the
contemporaneous phenomena observed. Furthermore, the report
will be accompanied by weather maps, prepared by the able

Merriam, Preliminary Report on Bird Migration. [January

hand of Mr. Otto Widmann, with explanatory text bv Professor
Cooke.

The Mississippi Valley — a mighty river basin penetrating the
heart of a great continent from a semi-tropical climate on the
South well into the cold-temperate regions of the North, and
unobstructed by mountain barriers or large bodies of water to
deflect the current of bird life from the smooth channel through
which it flows, yet sufficiently diversified to present a variety of
minor physiographical conditions — affords peculiar facilities for
the study of many phases of bird migration, and is well worthy
of the labor bestowed upon it in this report.

The Chairman takes pleasure in announcing two additions to
the personnel of the Committee. Mr. William Dutcher has
been appointed Superintendent of Long Island, New York, in
which district he has for several years been successfully at work.
The readers of ‘The Auk’ are already familiar with some of the
results of his investigations, but the greater portion is still
unpublished.

Mr. Lyman S. Foster has been appointed Superintendent of
th e Lighthouse District of Spanish America, and has already
brought together a large amount of valuable material. Mr.
Foster began the collection of data from this source indepen¬
dently of the Committee. On the 25th of April. 1SS4, he mailed
a circular-letter, inclosing return blanks, to the keepers of two
hundred and fifty-five lighthouses in the West Indies, Central,
and South America. The responses were so numerous and sat^
isfactory that, on the 25th of July, he mailed a second letter,
containing more detailed instructions, and accompanied by a
little book, in the Spanish language, as a guide to the keepers
in their ornithological investigations. A very voluminous poly¬
glot correspondence followed, and is still progressing. It was
ascertained that large numbers of birds are annually killed by
striking the lighthouses on both coasts of South America and in
the West Indies — particularly along the northern coast of Cuba.
Floientina Alvares, keeper of the lighthouse at Paredon Grande,
Cuba, picked up more than a hundred birds one morning.
Pedro Maury reports that two hundred and seventy-eight birds
killed themselves against the lighthouse near Cardenas during
the night of October 4-5, 1SS4. Francisco Megide writes from
Bahia de Cadiz, “one night an infinity of birds struck, and the

<SSS.]

Merriam, Pretiminary Report on Bird Migration.

57

tower men utilized them for food.” Francisco Bautista states
that at San Antonia from five to six hundred birds have been
picked up in a single morning.

From seven lighthouses upon the northern coast of Cuba Mr.
Foster has received much confirmatory evidence of the fact,
clearly pointed out by Professor Baird nearly twenty years ago, that
in autumn an immense bird-wave reaches the Cuban shores from
Florida — a movement which renders insignificant the migration
from Florida westward along the northern coast of the Gulf of
Mexico.*

Migration of the Martin ( Progne subis) in the
Spring of 1884.

The common Purple Martin is an excellent species by which
to trace migration, for it is well-known and widely distributed,
and its habit of occupying boxes erected for its use in towns and
villages renders its movements far easier of observation than in
the case of forest-dwelling birds. In winter the Martin visits
South America, but the last of the fall migrants rarely leave our
southern border before December. Returning, the advance
guard usually enters the Gulf States toward the latter part of
February. During March the great army arrives and spreads
over the whole of the Southern States, the van appearing in
many parts of Virginia, Kentucky, Southern Illinois, Missouri,
and Kansas, some enterprising individuals reaching even as far
north as latitude 40°. If not retarded bv cold, the first week of
April finds them pushing swiftly northward, and by the end of
the month they have distributed themselves over nearly the whole
of the United States east of the Rocky Mountains, and are
already common in some parts of Canada. The exact time of
their appearance at any given locality in the Northern States
varies as much as two weeks from year to year. During the
spring of 1884 they were recorded from Water Valley, Miss.,
March 1 ; Gainesville, Texas, March 5 ; Caddo, Indian Terri¬
tory, and Newport, Arkansas, March 9 ; St. Louis, Mo., March
24 ; Manhattan, Kansas, March 25 ; Southern Iowa, March 30.
During April they move through Northern Illinois and parts of
Wisconsin and Minnesota, arriving at latitude 450 about the end

* The full results of Mr. Foster's investigations, including notes on one hundred and
fifty species, were presented before the Linnasan Society of New York, September 21,
1884.

S»

Merriam, Preliminary Report on Bird Migration. [January

of the month. May 19 they reached Portage la Prairie in Man¬
itoba. East of the Mississippi Valley they were seen in Jessa¬
mine County, Kentucky, March iS; at Buffalo, West Virginia,
March 22 ; Camden, Indiana, March 28; New Lexington, Pa.,
April 16; Columbus, Ohio, April 15; Niagara Falls, April 18;
Auburn, New York, April 20; Belleville, Ontario, April 22;
Ottawa, Canada, April 27. In New England the returns show
them at Saybrook, Conn., April 19; Greenfield, Mass., April
2 7 ; Moosehead Lake, Maine, April 23. They were seen at St.
John’s, New Brunswick, May 2; Chatham, N. B. (Mirimichi
Bay, facing the Gulf of St. Lawrence), May 10; and at Cape
Breton Island, north of Nova Scotia, June 1.

Turning now to the other side of the Continent, their
progress is found to have been much affected by the unfavorable
weather. In California Mr. L. Belding has records from San
Diego, April 28; Stockton, March 1; Marysville, March 17;
Poway, May 1 ; San Jose, May 3 ; Olema, May 8 ; and Chico,
May 22.

Migration of the Baltimore Oriole ( Icterus gallnda)
in the Mississippi Valley During the Spring of 1884.

By W. W. Cooke.

The first record we have of this species is April 7, when it
appeared at Rodney, Mississippi, latitude 3i°52f; and the last,
May 25, at Oak Point, Manitoba, latitude 50° 30’. This would
make an average speed of twenty-seven miles a day. As we
found last year that the Oriole was a bird of quite uniform speed,
let us trace the record this year and see how it agrees. St.
Louis, Mo., latitude 38° 40', is reached April 26, which would
be at the rate of twenty-five miles a day, but if we go directly
north we find a record on the 25th at Hillsborough, Illinois,
latitude 390 12', which would make a speed of just twenty-seven
miles a day. About April 29 and 30 there seems to have been
much movement of this species; not so much the advance of the
van as the filling up of the country already traversed, bringing
the bulk to the country from latitude 390 30' southward and the
van to latitude 4 1 0 , and in the west to Manhattan, Kansas, lati¬
tude 390 12'. At twenty-seven miles a day they should have
advanced by May 6 to about latitude 430 30'. Now we have to
hunt for records of this advance. May 5 and 6 are days of

,88;.]

Merriam, Preliminary Report on Bird Migration.

59

especial movement in Iowa, Minnesota, Illinois, and Wisconsin.
During these days there are records of ‘first’ all over Northern
Illinois and Southern Wisconsin to latitude 430 16', with a stray
one at latitude 440 22' in Wisconsin ; and the State of Minnesota
shows records up to latitude 430 43', with an extra advance along
the Mississippi River to latitude 440 32'. May 12 should have
found them at latitude 46°, and we are furnished the record of
its appearance at latitude 450 25' and 46° 33' in Minnesota, so
that although there are slight variations in speed, as would be
expected, the species shows quite a remarkable uniformity in its
rate of migration throughout this long distance. There is, how¬
ever, no trace of the increase of speed from the south northward
which was noticed last year; the highest rate being in the middle
districts the first week in May. In the prairie region the records
are somewhat late, the birds reaching latitude 390 12' in Kansas
April 30, latitude 40° 53' in Nebraska May 9, and latitude 440 21 >
in Dakota May 22. Farther west, and almost at the extreme
limit of its western dispersion, it was observed at Gainesville,
Texas, and Ellis, Kansas.

The full record at St. Louis is : April 26, first, three males at
stand, calling. April 28, bulk of males arrive (the bulk of the
species averages in all the notes about four days behind the first).
May 3, first female (the average for females is about seven days
behind the first, and as the arrivals of bulk may be separated
into two series, one of about two or three days in the rear, and
the other of seven or eight, it is evident that the first series indi¬
cates the arrival of the bulk of the males, while the second indi¬
cates the increase of the species as a whole, caused by the arrival
of the females). May 5, bulk of females arrives, and many tran¬
sients, making this day the height of the season (as has already
been stated, this day and the next are the days of movement for
this species, and that, too, apparently over an immense country,
stretching from latitude 340 to latitude 440) . May 10, first male
of last year; May 11, species very much excited, and tran¬
sient birds of last year present. May 31, set found of six incu¬
bated eggs.

[East of the Mississippi Valley this species was reported from
Jessamine County, Kentucky, April 18; Camden, Ind., April 24;
College Hill, O., April 27; Columbus, O., April 2S ; Peters¬
burg, Mich., April 30; Cleveland, O., and Battle Creek, Mich.,

6o

Merriam, Preliminary Report on Bird Migration. [January

May i ; New Lexington. Pa., April 2S ; Brooklyn, Pa., May 6;
Long Island City, and Sing Sing, N. Y., May 2 ; Lockport, N.
Y., May 4; Painted Post, N. Y., May 5; Locust Grove, and
Auburn, N. Y., May 6 ; Watertown, N. Y., May 1 1 ; Lake George,
and Hammondville, N. Y., May 13; London, Ont., May 8;
Hamilton, Ont., May 9 ; Ottawa and Listowel, Ont., May 13 ;
Portland, Conn., May 2 ; East Hartford, Conn., May 4; Holy¬
oke, Mass., May 6; Greenfield, Mass., and Hanover, N. H.,
May 15; Thetford, Vt., May 10; Waterboro, Fryeburg, and
Brewer, Me., May 16; Moosehead Lake, Me., and Montreal,
Canada, May 24. The Baltimore Oriole is rather a late comer,
usually waiting for settled weather before venturing northward.
Hence its progress, being subject to comparatively few interrup¬
tions, is much more regular than in those species which migrate
earlier. — C. IL M.]

Bird Migration at Sombrero Key, Florida. By C.

Hart Merriam, M. D.

The southernmost station in the United States from which the
Committee has received returns is Sombrero Key, one of the
Florida Reefs, in latitude 240 37'. The lighthouse stands on iron
piles, over a sunken reef, and bears a fixed white light of the first
order, which is one hundred and forty-four feet above sea-level,
and is visible eighteen miles in clear weather. The keeper, Mr.
M. E. Spencer, has taken great pains to supply the Committee
with reliable data, and has sent several packages of heads and
wings for identification. His report, owing both to the absolute
trustworthiness of the data it contains (examples of every species
mentioned having been seen by the Chairman), and to the
geographical position of the station, may fairly be regarded as
the most valuable of the lighthouse returns thus far received.
It is given in full below.

Mr. Spencer states that more birds are killed by striking the
iron framework and cylinder of the tower than bv striking the
lantern, and that the numbers killed must be far greater than
found, because they seldom strike except on dark, stormy nights,
when the wind naturally carries the greater number into the
surrounding water, there being no land on the reef. He also
says that many birds are seen fluttering for a few minutes in the
rays of the light and then fly away, without striking.

iSS.vl

Merriam, Preliminary Report on Bird Migration.

6l

■s

^ £
^ .

g.*
-5 *3

1 N

^ CQ'

2 «j

5: =0
ci oo

,6

a «
o J
d 60
2:

-C c
"5 12

0) c/j

a

*• o

<SoOf

CK-

Of

<£i

OfOfOf«X)

Of ^X) <^o

_4J “ “ ‘ ” O •£ ; “ -

u

oez

u

ocS u

oc*

<u - «- _

- v -C oj S' .

(i, T3 ® - T3 73 M

O P ' O .

w . S £ ^5^

73 WW- W73W

(«:::: W: : :

W“

73Z

OC

3

7) :

jj -

k<

j= w _

es . -

uz

rs r\ w _, M I- -t-vo ro n ’(O t6 IT) ro H, « w W IV, „ yQ _ HH 00 O

S - 3 S -

<'*'*'*“'* <”
(<)fHHNfOON«OOOr<fl

S- - - s .

« w rOMOvO'O O GO O O
CO CO

r-l N rn\0 JJONCvdd O «" w C\ C^COCO O O o' O' ci -if t£

< - ^ <j

Q.-
OJ ■*

C/3

! cJ ,£

’’ .^ 1/5

! £ a

> 2 'O

! 8

I C/) •_

; 2-2:

i 3 5

c/3 Q

cs ~

o ’S *0 -

Ctf rt
biD u be

O-i’rj Dh2

o c o

5 ^

j-. 1 — ,

~~. - Q . in

a>

73 Q 73 3

o £
u "
73 O

f I

|§
^ c
73 D 1

_y J«

3 "G

— ci ;

J* o
oc c

C5 C

~ c/>

cl c2 ci M r>

C ti G ? C5 .5

cS .2 cs .h — bl

.a

r* CC «i — cj >

CL) —

£ c

rt ~

o .2

^ ^ -o ■

» g’o 3

« 21 ^£cJ-5 « «

CU 0(^07300,

62

Merriam, Preliminary Report oil Bird Migration. [January

0 ^ xt jy o

c c

o+<Sd «'o «*o

v> £

< rj

Of

Of

V ^

J 3

- So

«'0f-0

t-O

c& -* - - - -

- « - (fl

a rt

Pi Pi

y -

ti
w „

z “

6

Wb - - -

w

C/5 b b

w

~ = =

(A S V.

CD - -

- £ W -
Cd c/5

PI H M

CO N

^-00 o

O O Nfl"

O r)

coco c

~ 2

"I"

o

r» CO tc

— c s

JH

a'c

c be
£

» fl N N

hh O ■+ f/x ri

S=s5 = : = :::-s:2r32--- = = = 2:2--^ S -

& ' . ” ' ~ ~ ^ ^

OOOOOOON«fiMNfif(nf|+ + + + ^0000000+t +

«: y

5 5

es.2
" O

« > c

U c £ ts u S =

cS — C

cs O

? a

C cs u ti

C ±;

8 1
o

Oh y
^8

y K-r

^ O (U
CS O CS P

a ?* 2 Jl E

s- » •_ CS -o j=

DI:

o c b c £

y y .2 y cj

! O Q c/3 D Dx

u >,g
sOtf
&

cS >-> c«

&C=HJ

« o ajo >,a -

- — r* HH X X 'C

0-u S COO 3

o o: .2 o c b

o o - y y .b

y)GSSOC73

.2 > —

CS — o

C ’y Cl » '
S CS • rs — C

y cs

Q cu

he cs
cs g, •

f.2

D *5
CO ^

c ’or r*
sS ci £
ci ~ co

- <D

ci *r c hr:
u r c c
ci .£

^ O ci

~ CUC U :

g 8

c ± t; ^ jy
c * g 3 S

« « " « 5
•- Q < Pi c/2

ISSS.]

Merriam, Preliminary Report on Bird Migration.

63

Since the above went to press I have received from Mr. Spencer
another schedule. It contains fifty additional records, and supple¬
ments the above list by three species — i.e., Coturniculus passer-
inus, Melaner pes erythrocephctlus , and Ionornis martinica.

Bird Migration at Point Barrow, Arctic Alaska.
By John Murdoch.

From Observations made at the United States Signal Station Ooglaamie,
in North Latitude ji° 18' , from Sept. 1881, till Aug. 2q, /88j.

FIRST SEEN. LAST SEEN.

Species.

/ 882.

1883.

1882.

1883.

1. Saxicola cenanthe

May 19

May 22

Rare

2. Cotile riparia

July 29

Aug. 10

3. ./Egiothus canescens exilipes

fune 13

J uly 3

“

4. Plectrophanes nivalis

Apr. 9

Apr. 19

Sept. 20

Plenty

5. Centrophanes lapponicus

May 20

May 23

Sept. 4

'

“

6. Zonotrichia gambeli intermedia

Sept. 4

Very rare

7. Junco hyemalis

May 24

«4 <(

S. Nyctea scandiaca

Resid’t

Rare

9. Hierofalco gvrjalco sacer

10. Lagopus albus

“

11. Lagopus rupestris

“

12. Strepsilas interpres

|une 12

June 12

Aug. 2q

Plenty

13. Squatarola helvetica

June 21

Rare

14. Charadrius dominicus

May 21

May 24

Aug. 2S

Plenty

15. Macrorhamphus griseus scolopaceus

June 19

June 28

Aug. 17

16. Tringa canutus

fune 11

May 30

July s

Rare

17. Actodromas maculata

June 15

May 30

Sept. 6

Plenty

iS. Actodromas fuscicollis

June 6

July 6

Very rare

19. Actodromas bairdi

May 30

May 29

July 6

Aug. 12

Plenty

20. Pelidna alpina americana

May 31

May 29

Sept. 7

4 *

21. Pelidna subarquata

tune 8

Very rare

22. Ereunetes pusillus

July 39

July 25

Aug. 18

Aug. 15

Plenty

23. Limosa iapponica novse-zealandiie

Aug. 12

Aug. 1 1

Aug. 18

Rare

24. 1 ryngites rufescens

June 8

June 6

July 2

July 27

Plenty

25. Numenius borealis

May 20

July 6

Rare

26. Phalaropus fulicarius

June 4

May 30

Oct. 10

Plenty

27. Lobipes hyperboreus

June 11

Rare

28. Grus canadensis

june 2

June 20

29. Chen hyperboreus albatus

May 16

May 5

June 23

Aug. 15

Plenty

30. Anser albifrons gambeli

May 16

May 25

Aug. 18

Julv iS

«

31. Bernicla nigricans

June 13

June 7

Sept. 21

“

32. Dafila acuta

June 18

July 26

Sept. 7

Aug. 12

Rare

33. Harelda glacialis

May iS

May 24

Oct. 9

Plenty

34. Polysticta stelleri

June s

june 1 1

Aug. 3

Aug. 16

“

35. Lampronetta fischeri

May 29

May 26

June 18

(Aug/ 24)

Not plenty

36. Somateria v-nigra

May 16

May 19

Aug. 18

Plenty

37. Somateria spectabilis

Apr. 27

May 5

Dec. 2

“

3S. Pagophila eburnea

May 22

Oct. 10

Rare

39. Larus glaucus

May 1 1

Mar. 29

Nov. 1

Plenty

40. Rhodostethia rosea

Sept. 10

Oct. 9

<<

41. Xema sabinei

June 2

June 6

Aug. 3

(Oct. 22, ’81)

“

42. Sterna macrura

tune 10

June 10

Aug. 25

43. Stercorarius pomatorhinus

June 24

June 6

Aug. 15

Not rare

44. Stercorarius crepidatus

July s

May 30

July 7

Aug. 12

“ «

45. Stercorarius parasiticus

May 31

May 29

Aug. 27

Aug. s

Plenty

46. Colymbus adamsi

May 15

May 25

July 3°

Aug. 2S

“

47. Colymbus pacificus

June 4

June 13

Sept. 28

(and later)

“

48. Colymbus septentrionalis

June 5

Aug. 15

Aug. 16

“

49. Uria grylle

Aug. 14

Feb. 3

Not plenty

30. Lomvia arra

May 22

July 7

Dec. 9

Rare

The Station was abandoned on August 29, 1SS3, so that dates
of departure for species which remained later than this date
are unknown.

(S_j_ Merriam, Preliminary Report on Bird Migration. [January

Bird Migration at the Straits of Mackinac. By C.

Hart Merriam, M. D.

Data resulting- from a single season’s observations seem to in-
dicate that the Straits of Mackinac lie in the line of a somewhat
remarkable avenue of migration. It is probable that the great
bulk of those birds which, on their way to the upper peninsula
and Canada, pass between the west end of Lake Erie and the
southernmost point of Lake Michigan, cross the Straits of Mack¬
inac. Tire southern peninsula of Michigan, with a narrow strip
from the northern borders of Ohio and Indiana, may be regarded
as a great wedge with a base two hundred miles in length. Birds
entering this wedge are apt to follow it northward, hemmed in
on the east by Lake Huron, and on the west by Lake Michigan,
till they arrive at its apex, at Mackinac. Hence .it appears, in the
spring migration, that the Canada-bound birds which, between
the south end of Lake Michigan and the west end of Lake Erie
are spread over a tract two hundred miles broad, are gradually
condensed, so to speak, during their northward passage, till, in
crossing the Straits of Mackinac, they occupy a belt but a few
miles in width.

It must not be understood that all the birds which cross the base
line between lakes Michigan and Erie, and enter the Michigan
wredge, pass out at the Straits. From this total must be subtract¬
ed all those that breed in the southern peninsula — over an area of
forty-one thousand, six hundred square miles — and those (a far
smaller number) that migrate by other channels. The remainder,
constituting the great bulk of the northern peninsula and Canada-
bound individuals, cross at or near Mackinac. It is evident,
therefore, that stations located in this vicinity possess unusual
facilities for the study of successive bird-waves ; and that the
keepers of lights in these waters can, with little trouble, furnish
the Committee with information of the utmost value.

Spectacle Reef, in Lake Huron, lies just east of the entrance
of the Straits, and about midway between shores. The light¬
house rises directly from the water and is surrounded by a wood¬
en pier ninety-five feet square. The light is of the second order
and shows alternately a red and white flash every 30 seconds.
It is eightv-six feet above sea-level and is visible, in clear weather,

[«sss.

Brewster on Szvainson’s Warbler.

65

at a distance of sixteen and one-half miles. The keeper of this
light, Mr. William Marshall, has been there seven years. He
states that during the migrations, in misty and rainy nights, large
numbers of birds strike. On a single morning he has picked up
one hundred and fifty on the pier surrounding the tower, and
thinks that ten times as many as lodge on this narrow plat¬
form fall into the water. A package of specimens which he was
kind enough to send the Committee for identification, early in
June last, contained the following species: Regulus calendula
( $ ) , Dendroeca castanea (?), Dendroeca maculosa ( £ and
9), Dendroeca ceerulescens ( p and 29)5 Geothlypis trichas
(2 P and 9)5 Geothlypis Philadelphia (9), Helminthophila
peregrina (P ) , Myiodioctes canadensis (P), Siurus aurica-
pillus , Vireo pkiladelphicus (3), Vireo solitarius , Vireo
olivaceus , Zonotrichia albicollis (2), Zonotrichia leucophrys
(P), Passerculus savanna , Melospiza lincolni , Con t opus
virens , Empidonax Jlaviventris (2).

Mr. James Davenport, keeper of the light at McGulpin’s Point,
near the western entrance of the Straits of Mackinac, has also
furnished the Committee with valuable information.

SWAINSON’S WARBLER.

BY WILLIAM BREWSTER.

Swainson’s Warbler was discovered in 1S32 near Charles¬
ton, South Carolina, by the Rev. John Bachman. His experi¬
ence, as quoted by Audubon — who named the species and made
it the type of a genus Helinaia — is as follows:* “I was first
attracted by the novelty of its notes, foifror five in number, rejieat-
ed at intervals of five or six minutes apart. These notes were
loud, clear, and more like a whistle than a song. They resembled
the sounds of some extraordinary ventriloquist in such a degree,
that I supposed the bird much farther from me than it really
was ; for after some trouble caused by these fictitious notes, I
perceived it near to me, and soon shot it.

Birds of America, Vol. II, p. 84.

66

Brewster on Swainson's Warbler.

[January

“The form of its bill I observed at once to differ from all other
known birds of our country, and was pleased at its discovery. On
dissection it proved to be a male, and in the course of the same
spring, I obtained two other males, of which the markings were
precisely similar. In the middle of August of that year, I saw
an old female accompanied with four young. One of the latter I
obtained : it did not differ materially from the old ones. Another
specimen was sent to me alive, having been caught in a trap. I
have invariably found them in swampy, muddy places, usually
covered with more or less water. The birds which I opened had
their gizzards filled with the fragments of coleopterous insects, as
well as some small green worms that are found on water plants,
such as the pond lily ( Nymphcea odorata ) and the Nelumbhim
( Cyamus Jiavicomus') . The manner[s] of this species resem¬
ble those of the Prothonotary Warbler, as it skips among the low
bushes growing about ponds and other watery places, seldom
ascending high trees. It retires southward at the close of
summer.”

From the above account it will appear that Dr. Bachman took
at least five specimens. Of these Audubon’s type, afterwards
given by him to Professor Baird, is now in the National Museum,
while a second is still preserved, with some other of Bachman’s
skins, in the Museum of the College of Charleston. The re¬
maining three I have been unable to trace, and it is probable that,
in accordance with the usage of a time when a pair of specimens
was considered to sufficiently illustrate a species, they were merely
examined and thrown away.

For upwards of forty years succeeding its discovery our bird
was so nearly lost sight of that only three examples seem to have
been taken, — the first by Mr. W. L. Jones, in Liberty Co.,
Georgia,* some time prior to 1S5S ; the second by Mr. L. L.
Thaxter, at Little Silver Spring, Florida, April 15, 1869,! and the
third in Cuba. The last was recorded by Glmdlach,J who,
writing in 1S72, merely says that it was shot at the begin¬
ning of April near Havana, by his friend Don Ramon Fons, and
that it represents the only Cuban occurrence of which he has any
knowledge.

* Bd., Cass, and Lawr., Bds. N. A., 1858, p. 253.
t Maynard, Birds Fla., 1873,^. 47.

X j. f. o. 1872, p. 412.

iS3S.]

Brewster on Swainson's Warbler.

67

Next in chronological order comes a specimen which I saw in
the collection of Mr. Christopher D. Wood, a Philadelphia taxi¬
dermist, in 1S73, and which, if I remember rightly, was killed
near Beaufort, South Carolina, in April or May of the preceeding
year. This bird, so far as I know, has escaped the notice of pre¬
vious recorders. At last accounts it was still in Mr. Wood’s
possession.

The year 1S7S brought an important contribution to our
knowledge of the mysterious bird from the pen of Mr. N. C.
Brown, who met with three specimens at Coosada, Elmore Coun¬
ty, Alabama, and who, after Bachman, seems to have been the first
observer to learn anything respecting its habits. Mr. Brown’s
account* of his experience is so interesting and graphic that I
transcribe it in full :

“On April 12, while forcing my way through the dark, rank
forest which lies about the source of Coosada Creek, I caught the
final notes of an unknown song uttered close at hand. Instantly
seating myself on a fallen tree. I awaited its repetition. The woods
about me were quite dry and comparatively deserted by birds,
but along the neighboring creek many Vireos, Thrushes, and
Swamp- Warblers were producing such a babel of sounds that I
feared the voice of my unknown songster might escape me. After
the lapse of a few minutes, however, a bird emerged from a thicket
within a few yards of me, where he had been industriously scratch¬
ing amongst the fallen leaves, flew into a small sapling, and gave
utterance to a loud, ringing, and very beautiful song. Seen in
the dim light of the woods, he bore a decided resemblance to the
Louisiana Water Thrush, and his song might almost have passed
for an exceptional performance by that bird ; but I at once sus¬
pected his true identity, and in a few seconds held in my hand
the lifeless body of a male Swainson’s Warbler.

“During the succeeding nine days I repeatedly and most care¬
fully searched this tract of woods and other localities apparently
equally favorable, without detecting additional specimens.
Finally, April 22, while exploring a slough near the union of the
Coosa and Tallapoosa Rivers, I met with two more males.
Piloted by their song, I readily approached them, but, unfortu¬
nately, lost one, badly wounded, in the impenetrable cane.

* Bull. N. O. C., Vol. Ill, 1878, pp. 172, 173.

68

Brewster on Srvahisou's Warbler.

[January

“I was impressed by the absorbed manner in which this bird
sings. Sitting quietly upon a limb of some small tree, he sud¬
denly throws back his head and pours forth his notes with the
utmost fervor and abandon. During his intervals of silence he
remains motionless, with plumage ruffled, as if completely lost
in musical reverie.”

Contemporaneously with the above appeared a note* by Mr.
Ridgway announcing the supposed occurrence of the species at
Mt. Carmel, Illinois, where a bird thought to be Swainson’s
Warbler was heard and seen, but unfortunately not secured.
Some three years later the same author recordedf the detection
of the species in Texas, a specimen having been shot there in the
Trinity River bottom, Navarro County (presumably in the spring
of 1SS0, though the date is not given), by Mr. J. Douglas
Ogilby.

Excluding certain New England citations long since shown to
be erroneous, the above is believed to comprise everything
essential that occurs in the records down to the year 1SS4. During
1884 there were two announcements, the first a mere mention by
Mr. Walter Iloxiej of the finding the species atFrogmore, South
Carolina; the other a short article by Dr. Cones, § embodying
notes furnished him by Mr. Arthur T. Wayne. As the latter
paper is anticipatory to the matter which I am about to present,
as well as based on data which I am in a position to elaborate
more fully, as well as perhaps more accurately, than was Dr.
Cones. I shall not refer to it again, except, possibly, to call atten¬
tion to certain statements which are either not warranted by the
evidence at hand, or directly negatived by it.

In the hope of adding to the scanty store of knowledge just re¬
viewed I visited South Carolina in May, 1883, expressly to search
for Swainson’s Warbler. Having letters of introduction to gen¬
tlemen in Charleston, I made that city my headquarters, and
from it rambled over the neighboring country, exploring the
woods and swamps with all possible care and thoroughness. Of
this trip it is perhaps enough to say that it proved a failure, as far

* Bull. N. O. C., Vol. Ill, 1878, p. 163.

t Bull. N. O. C., Vol. VI, No. 1, Jan. 1881, pp. 54, 55.

+ Orn. and 061., Vol. IX, No. 11, p. 138.

J Forest and Stream, Nov. 6, 1884, pp. 285, 286.

iSS.vl

Brewster on Swainson's Warbler.

69

as its chief object was concerned, for I was obliged to return to
Massachusetts without having found the bird of which I was in
quest. One promising result was accomplished, however, Mr.
Arthur T. Wayne, a young local collector whom I had employed
as guide and assistant, and who had become much interested in
the search, being engaged to continue it in my interests. But
during the year 1SS3 he also was unsuccessful.

Although discouraged I by no means gave up hope, but early
the next spring (1SS4) returned to Charleston prepared to
devote the greater part of the season to the pursuit. The first
three weeks of April passed profitably enough, as far as general
collecting was concerned, but without developing anything of
special importance or interest. On the evening of April 22,
however, Wayne, who had been out alone that day, called, and
handed me a bird with the simple question, “What is it?” One
glance was enough — the long sharp bill with its compressed
ridge extending well back on the forehead, the plain olive brown
back and reddish crown, and the delicate, lemon-tinted white of
the under parts were all unmistakable, for of course it was not
the first Swainson’s Warbler I had seen. It was, however, the
very first freshly-killed one ; — and who does not know the differ¬
ence !

Just a week later the second specimen was taken. I stum¬
bled on it quite by accident while exploring a tract of oak scrub
covering a dry, in fact positively sandy, ridge on James Island,
opposite Charleston. It was feeding on the ground in company
with an Ovenbird (Slums auricapillus) , and almost imme¬
diately flew up into a sapling within a few yards of me, so
near, indeed, that I had to retreat several paces before shooting.
Wayne’s bird was a male, this a female, with well-developed
ovaries, but evidently not ready to breed by at least a week or
two.

After this the tide of success rose, if not rapidly, at least
steadily, and during the time that intervened before my depar¬
ture for the North (May 10) seven more specimens were secured ;
thus I took home nine in all, or nearly as many as had been pre¬
viously collected since the discovery of the species. At the time
this success was sufficiently gratifying, but it proved only the
earnest of what was to come, for during the following summer
and autumn, Mr. Wayne sent me thirty-six more; all that he

7°

Brewster on Szva in son's Warbler.

[January

took, so lie assures me, with the exception of five others disposed
of elsewhere. The total number killed by us near Charleston in
1884 is accordingly just fifty.

From the acquisition of so large a series in a single season it
might be inferred that Swainson’s Warbler is an abundant bird
near Charleston. This, however, is certainly not the case.
Indeed, there is no present evidence to show that it is even com¬
mon there except in a few localities, and the keenest collector
may cover miles of apparently suitable ground without finding
a single specimen. Mr. Wayne has had this experience repeat¬
edly, while in no instance save one (when he fell in with a brood
of young accompanied by their parents) has he taken more than
three specimens in a day. His general success was simply the
result of the most persistent efforts extended over a period of
several months, during which almost his entire time was devoted
to the pursuit of this species alone. Most of his specimens
were taken in a somewhat limited area where, during the breed¬
ing season, the females were spared that they might serve as
decoys to bachelor males. So successful was this plan that
in one instance no less than five males were shot to one female.
Many of these were doubtless attracted long distances. After
July, there was an appreciable if slight influx of young birds in
fall plumage. Some of them may have been reared near at
hand, but the majority evidently came from swamps further
inland or to the northward. This movement continued through
August, but at the close of that month it waned. The last speci¬
men was taken September 25. Thus the stay of the species in
South Carolina would seem to extend over a period of a little
more than five months.

The specimen killed on James Island, and another shot two
days later, about three miles to the westward of Charleston, were
the only ones met with in the immediate vicinity of that ci tv .
Both were undoubtedly migrants, and it is probable that the
*sea islands’ generally, with the adjacent mainland, are visited
regularly during the spring and fall flights. They may harbor
a few breeding birds also, but of this we have no present proof.*
On the contrary, after the migrations passed we failed to find

* Since writing the above I have examined — through the kindness of Mr. C. K
Worthen — a specimen taken by Mr. Joseph H. Batty at St. Helena Island, South
Carolina, May 30, 1884. This date is fairly within the breeding season.

Brewster on Swains on’s Warbler.

71

>88$.]

the species nearer Charleston than a place about six miles to the
westward and directly inland. At this point the rice plantations
begin. There may be no actual connection between these facts,
but certain topographical as well as floral characteristics of this
rice belt incline me to believe that its limits may be found to
correspond more or less closely witli those of the summer dis¬
tribution of Swainson’s Warbler in South Carolina.

While the facts already given prove incontestably that the
present species may occur at times in dry scrubby woods, or
even in such open situations as orange groves, it certainly haunts
by preference the ranker growth of the swamps, to which,
indeed, it appears to be confined during the breeding season.
In South Carolina, as elsewhere, the term swamp is somewhat
general in application. As our Warbler is by no means equally
general in his tastes but, on the contrary, exceptionably fas¬
tidious in the choice of a summer home, it is necessary to be
more explicit. The particular kind of swamp to which he is
most partial is known in local parlance as a ‘pine-land gall.’ It
is usually a depression in the otherwise level surface, down
which winds a brook, in places flowing swiftly between well-
defined banks, in others divided into several sluggish channels or
spreading about in stagnant pools, margined by a dense growth
of cane, and covered with lily leaves or other aquatic vegetation.
Its course through the open pine-lands is sharply marked by a
belt of hardwood trees nourished to grand proportions by the
rich soil and abundant moisture. Beneath, crumbling logs
cumber the ground, while an under-growth of dogwood ( Cornyis
Jlorida ), sassafras, viburnum, etc., is interlaced and made well-
nigh impenetrable by a net-work of grapevines and greenbriar.
These belts — river bottoms they are in miniature — rarely exceed
a few. rods in width ; they may extend miles in a nearly straight
line, but ordinarily the brooks which they conceal form short
tributaries of streams of larger size, which in turn soon mingle
their waters with those of neighboring rivers. More extensive
swamps, especially those bordering the larger streams, are sub¬
ject to inundations which, bringing down deposits of alluvial soil,
bury up or sweep away the humbler plants, leaving a floor of
unsightly mud, interspersed with pools of stagnant water. Such
places answer well enough for the Prothonotary and Hooded
Warblers, which, although essentially swamp-lovers, are not to

72

Brewster on Sivainson's Warbler.

[ January

any extent terrestrial ; but you are not likely to find Swainson’s
Warbler in them, unless about the outskirts, or on islands elevated
above the reach of the floods. Briefly, four things seem indis¬
pensable to bis existence, viz., water, tangled thickets, patches of
cane, and a rank growth of semi-aquatic plants.

All four conditions are fulfilled by the ‘pine-land galls.’ These
belts, with their cool shade, running water, and luxuriant vege¬
tation, attract many thicket-haunting birds. They invariably
swarm with Cardinals, White-eyed Vireos, Carolina Wrens, and
Hooded Warblers, while there are occasional pairs of Maryland
Yellow-throats, and now and then a Wood Thrush, sounding his
flute-like notes, or a Painted Finch, warbling softly' among the
bushes. From the pines outside come the sweet refrain of the
Yellow-throated Warbler, the petulent cry of the Great-crested
Flycatcher, and, ffom somewhere in the distance, the matchless
reverie of Bachman’s Finch.

In the early morning, before the sun’s rays have evaporated the
delicate frosting of dew-drops from the fronds of the ground
palmetto, or' invaded the swamp, still cool and fragrent after the
night, one may hear fifty birds singing in such a spot. The
effect is confusing at first, but the practised ear soon identifies
the various performers, and a few minutes spent in this way will
often give the listener a fairly accurate idea of the bird life by
which he is surrounded. Amid the general din, if he be for¬
tunate, may be heard the song of Swainson’s Warbler, a per¬
formance so remarkable that it can scarcely fail to attract the
dullest ear, while it is not likely to be soon forgotten. It consists
of a series of clear, ringing whistles, the first four uttered rather
slowly and in the same key, the remaining five or six given more
rapidly, and in an evenly decending scale, like those of the
Canon Wren (Cat/icrfies mexicanus conspersus) . In general
effect it recalls the song of the Water Thrush ( Siurus ncevius ).
It is very loud, very rich, very beautiful, while it has an inde¬
scribably tender quality that thrills the senses after the sound has
ceased.

It is ventriloquial to such a degree that there is often great
difficulty in tracing it to its source. You advance confidently
enough at first, when suddenly the sound comes from behind you.
Retracing your steps, the direction is again changed. Now it is
to the right, shortly after to the left ; one moment in the tree tops

'885-]

Brewster on S-vainson' s Warbler.

73

overhead, the next among the bushes almost at your feet. Hur¬
rying hither and thither with rapidly diminishing caution you
finally lose all patience and dash through the tangle, tripping
over hidden obstructions or perhaps floundering in morasses at
imjnent risk of being bitten by some venomous moccasin. When
at length you pause near the starting point, tired of the fruitless
pursuit, and convinced that your will-o’-the-wisp has been
momentarily changing his position, you may perchance discover
him sitting quietly near the end of some low branch, where he
has probably been all the while, calmly curious perhaps with
respect to the strange two-legged creature rushing about beneath,
but more likely lost to everything except his own ecstatic music.
At times, however, he actually will flit from perch to perch as
you advance, keeping more or less concealed among the foliage.

In addition to its song this Warbler utters a soft tchip indistin¬
guishable from that of Parula arnericana , but wholly unlike the
cry of any Ground Warbler of my acquaintance. I heard this
note on only one occasion, when the bird was excited over some
disturbance in the shrubbery, perhaps the presence of a snake.

Although a rarely fervent and ecstatic songster, our little friend
is also a fitful and uncertain one. You may wait for hours near
his retreat, even in early morning, or late afternoon, without
hearing a note. But when the inspiration comes he floods the
woods with music, one song often following another so quickly
that there is scarce a pause for breath between. In this manner
I have known him sing for fully twenty minutes, although ordi¬
narily the entire performance occupies less than half that time.
Such outbursts may occur at almost any hour, even at noontide,
and I have heard them in the gloomiest weather, when the woods
were shrouded in mist and rain.

When not singing Swainson’s Warbler is a silent, retiring bird,
"spending nearly his entire time bn the ground in the darkest
recesses of his favorite swamps, rambling about over the decaying
leaves or among the rank water-plants in search of the small
beetles which constitute his principal food.* His gait is distinctly
a walk, his motions gliding and graceful. Upon alighting in the
branches, after being flushed from the ground, he assumes a stat¬
uesque attitude, like that of a startled Thrush. While singing he

* The stomachs of all the specimens that I have examined contained exclusively
small Coleoptera.

74

Brewster on Swainson's Warbler.

[January

takes an easier posture, but rarely moves on his perch. If desir¬
ous of changing his position he flies from branch to branch
instead of hopping through the twigs in the manner of most
Warblers. Under the influence of excitement or jealousy he
sometimes jets his tail, droops his wings, and raises the feathers
of the crown in a loose crest, but the tail is never jerked like that
of a Geothlypis , or wagged like that of a Siurus. On the con¬
trary, his movements are all deliberate and composed, his disposi¬
tion sedentary and phlegmatic.’ At the height of the mating
season the males do occasionally show some spirit, chasing one
another among the trees, or even attacking larger birds ; but these
lapses, like their song periods, seem to form comparatively rare
breaks in a life which, for the most part, is passed in profound
quiet and seclusion.

In these, as well as other characteristics, he is the very counter¬
part of the Connecticut Warbler, as I have observed the latter in
the swamps about Cambridge. In none of them does he bear
the least resemblance to the Worm-eating Warbler, with which
he has been so closely associated by ornithologists. The Worm-
eater is an active, restless bird, spending much of its time wind¬
ing about the trunks and branches of trees in the manner of
Mniotiltci. Moreover, it breeds by preference, if not invariably,
in dry situations, such as tracts of oak scrub, on the steep sides
of elevated ravines or mountain slopes — precisely such ground, in
short, as is resorted to by the Ovenbird ( Siurus auricapillus') .
Systematists may make light of such considerations, but H.
swainsoni has, in addition, certain structural affinities with Opor-
ornis to which I shall presently call attention.

Judging by my personal experience, Swainson’s Warbler is at
all times a singularly unsuspicious bird. If singing he may
be usually approached within a few yards, even though the crash¬
ing that inevitably marks your every movement among the thickly-
growing canes has long ago alarmed and silenced the other song¬
sters of the swamp. When flushed from the ground he flies in
silence to the nearest low branch, whence he regards yoh with a
half-timid, half-wondering expression, precisely like that of the
Connecticut Warbler under similar conditions. You may startle
him by an unexpected or threatening motion, for the tamest birds
are subject to sudden panic ; but ordinarily, it once distinctly seen
he is certainly yours — barring a miss or some other accident.

i8SS.]

Brewster on Sivainson's Warbler.

IS

The chief difficulty is to find him, for if on the ground his color¬
ing harmonizes so well with that of the general surface that the
keenest eye may overlook him, while he is not apt to start unless
almost trodden on. Like most thicket-haunting birds, however,
he is intensely curious, and by concealing yourself and producing
a shrill screeping or chirping you may often call him directly to
you. More than once has this plan been successful when I had
no idea that the bird was near. On one such occasion the victim
proved a female, which had unmistakably just laid her full set of
eggs. I had barely begun to ‘screep’ on the edge of a small
cane-brake bordering a brook, and surrounded by comparatively
open ground swept clear of undergrowth, and the usual debris ,
by a recent fire, when there was a glimmer of wings and the War¬
bler appeared, alighting on the stem of a cane. Upon shooting
and examining her I discovered that she was incubating. As it
was near noon of a very sultry day, and birds of all kinds closely
hidden, I felt sure that she had come directly from the nest. This
conviction became almost a certainty when, a few paces further
on, I flushed and secured her mate. Needless to say, the
remainder of the day was devoted to searching that thicket.
But although it covered only a few square rods of surface, the
nest could not be found. Speculations as to its position are idle,
but there seemed to be only* two available sites — the stems of the
canes and the ground.

The date of this episode was May 3, which probably repre¬
sents about the beginning of the breeding season. Mr. Wayne
met with a brood of three young June 9, and another of four June
11. Specimens of both broods are before me. They are in first
.plumage and were evidently only a few days from the nest, but
sufficiently feathered to fly well. All the young taken after this
date were in autumnal plumage, which seems to be very quickly
put on.* They frequented the same places as the spring birds
and had essentially similar habits, though, according to Mr.
Wayne, they were shyer, or at least more timid.

* In his ‘Forest and Stream’ article Dr. Coues quotes Mr. Wayne as saying: “The
first brood is abroad late in June, that is on the way [wing?] ; it usually numbers four.
The second brood is abroad early in August.” The inaccuracy of the first statement
will appear on comparing it with the dates above given; the assumption that the bird
regularly rears two broods in a season is, in my opinion, equally unwarranted by the
evidence at hand.

Brewster on Sivainson's Warbler.

[January

Critical Notes. — Swainson’s Warbler has been considered
nearly related to the Worm-eating Warbler and, by most recent
writers, even placed with it in the genus Helmitherus. It has
been occasionally separated, however, at least subgenerically,
under the Audubonian name Helinaia. With abundant material
for study and comparison, I am convinced that it merits such sep¬
aration, and furthermore that Helinaia should stand as a full
genus. It may be characterized as follows :

Genus Helinaia Audubon.

Char. — Bill long, robust at base, tapering to a sharp point, smooth or
slightly notched at tip; the culmen slightly curved, its ridge compressed,
elevated and extending well back on the forehead, resembling in this, as
in some other respects, the bill of the Meadow Lark ( Sturnella ). Wings
long, rather rounded, the first quill always shorter than the second and
third, which are about equal. Tarsus stout, slightly longer than the
middle toe. Feet large, flesh-colored. Eminently terrestrial.

Helinaia swainsoni And.

Sp. Char. — (Adult J , breeding plumage, No. 8974, Coll. W. B., Charles¬
ton, South Carolina, May 1, 1884.) Crown and nape reddish-brown;
remainder of upper parts, including the sides of neck, clear olive, the-
wings, tail, and upper tail-coverts tinged with reddish-brown ; under parts
creamy white with a lemon-yellow tinge, most pronounced on the breast
and abdomen, faintest on the throat and crissum ; sides of body brownish
olive; sides of breast olivaceous-ashy, extending completely across the
breast in a broad but rather indistinct band of pale, nebulous spots;
throat, abdomen, and crissum immaculate ; a dusky stripe starting at the
lores (which are nearly black) passes backward along the side of the
head intersecting the eye and separating a conspicuous, brownish-white
superciliary stripe from the region below the eye, which is dappled with
reddish-brown on a creamy -white ground. There is also a short, yellowish,
concealed median stripe on the forehead. Iris hazel ; legs and feet flesh-
colored (notes taken from the freshly killed specimen). Sexes indistin¬
guishable.

Dimensions. — Length, 5.65 ; extent, 9.00; wing, 2.82 ; tail, 2.03 ; tarsus, .74;
culmen from base, .70; from feathers, .61; from nostril, .42; depth of
bill at anterior corner of nostril, .18; width at same point, .13.

Juv.. first plumage.— No. 224, A. T. W., Charleston, June 9. 1884).
Wings and tail essentially as in the adult; abdomen dirty-white; rest of
plumage, including the crown, nape, back, rump, throat, breast, sides of
head, neck and body, and the wing-coverts, nearly uniform dull cinnamon-
brown, without bands, spots, or any other markings whatever, even on

«8S5.]

Brewster on Siva inson's Warbler.

77

the head. Another specimen from the same brood, but apparently older,
has the lores distinctly black, the light space on the abdomen nearly
obscured by a brownish tipping on many of the feathers, and the general
coloring lighter, approaching chocolate-brown in places.

The above-described plumage is very odd and striking. In general
coloring the bird seems to most nearly resemble the young of Oporornis
formosus.* It differs so widely from the adult H. s-wainsoni that no one
would suspect their identity were it not for the bill, which in the smallest
specimen before me shows all the essential characteristics of the genus.

Juv., fall plumage. — (£ No. 354, A. T. W. , Charleston, Aug. 25,
1884.) Entire upper parts rich olive strongly tinged with reddish-brown,
the crown scarcely deeper-colored than the back, the wings a trifle redder;
loral stripe blackish ; superciliary stripe- tinged with yellow; under parts
strongly yellowish. Otherwise like the adult.

Variations. — Among the adults and fall-plumaged young before me
there is much variation in the size and shape of the bill, as well as in
general coloration. Some examples have the upper and lower outlines of
the bill nearly if not quite straight; in others the culmen is curved,
the gonys often with an appreciable angle. Again some specimens
have the bill decidedly notched at the tip, although in the majority
it is plain. As a rule (but not invariably) young birds seem to have
shorter, slenderer, and straighter bills than do the adults.

The color variations range between two extremes. In one the crown,
wings, and tail are bright reddish-brown — almost reddish-chestnut on the
secondaries — in decided contrast with the back, which is deep brownish-
olive; the underparts strongly yellowish. In the other the wings and tail
are concolor with the back, which is of a plain grayish olive; the crown
dull reddish-brown ; the under parts creamy-white, scarcely, if at all, yel¬
lowish. That these variations are not sexual is evident, for the richest-
colored bird in the whole series is a female (No. 137, A. T. W., May 10),
and several of the dullest are males ; that they are not connected with age is
equally certain, for among the young birds still bearing traces of first
plumage both types occur. As a rule, however, the young in autumn are
more apt to be yellow beneath than are breeding birds, but in none of the
specimens which I have seen is the yellow deeper than in a male taken
May 5 (No. 9015, W. B). Adults in autumn are positively indistinguish¬
able from breeding birds. Young in full autumnal dress may be generally,
if not invariably, recognized by the darker color of the bill and the much
more uniform coloration of the upper parts, the crown in some specimens
being almost concolor with the back, wings, and tail, a condition never
seen in spring birds.

In markings the variations are trifling. The nebulous spotting on the
breast is indistinct in many birds, and in a few, barely appreciable,
the ashy being practically confined to the sides, and the remainder of the

* As described by Mr. Ridgway, Bull. N. O. C., Vol. Ill, No. 2, April, 1868, p. 60. I
have no specimens for comparison.

Measurements.

Brewster on Szvainson’s Warbler .

[ January

0)

<D

« 5

rt -

H

to y tj. jj
« § « ” 5

S 5-E H

<U <z> <U*

cJ o

K £

. <L) H

ffi «U

•— >

o so
O HU

~ <n >

3 <L> S

Jps

vO vO CO r^vO J>-00 t"* J>.vo vO ci r^vO vO vO vO r^vO vO

G —
u CV

s|£

(/)

<u

E o
j= P *5

sC cS

O £

£ G o

•5 p rt

d ci d hh d d d m i-h ri ci ci ci *-• ci ci ci w n ci

Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl ci ci Cl Cl Cl Cl

CO CN CO CO CO

ITj IT, 1C LOVO

ci co I "* CN -+-

o d
CO ci
. CO
^ ^
Ci *_ CO

s 4T

u .

u ..

if

- - - cj-

if

r.

if

0

£

o

(A

6

o

<L>

ci

o

S

u

Ci

u

-* CO -J-vO i-^ «o io C

CO CO N O O H ir, CO N
CO OOONOO o *-• ~
CO CO CO CO CO CN c\

f O 1^. co ci VO

CO co CO ^ !>.

Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl

* Numbers below iooo are those of Mr. A. T. Wayne.

iSSs-1

Brewster on Sivaittson' .? Warbler.

79

upper parts immaculate. The yellow of the median stripe on the forehead
is usually restricted to the bases of the feathers, but in some specimens it
extends to their tips, forming a conspicuous marking. In others again it
is wholly wanting.

The place which Helinaia should occupy in systematic lists
is a somewhat puzzling question. Its long wings, large, flesh-
colored feet, and sluggish terrestrial habits indicate an affinity
with Oporornis ; its acute, compressed bill and short tarsi a per¬
haps stronger one with Helmitherus. In many respects it seems to
form a connecting link between these two genera, with Helmith¬
erus extending the chain towards Helminthophila. Baird
apparently held some such view in 1 8 5 8 , for he placed Helmith¬
erus (in which he included Helinaia ) between Icteria and
Helminthophila , and Oporornis immediately before Icteria.
Subsequently he separated Helminthophila further from Opor¬
ornis by the intervention of the additional genera Perisso-
glossa , Dendrceca , and Siurus, and later authorities have
widened the gap still more. Leaving out of consideration the
Coerebid®, a troublesome family which seems to grade insensibly
into the Sylvicolidae through such genera as Helminthophila and
Perissoglossa , our North American Sylvicolidae might be very
naturally arranged as follows: 1, Mniotilta; 2, Dendrceca (in¬
cluding Perissoglossa and Peucedramus as sub-genera) ; 3,
Protonotaria ; 4, Panda ; 5, Helminthophila ; 6, Helmith-
erus ; 7, Helinaia; 8, Siurus; 9, Oporornis ; 10, Geothlypis ;
11, Icteria; 12, Myiodioctes ; 13, Setophaga ; 14, Cardellina ;
1 5, Ergaticus ; 16, Basil euterus. The Coerebidae, however,
cannot be thus conveniently ignored, and the general subject is far
too important and comprehensive to be discussed within the
limits of the present paper.

Recapitulation. — Within the United States Swainson’s War¬
bler has been taken only in South Carolina, Georgia, Florida,
Alabama, and Texas. There is but one extralimital record
(Havana, Cuba). It has been erroneously accredited to New
England, on incomplete evidence to Southern Illinois. It is not
known to winter within the United States, but on the contrary
seems to emigrate southward before the approach of cold weather
(latest date, September 25 ) , returning again in April (earliest date,
April 12). It has occurred in numbers only near Charleston,
South Carolina, [*] where alone it has been positively ascertained

[* Cf. p. 62 of this number of ‘The Auk.’ — Edd.]

8o

Brewster on the Heath Hen of Massachusetts.

[January

to breed. During the migrations it sometimes visits dry or open
situations ; it breeds, as far as known, only in the most tangled
swamps. It is an exquisite but fitful singer ; when not singing a
silent bird, retiring and sedentary in disposition, eminently ter¬
restrial in habits.

Thus much light on what has been an obscure subject ! Impor¬
tant details remain to be worked out, such as the general distri¬
bution of the bird in the South, its manner of nesting, etc. It is
to be hoped that the near future will see all these points made
clear. Meanwhile we may congratulate ourselves on what in
effect, if not literally, is the rediscovery of another ‘lost’ species.

THE HEATH HEN OF MASSACHUSETTS.

BY WILLIAM BREWSTER.

Although the Pinnated Grouse was found rather numerously
during the first half of the present century at several localities in
the Middle and New England States, no specimens from this
region seem to have come under the critical notice of modern
ornithologists. Accordingly it is with peculiar pleasure and
interest that I have entered into an examination of three exam¬
ples kindly loaned me by Mr. F. T. Jencks, who received them
directly from Martha’s Vineyard in the autumn of 1S79. Com¬
pared with western specimens, they prove to be smaller, with
relatively, as well as actually, shorter tarsi ; the feathers of the
neck-tufts narrower and acutely instead of obtusely lance-pointed ;
generally redder or rustier coloring above, and much less white
or whitish below. The neck-tufts, also, have only from four to
five instead of from seven to ten rigid feathers.

It may be pretty safely assumed that at the time of the first
settlement of the country, when the Pinnated Grouse ranged
more or less uninterruptedly from Eastern Massachusetts to
beyond the Mississippi, all the birds found east of the Alle-
ghanies were similar to these island specimens ; or, to put case
more comprehensively as well as definitely, that the large, light-

■SSs.J

Brewster on the Heath Hen of Massachusetts.

8l

colored Prairie Hen of the open grassy plains and prairies of the
West originally had a smaller, darker, and redder eastern repre¬
sentative distributed, perhaps rather locally, in scrubby pine and
oak tracts, throughout Southern New England and portions of
the Middle States. At that time it is not unlikely that the two
forms intergraded over such intermediate ground as Western
Pennsylvania and Eastern Ohio and Kentucky. However this
may have been, they cannot do so now — unless fortuitously, as
by reversion — for the last remnant of the eastern stock still
lingering on Martha’s Vineyard is separated from the extreme
eastern confines of the present range of the western bird by an
interval of about eight hundred miles.

As these eastern Grouse are distinguishable from their western
cousins by well-marked and apparently constant characters,* and
as the two birds are now so widely separated geographically that
they cannot intermingle, it follows that they may be consistently
recognized as distinct if closely related species, for the probability
that their separation has been brought about by man’s in¬
tervention, and within historic times, can have no real bearing
on the case. Unfortunately the Prairie Hen must receive
the new name, for there is little doubt that the Tetrao
cufiido of Linnaeus was really the eastern form. This is
indicated by the fact that its habitat is given as “in Virginia”! ;
moreover, there are good reasons for believing that Linnaeus
based his diagnosis (which is too brief and general to give much
more than generic characters) on Catesby, whose work he cites.
If this assumption be granted, the case is freed from all obscur¬
ity, for Catesby’s figure, although an absurd caricature, was
evidently drawn from the eastern bird, while his discription
mentions several of the characters which separate the latter from
the Prairie Hen. Both plate and description were taken from some
live specimens which Catesby saw in 1742 “at the right honour¬
able the Earl of Wilmington' s at Chiswick . who told me they
were natives of America , but from what particular part they
came his Lordship knew not.” Other considerations aside, it is

* I have examined in this connection upwards of a hundred western specimens in
the Boston markets.

f Doubtless a loose statement, as I cannot find that it ever occurred south of Penn¬
sylvania.

82

Brewster on the Heath Hen of Massachusetts.

[ January

hardly possible that in those early days they could have been
obtained from anywhere west of the Alleghanies.

Having thus briefly stated a case which is not less remarkable
than interesting, I propose to distinguish the forms in question
as follows :

Cupidonia cupido Heath Hen.

Sp. char. <J. Ground-color above light reddish-brown or rusty; be¬
neath rusty-white with transverse bars of dark reddish-brown, the dark
color prevailing over the lighter on the exposed portions of the feathers;
plumage of tibiae and tarsi brownish-cinnamon thickly mottled with
whitish; neck-tufts composed of from three to five narrow, acutely lance-
pointed, stiffened feathers, with about the same number of overlap¬
ping coverts. Wing, 8.35; tarsus, 1.75; bill, .38 deep, by .55 long from
nostril.

$. Smaller (wing, 7.93) ; darker and rustier; the dark bars beneath
dull black ; tail dark clove-brown with numerous fine, irregular, rusty
bars.

Habitat. — Martha’s Vineyard, Massachusetts ; formerly found at vari¬
ous points in Eastern Massachusetts, Southern Connecticut, Long Island,
New Jersey, and Pennsylvania; perhaps also Southern New England and
the Middle States generally. A -woodland species, inhabiting scrubby
tracts of oak and pine.

Cupidonia pinnata nov. spec.* Prairie Hen.

Sp. char. Ground-color above brownish-ochraceous tinged with gray;
beneath white with transverse bars of clear dusky brown, this color not
prevailing over the lighter tints; tibiae and tarsi brownish-ochraceous not
mottled with whitish ; neck-tufts comprising from seven to ten stiffened
feathers, obtusely pointed or even broadly rounded at their tips. Wing,
9.00; tarsus, 2.10; bill, .40 deep by .60 long from nostril.

J. Smaller, similar in general color and markings, but with the tail
barred.

Habitat. — Prairies, from Illinois westward. A bird of the open, breed¬
ing on treeless plains, and seldom or never inhabiting timber.

Cupidonia pinnata has been too often and carefully treated under the
name C. cupido to require further consideration here. The eastern
species, however, although destined to bear a familiar name, is practically
a new bird. Accordingly I find it necessary to redescribe the original C.
cupido as follow.s : \

£ (No. 5330, Coll. W. B., Martha’s Vineyard, Mass., Nov. 1879. From
F. T. Jenftks). Ground-color of upper parts light reddish-brown some-

*Types: $ No. 2689, ? No. 2690, Coll. W. B. — Vermilion, Dakota, January 20,
1877.

Brewster on the Heath Hen of Massachusetts.

83

■ 885.]

what ochraceous on the rump; under parts dark reddish-brown with
some concealed rusty-chestnut on the jugulum, the feathers everywhere,
except on the throat, anal region, and under tail-coverts, crossed by from
one to five narrow, continuously-transverse bars of pale rusty or white.
These bars, except on the sides posteriorly, are narrower than the brown
spaces which they separate; hence the darker color predominates. Upper
parts diversified by numerous ragged, irregular-shaped markings of black¬
ish-brown or dull black, usually continuous across both webs of the
feather, but never embracing its tip ; forehead, sides of head above the
eye, and entire occiput rusty brown mottled with dull black; crown black,
each feather tipped with buff and narrowly margined with rusty ; throat
and lores immaculate creamy buff; sides of head below the eye of a
deeper, more rusty buff, with an isolated patch of dark brown on the
cheeks, and a stripe of reddish-brown, extending from the rictus to the
ends of the auriculars, passing directly below the eye but leaving the
eyelid buff; scapulars with large and very conspicuous terminal spots of
white tinged with fulvous; primaries and tail plain brownish or dusky
drab, the former with small round spots of pale rusty on their outer webs,
the latter tipped narrowly with white; plumage of tibiae and tarsi pale
cinnamon-brown ; each feather tipped with whitish, giving the parts a
mottled appearance. Crissum and under tail-coverts white, the latter with
irregular marginal spots of rusty or dull black. Neck-tufts 2.60 long,
composed of five narrow, acutely lance-pointed feathers, the under ones
plain, the middle two with shaft-lines of buff extending in from the tips
an inch or less, the exterior (overlapping) ones with much broader cen¬
tral stripes continued nearly to the base of the feathers.

Dimensions. — Wing, 8.35; tail, 3.75; cultnen from skull, 1.06; do. from
feathers, .70; do. from nostril, .55; depth of bill at nostril, .38; tarsus,
1.75; middle toe, 1.60; its claw, .53.

$ (No. — , Coll. F. T. Jencks, Martha’s Vineyard). Smaller (wing,
7.93) ; with merely rudimentary neck-tufts; the ground tints more rusty;
the dark markings coarser and blacker; the tail dark clove-brown crossed
by numerous narrow, irregularly-transverse bars of rusty.

The general differences between this bird and its western repre¬
sentative, C. pinnata , are difficult of adequate definition, for the
reason that they consist largely in shades of color rather than in
markings. Its small size, short tarsus, acutely lance-pointed
feathers of the neck-tufts, white-tipped scapulars, general reddish
coloration above, and restricted light markings beneath are, how¬
ever, readily appreciable and apparently constant characters. The
bird above described is the least extreme in most of these re¬
spects. Another before me ( $ , No. — , Coll. F. T. J., Martha’s
Vineyard) actually has the greater part of the breast posteriorly
without exposed light bars, the nearly uniform reddish-brown
plumage being merely tipped with hoary. This bird is also pe¬
culiar in having the neck-tufts dull brownish-chestnut.

84

Brewster on Some Arizona Birds.

[January

The female above described differs more from females of C.
■pinnata than do eastern from western males. The under parts
(except the crissum and tail-coverts) are barred heavily with dull
black on a rusty orange ground. This rusty suffuses the lighter
portions of the plumage elsewhere, even tingeing the cheeks and
throat.

The Heath Hen (I use the vernacular name by which it was
known to our forefathers) is still common on Martha’s Vineyard,
where it is mainly, if not exclusively, confined to the woods,
haunting oak scrub by preference, and feeding largely on acorns.
Being strictly protected by law, but few are probably killed. I
am told by one of the Boston marketmen, however, that he has
had as many as twenty from the ‘Vineyard’ in a single season.
He also says that they average nearly a pound less in weight than
western specimens, and on this account do not sell as readily.
The bird is not found on the neighboring island of Naushon, des¬
pite statements by recent writers to that effect, nor is there any
good evidence that it ever occurred there. There is also no rea¬
son to believe that the stock on Martha’s Vineyard has been viti¬
ated by the introduction of western birds. It is simply the last
remnant of a once more or less widely-distributed race, preserved
in this limited area partly by accident, partly by .care. According
to the best testimony available, the colony is in no present danger
of extinction.

PRELIMINARY NOTES ON SOME BIRDS OBTAINED
IN ARIZONA BY MR. F. STEPHENS IN 1884.

BY WILLIAM BREWSTER.

Mr. F. Stephens has kindly allowed me to examine and re¬
port on some birds selected from a large collection made by him in
Arizona in 1SS4. As the opportunity comes too late to admit of
more than a brief announcement in this number of ‘The Auk,’ I
give only the more important results, reserving the remainder
for a future occasion.

iSSs.j

Brewster on Some Arizona Birds.

85

1. Turdus ustulatus Nutt. Russet-backed Thrush. — In my paper

on the collection made by Mr. Stephens in 1881 I added* this Thrush to the
fauna of Arizona with some hesitation, the single specimen taken having
been merely identified in the field, without comparison, and shortly after¬
wards lost. This record is now satisfactorily corroborated, however, by a
second example, unmistakably ustulatus , taken at Camp Lowell, May 21,
1SS4. . *

2. Sialia sialis azurea Baird. Mexican Bluebird. — Three Blue-
* birds obtained in the Santa Rita Mountains in June are doubtfully referable

to this subspecies. One of the two males (No. 1855, F. S., June
18) has the blue above of that greenish shade said to be charac¬
teristic of azurea , but the other (No. 1856, F. S.), taken the
same day, does not differ in this respect from sialis, the tint of the blue
being precisely the same. Both are peculiar in having the under parts
(excepting the usual dingy white space on the abdomen, crissum, and
tail-coverts) nearly uniform pale brownish-orange, paler and vellower, in
fact, than in the female of sialis, and with scarcely a tinge of the usual
deep reddish-brown. This characteristic is not mentioned in descriptions
of azurea , nor do I find it in any of the dozen or more Mexican and Gua,
temalan examples before me. The Santa Rita female (No. 1897, F. S.-
June 20) is still paler beneath, as well as browner above than the female
of sialis. All these specimens differ further from 6". sialis in having rather
longer wings and tails, in this respect agreeing with azurea. In the event
of their proving distinct from the latter, which seems probable, I propose
for them the name fulva. Whether distinct or not, the bird is new to
Arizona, no form of Sialia sialis having been previously reported from
that Territory.

Measurements. — $ , No. 1855, F. S. : Length, 6.40; extent, 12.90; wing,
4.01; tail, 2.83; culmen from nostril, .35. $ No. 1856, F. S. : Length,

7.10; extent, 12.50; wing, 4.00; tail, 2.85; culmen, .37. $ No. 1S97, F.

S. : Length, 6.60; extent, 11.90; wing, 3.90; tail, 2.73; culmen, .37.

3. Caeligena clemenciae Lesson. Blue-throated Cazique. — An
adult male of this fine Hummingbird, which, it is needless to sav, is en¬
tirely new to our fauna, was taken by Mr. Stephens at Camp Lowell, May
14, 1884. Upon comparing it with three Mexican specimens (exact locali¬
ties not recorded) in the collection of the Boston Society of Natural His¬
tory, I find that it differs only in being of a darker, purer green above,
and in having the ash-gray of the under parts unmixed with green except
on the sides. The birds just mentioned have the upper parts of a bronzed
or yellowish green, the feathers of the under parts everywhere (except on
the throat) tipped with greenish. Elliot describes! the upper parts as
‘bronzy-green’ but says nothing about any greenish below.

Measurements. — $ No. 1460, F. S. : Length, 5.40; extent, 7.50; wing,
3.10; tail, 1. 91 ; culmen from nostril, .88.

* Bull. N. O. C., Vol. VII, No. 2, Apr., 1882, p. 68.
f Synopsis of the Trochilidae, p. 30.

86

Recent Literature.

[ January

RECENT LITERATURE.

A Naturalist’s Rambles about Home.* — Under this taking title Dr.
Abbott has written a popular book — consisting in part of previously pub¬
lished essays — on natural history, detailing in a pleasant way his long-con¬
tinued observations on the habits of the beasts, birds, reptiles, and fishes
met with in his rambles in the immediate neighborhood of his home at
Trenton, New Jersey. Nearly one-half of the book (pp. 96-249 and 451-
475) relates to birds, which are treated in Chapters XII-XXVII, in addition
to which an annotated list is given in the Appendix. As regards the birds,
the author’s remarks, aside from the List, relate in the main to compara¬
tively few species, many others, however, being mentioned incidentally.
The titles of the chapters are suggestive of the matter and method of treat¬
ment. Under ‘Our Birds in General’ are noted changes in the habits and
distribution of certain species, as, for example, the Bluebird and Carolina
Wren, which are regarded as now resident species, though believed to have
been formerly migratory ; the Summer Redbird and Mockingbird of late
appear only as rare stragglers rather than as common summer residents,
as was formerly their status ; and other southern species are cited as of
much more common occurrence in winter than they were twenty years ago.
Under ‘The Migration of Inland Birds’ are discussed at some length various
phenomena of migration, to which are added speculations regarding the
cause of migration. ‘A Short Study of Birds’ Nests’ gives detailed
observations on the nesting of several species, as the Baltimore Oriole,
Robin, etc., the subject being considered with reference to Mr. Wallace’s
well-known essay on the ‘Philosophy of Birds’ Nests,’ whose views, Dr.
Abbott finds, “to a certain extent, at least, .... will apply to our
birds.” A chapter is also devoted to ‘The Songs of Birds,’ anc{ others to
the following subjects: ’Chats and Wrens: a Summer’s Study’; ‘The
Carolina Wren: a Year of its Life’; ‘Do Swallows Hibernate?’ Rose¬
breasted Grosbeaks’ ; ‘Feeding Habits of Kingfishers’; -The Saw-Whet
and other Owls’; ’Notes on our Herons’; ‘Notes on the Wood Duck,’ etc.
These chapters, and others with less explicit titles, abound with obser¬
vations on various species of birds, interspersed quite freely with specula¬
tions as to the cause of observed or suspected changes of habits, etc.
The chapter on the hibernation of Swallows attempts to account for the
belief in hibernation, and to explain the ’testimony’ that has come down
to 11s regarding alleged instances of hibernation. The hibernation of
Swallows the author believes to be merely ‘a fancy’; but as regards our
Chimney Swift, the case seems somewhat different, and the author con¬
fesses himself ‘fairly staggered.’ To this subject he contributes several
suggestive facts, such as the finding of living Chimney Swifts in a stove-

*A Naturalist’s Rambles about Home. By Charles C. Abbott. New York: D.
Appleton and Company, 1, 3, and 5 Bond Street, 1884. 8vo. pp. 485.

>885.]

Recent Literature.

8

/

funnel in December, and others, apparently but a short time dead, in a
hollow sycamore in February.

The ornithologist will be surprised at many of the facts recorded in
Dr. Abbott’s book, and will feel inclined to think that New Jersey birds
have ways of their own, particularly as regards times of migration. The
Bank Swallow, for instance, is repeatedly said to be the earliest of all the
Swallows to arrive in spring, and the last to disappear in autumn, the
date of arrival being ‘often as early as the ioth of March,’ and that they
depart late in October, or may remain longer, ‘undaunted by the chill
November fogs.’ The experience of other observers is quite different,
the Bank Swallow being almost universally reported as the latest to arrive
of all the Swallows, and one of the earliest to leave in autumn. Dr.
Abbott’s dates for the spring arrival are a month earlier than those given
for the latitude of Washington, and two months earlier than the dates
usually given for their arrival in the Middle and Eastern States! Instead
of being the earliest of the Swallows to arrive in spring, it is commonly
preceded by a full month by the White-bellied Swallow,— at least this is
the uniform testimony of all previous writers. There are many other
marked discrepancies between the behavior of birds in New Jersey — partic¬
ularly as regards migration — as reported by Dr. Abbott, and as observed in
contiguous territory by others. New Jersey Owls seem also possessed
of eccentricities, since in Dr. Abbott’s chapter on ’A Secluded Corner.’
we are regaled with an account of a family of Short-eared Owls observed
“during a pleasant moonlight evening last October ,” the younger mem¬
bers of which are represented as still too young to be able to fly well or
to provide for themselves. Strangely, too, for Short-eared Owls, their
nest was lin a tree.' Short-eared Owls outside of New Jersey have the
habit of nesting much earlier than this, usually in the Middle and
Eastern States, from April to June; furthermore, their nesting place is
on the ground, usually in marshes, and not in trees. But the Owls are
not the only peculiar creatures which enter into this pleasing story. New'
Jersey frogs having also strange habits, since the ‘racket made by the
frogs,’ on this beautiful October evening, did not wholly prevent Dr.
Abbott’s hearing the ‘varied utterances’ of the Owls. Even as a piece of
natural history romance, ‘A Secluded Corner’ is far from a success, while
as a piece of sober narrative, detailing facts of observation, as it purports
to be, it is a most unfortunate composition,* since such interludes of

* In the desire not to do the author injustice, his attention was called to some of the
eccentricities of New Jersey birds as narrated in his book, and since the above was
written we have been favored with a brief reply, in which he says he has "found Otus
brachyotus nesting in a capacious hollow of a tree — not a cooped up hole that would suit
a little Screech (S. asio)." He also says "October should read August ,” and that Bank
Swallow “should read White-bellied.” It strikes us, however, that the substitition of
August for October illv harmonizes with the context, while to substitute White-bellied
Swallow for Bank Swallow results in an incongruity bordering upon absurdity, as may
be readily seen by referring to p. ioo, and especially by reading pp. 161-163, as well as
other passages in the book.

88

Recent Literature.

[January

reverie reflect unfavorbaly, not only on other parts of the book, but upon
the general trustworthiness of the author’s scientific writings. Even in
natural history romance, probabilities should at least be kept in view.
In other parts of the book there are passages which evince a surprising
degree of ignorance on points well-known to many much less pretentious
observers.

Throughout the work the author betrays a penchant for gratuitous and
not particularly sagacious speculation, as witness repeated attempts to
account for changes in habits when the author himself admits that he is
not sure that the changes have in reality occurred. There is also a loose¬
ness of expression at times that ill-becomes a writer whose rambles are made
habitually with note-book in hand, recording on the spot whatever seems
worthy of note. The List, in the Appendix, of 219 species of birds is prac¬
tically, the author tells us, a reproduction of Turnbull’s list, “with annota¬
tions based upon the observations of the sixteen years which have elapsed
since Dr. Turnbull wrote his work.” He says bis list “may be said to
constitute the ornithic fauna of Mercer County.” It is, however, disap¬
pointing as a faunal list; the annotations are unsatisfactorily meagre, in
many cases merely quotations from Turnbull, and in many others are
marred by more or less obvious misstatements. — J. A. A.

Seebohm’s History of British Birds.* — This work, the prospectus states,
is intended to form three royal octavo volumes, of about 600 pages each,
and will be published in six parts, illustrated with between 60 and 70 col¬
ored plates. It is the author’s intention to issue a part every six months.
The illustrations, executed in chromo-lithography, are to include all the
known eggs of British birds, and those of several species will now be
figured for the first time. Four parts have already reached this country,
the first three being dated 1883 and the fourth 1884. The typographical
execution of the work is excellent, and the plates are entitled to high
praise. The author’s style is attractive, and his fitness for the under¬
taking being well-known, the work cannot prove otherwise than a most
important addition to the literature of British ornithology. In respect
to nomenclature and classification Mr. Seebohm is conservative to a
degree aproaching eccentricity, but in respect to the general subject his
views are liberal, philosophic, and progressive. As regards details of
distribution, habits, etc., of the species treated, we are not in position to
judge critically, but the work seems to carry the stamp of care and
thoroughness. The illustrations have certainly rarely been equalled.

In an ‘Introduction’ of some twenty or more pages the author unfolds
his plan and principles of work. He considers, very properly, that “the
question of the development of species bv evolution is one which lies at

* A History of British Birds, with colored Illustrations of their Eggs. By Henry
Seebohm. London : Published for the author by R. H. Porter, 6 Tenterden Street, W.,
and Dulau & Co., Soho Square, W. Roy. 8vo. Vol. I, 1883, pp. xxiv -f-613, pll. 20;
Vol. II (Part 1, 1883, Part 2, 1884), pp. xxxiv-f-600, pll. 22.

Recent Literature.

89

1885.]

the foundation of all inquiries into the history of individual species; and
when it is answered in the affirmative, the study of ornithology is found
to possess a new interest, many obscure points become comparatively
clear, and the old treatment of the subject requires modifying in various
ways.” “The acceptation of the hypothesis of evolution,” he says,
“implies the recognition of species in the process of formation”; and
adds: “It is easy to find examples of species in every stage of develop¬
ment, from mere local races to well-defined sub-species.” He discusses
in this relation the interbreeding of birds, upon which he lays great
stress as affording an explanation of intermediate forms. The influence
of environment upon the evolution of species is thus to a large degree
strangely ignored. As we have elsewhere said,* we cannot agree that
interbreeding has anything like the importance in this connection that Mr.
Seebohm assigns to it, or that it is by an}' means adequate to account
satisfactorily, except in a small number of cases, for intermediate forms,
many of which are so obviously due to environment. Neither can we
quite agree that “in the tropical regions birds vary much less than they
do in the arctic regions,” or “that tropical species are well-defined,” in
comparison with those of other regions, but rather that variation within
one given area as compared with another is dependent upon the relative
diversity of the conditions of life in the one area as compared with the
other, and in part to the varying degree of plasticity in different groups
of birds.

As regards classification, Mr. Seebohm seems inclined to ignore all
recent progress, because systematists have not yet come to an agreement
in regard to all points, or even all important points, and so goes back to
the “artificial sequence adopted by Cuvier, which has at least the practical
value that it is well-known, and thus obviates to a large extent the trouble
of reference to an index” (!). He accordingly begins with the Raptorial
Birds, and on reaching the Singing Birds, places them all in a single
‘family Passeridas,’ recognizing for British Birds eleven '■sub-families'
which are the equivalents of the families usually .recognized by modern
writers.

In respect to the ‘vexed question of nomenclature,’ he has throughout
his work “set the Rules of the British Association at defiance, being con¬
vinced that, so far as ornithology is concerned, they have done infinitely
more harm than good.” His panacea for the evil is the utter disregard of
the law of priority, and the adoption of an * auctorum flurimorum' rule ;
that is, the selection of “the specific name which has been most used by
previous writers.” In respect to genera, he follows the Stricklandian
Code with modifications, some of which are manifest improvements. For
instance, it seems sound doctrine that “Whenever the name of a species
has been selected for the name of a genus, the species whose name has
been so adopted becomes of necessity the type of such genus.”

For subspecies he adopts what may be termed a Seebohmian system of
trinomials, first instituted by him in his British Museum Catalogue of the

* Ibis, 1883, pp. 226-228.

9°

Recent Literature.

[ January

Turdidre,* which, as developed in the above-named and in the present
work, is open to the charge of being illogical and inconsistent with the
author’s platform of principles. In illustration we may cite his treatment
of the Gyrfalcons. He says there are “two species of Jer-Falcons, very
distinct from each other, and having well-defined geographical ranges,
but connected together by a series of intermediate forms in the interme¬
diate localities." We are at a loss, however, to understand what is meant
b y species, in view of the two parts of the above quotation Ave have dis¬
tinguished by italics. The heading'here adopted is “ Falco gyrfalco and
Falco candicans. Brown Jer-Falcon and White Jer-Falcon.” Under
this the synonymy is grouped under four subheads, as follows: (i)

Falco gyrfalco ; Brown Jer-Falcon. (2) Falco gyrfalco candicans-, Ice¬
land Jer-Falcon. (3) Falco candicans gyrfalco; South Greenland Jer-
Falcon. (4) Falco candicans; White Jer-Falcon. After detailing the
various intermediate stages he says : “The selection of any one of these
intermediate forms is purely arbitrary; and between the two extreme
forms it is just as easy to make ten subspecies as two.” His recognition
of two species then (not s«£species) within this group must be purely
arbitrary and without reason, as he appears to admit, species seeming to
rest on no different basis from subspecies! We believe, however, that
Mr. Seebohm, in theory at least, stands on firmer ground than this, and
that his paper on the subject of trinomial nomenclature, read at the
meeting of British naturalists convened last July to consider this
subject,! indicates that he has now reached better footing.

Mr. Seebohm here and there finds occasion to criticise the work of
some of his fellow ornithologists, and the unsparing hand with which he
sometimes belabors his unfortunate victim indicates that he is by no
means lacking in what has been termed the courage of conviction; but he
very cordially invites like treatment of his own mistakes. In his
accounts of the species treated, he gives special attention to their
geographical distribution, their relations to allied forms, and very full
details of their life-histories, often incorporating therewith much wholly
fresh material. Doubtless in some instances he takes a more comprehen¬
sive view of species than some would be inclined to allow, but doubtless
not wider, in most cases, than his extended experience with the forms in
question would seem to warrant.

As Mr. Seebohm says : “The real history of a bird is its life-hi story.
The deepest interest attaches to every thing that reveals the little
mind , however feebly it may be developed, which lies behind the
feathers. The habits of the bird during the breeding season, at the two
periods of migration, and in winter; its mode of flight and of progression
on the ground, in the trees, or on the water ; its song and its various
call- and alarm-notes ; its food and its means of procuring it at different
seasons of the year; its migrations, the dates of arrival and departure,
routes it chooses, and the winter quarters it selects; and, above all, every

* Cf. Bull. N. O. C., VIII, pp. 100-104.
f See Auk, I, pp. 342-346.

<SSS.]

Recent Literature.

91

particular respecting its breeding, when it begins to build its nest, the
materials it uses for the purpose, the number of eggs it lays, the variation
in their color, size and shape, — all these particulars are the real history
of a bird; and in the account of each species of British birds I endeavour
to give as many of them as possible.” The Introduction to Volume II con¬
tains a paper of 24 pages ‘On the Protective Colour of Eggs,’ by Mr.
Henry Dixon, which will be noticed at length in some future number of
‘The Auk.’

Mr. Seebohm’s work abounds in passages which invite comment, but
lack of space forbids a more extended notice. — J. A. A.

Ingersoll’s ‘Country Cousins.’* — This well-written work, intended to
entertain and assist ’those who take delight in out-door studies,’ consists
of twenty-one articles, devoted to a variety of subjects, reprinted from the
various periodicals in which they originally appeared. Birds come in for
a fair share of notice, mainly in the chapters entitled ‘A Wet Day with the
Birds’ (pp. 21-30), ‘Birds of the Brookside’ (pp. 39-48), and ‘A Chat about
Bob White’ (pp. 175-181). The book as a whole is much better written,
both as regards truthfulness and style, than popular works on natural his¬
tory often are, the writer for the most part contenting himself with sub¬
jects with which he is personalty familiar, and in which he is especially
interested. He therefore writes intelligently, largely from original obser¬
vation, and in the main correctly, but there are here and there lapses
which a little more care would have saved. This is not often the case in
the ornithological portions of the work, but a pleasantly written account,
several pages in length, of the Long-billed Water Thrush (Siurus mota-
cilla ) is marred at its close by the statement, “This is a northern bird.”
The Spotted Sandpiper, the three species of Siuri, and the Quail (Ortyx
virginiantis') are the species accorded most attention. — J. A. A.

Langille’s ‘Our Birds in their Haunts : A Popular Treatise on the Birds
of Eastern North America.’! — Several months have now elapsed since
the appearance of this long-promised book, on which the author has been
at work, he tells us, for the past twelve years. It is a compact volume of
624 pages, sparsely illustrated by woodcuts, most of which are borrowed
from the second edition of Coues’s ‘Key.’ Its scope will appear from the
opening sentence of the preface : “The first aim of this work is to render
as popular and attractive as possible, as well as to bring within a small
compass, the sum total of the bird-life of Eastern North America.” Had

* Country Cousins : Short Studies in the Natural History of the United States. By
Ernest Ingersoll, Author of ‘Friends Worth Knowing,’ ‘Knocking Round the Rockies,'
The Ice Queen,' etc. Illustrated. New York : Harper & Brothers, Franklin Square,
1884. 8vo. pp. 252. Piates, and woodcuts in the text.

t Our Birds in their Haunts : a Popular Treatise on the Birds of Eastern North
America. By. Rev. J. Hibbert Langille, M. A. Boston : S. E. Cassino & Company
1884. 8vo. pp. 624, woodcuts in the text.

92

Recent Literature.

[January

the title of the work been restricted to ‘Our Birds in their Haunts’, and
had the author contented himself with biographical sketches of the birds
with which he was personally familiar, he would have escaped numerous
embarassments, and his book would have had a charm which has been
largely forfeited by reason of its more pretentious scope.

A third of the preface, and occasional paragraphs throughout the volume,
are devoted to the author’s notions of the religious aspects of ornithology,
and he often works into the narrative what he is pleased to consider evi¬
dences of a ‘Creator’, or of ‘design’, in the structure or habits of birds.
Without so much as a show of either logic or modesty, he attacks the
theory of migration which was proposed, independently, by Wallace
of England and Palmen of Finland, and bluntly announces his conclusion
that the phenomena of migration are “caused by the laws of instinct, sup¬
erintended by an Infinite Intelligence.” Seemingly ignorant of the
laws of hereditary habit, he delights in calling upon the supernatural
for the explanation of very simple facts. However gratifying this may be
to his brother Divines, it is certainly out of place in ‘A Popular Treatise
on the Birds of Eastern North America.’

In the preface the author says that he has incorporated in his book “a
good deal of direct information from Hudson’s Bay, by means of an excel¬
lent correspondent. This last feature of original investigation should
specially commend the work to the scientist.” The book was read from
beginning to end, and every record from the above source was carefully
noted. The task completed, just a dozen species were found, and every
one of these has been known from Hudson’s Bay for at least thirty-five
years, and several for a much longer period! From a clerical standpoint,
the mention of a dozen birds from a given locality where they have been
known for nearly half a century may be regarded as “a good deal of direct
information,” but the reviewer, who looks at the matter from an ornitho¬
logical standpoint, is hardly prepared to admit, in consideration of the
total absence of a new fact of any kind, that “this last feature of original
investigation should specially commend the work to the scientist.”

The arrangement of the subject matter is novel and not unattractive.
The Chapters are entitled: ‘Hoar Frost’; ‘Snowed In’; ‘Open Winter’ ;
‘Below Zero’; ‘A January Thaw’; ‘Voices of Spring’; ‘A Bluff and the
Cat-tails’; ‘Along the Creek’; ‘Early April and the Phoebe’; ‘Later in
April’; ‘Late in April’; ‘The Third of May’; ‘The Swamp, The Field,
and The Lake’; ‘The Tenth and Eleventh of May’ ; ‘Peewees and the
Hooded Warbler’ ; ‘Birds around the House’; ‘The First Days ot June’;
‘Georgian Bay’; ‘Tenting on the Niagara’; ‘Bird-life in Nova Scotia’;
‘New Jersey Coast and the Osprey’; ‘Autumnal Days'; ‘Reminiscences’;
‘Gleanings’. Under each of these headings a number of species are dis¬
posed of. There is a fair index, but no table of contents.

The technical descriptions are woven into the narrative (which is al¬
ways a mistake) and in most cases are insufficient to admit of positive
identification except in strongly marked species. The most striking de¬
fect in the book — a defect which appears with provoking frequency, and

»SSS.]

Recent Literature.

93

might so easily have been remedied that it is inexcusable — is the absence
of authorities for the great majority of non-original statements. A still
more serious omission is the lack of precise data concerning rare or un¬
usual occurrences which have fallen under the author’s notice^ Quite a
number of inaccuracies have crept into the book, doubtless through want
of more extended observation or reading. Their character may be seen by
the following: The White-bellied Nuthatch is “at all times strictly insec¬
tivorous.” The nest of the Chipping Sparrow “is never very near the
ground.” “Concerning all Woodpeckers, an account of the habits of one
comes very near being an account of them all”; and again, the Red-head¬
ed Woodpecker, “in most respects, is so like other Woodpeckers in habit
as to need but little special history in a work like this”! The Hudsonian
Tit is “in all repects similar in habit” to the Black-capped Chickadee! !

After enumerating several grievous charges against the Crow he goes
on to say: “But, as in the case of many other transgressors, there are
some weighty things to be said in his favor. In the same field from which
he steals the corn, he destroys many noxious worms and insects, especial¬
ly cutworms; not to speak of the snakes, moles, and mice.” Now every¬
body knows, or ought to know, that snakes rank among the best friends
of the farmer; and as to moles, they certainly cannot be regarded as ene¬
mies. Moreover, it might be a difficult task to prove that the Crow does
kill moles. The same remark applies to the Short-eared Owl, which, ac¬
cording to our author, “feeds especially on mice and moles.”

The statement that the European Crested Grebe ( Podiceps cristatus)
••is common in North America” is a striking instance of the unfortunate
manner in which blunders are perpetuated for many years (in this case
seven) after they have been pointed out and corrected.

The Redpolls are confused under a single species (A. I inaria), and
similar errors occur in other places. There are some strange incongrui¬
ties in the treatment of subspecies. One is given great prominence — the
subject of a special article — while the existence of others is not even
hinted at. It is a little remarkable that an author who has been for
twelve years engaged in the preparation of a book on birds, and who has
spent much time in the field, should not have heard the song of so common
a bird as the Ruby-crowned Kinglet (Regulus calendula) till the end of
the eleventh year (May 18S3). It is also surprising, and not a little dis¬
couraging, to find doubt expressed concerning the method of so well-un¬
derstood a performance as the drumming of the Ruffed Grouse.

Typographical errors are rare, though the statement that the Barn
Swallow is four and a half inches long may probably be classed under this
head. At the bottom of page 487 Wood Thrush is printed where Wood
Duck is clearly meant.

Having now done duty as a critic, there remains the far more agreeable
task of pointing out some of the many really valuable and praiseworthy
features of the book. The reader is soon impressed with its strongest
recommendation, which is the manifest trustworthiness of the original
matter. The author is a good observer, and his biographies are, in the

94

Recent Literature.

[January

main, accurate and well expressed. He evidently has a keen ear, and in
putting bird music on paper has been more successful than many of his
predecessors. He knows how to use both gun and glass, and has the
good sense never to trust the latter in matters of identification.

His careful descriptions of the physical features of several localities
where much of his field work has been done contribute largely to the in¬
terest and importance of the biographies that follow. The accounts of the
Ducks that frequent Niagara River and Lake Ontario contain much that
is new; and attention is directed to the little-known habit of the Canada
Goose of foraging in wheat-fields.

Concerning the breeding of the White-bellied Swallow on the Mud
Islands in Yarmouth County, Nova Scotia, he says: “I saw the nests of
this species on the ground under flat stones, and in holes in the ground.
They were elegantly lined with the feathers of the Herring Gull and of
the Eider Duck, the feathers being so laid that the tips curved upward and
nearly concealed the eggs.”

His personal observations on the Horned Lark, the Butcher Bird, and
many other species are full of interest and are written in a free and pleas¬
ing style. He has heard the rich night-song of the Ovenbird, and his
heart has been stirred by the unspeakable melody of the Hermit Thrush.
Indeed, he is a real lover of nature, and the reviewer, though forced to
mention certain errors and omissions, is still in deep sympathy with
much of the author’s narrative.— C. H. M.

Stejneger on the Wrens of the Subgenus Anorthura.* — A sjmopsis of
the various forms is given, with their synonymy. Six species and two
subspecies are recognized, as follows: (i) Troglodytes borealis , (2) T.
parvulus , (2a) T. parvulus bergensis (subsp. nov.), (3) T. pallescens (sp.
nov.), (4) T. alascensis, (5) T. hiemalis , (5 a) T. hiemalis pacific us. (6)
T. fumigatus. The paper has special reference to Mr. Seebohm’s treat¬
ment of the same group in his ‘History of British Birds,’ by whom all
the known forms of Anorthura are degraded to subspecies of the Euro¬
pean T. parvulus. — J. A. A.

Stejneger on the Ptarmigans of the Group Attagen.f — This paper
embodies the results of Dr. Stejneger’s extended and careful in vestigation
of this difficult group of birds — more difficult than almost any other,
owing to their nearly continuous moult, and to the scarcity of material
collected at corresponding seasons of the year, and properly authenticated
as to date of collection. The conclusions here reached are to some extent
tentative, and the author appeals for further aid in the way of material.
The species and subspecies recognized are as follows : (1) Lagopus muta,

* Ueber einige Formen der Untergattung Anorthura. By Leonhard Stejneger.
Zeitschrift fur die gesammte Ornithologie, I, pp. 7-14, Feb., 1884.

t A Brief Review of the Lagopodes belonging to the Group Attagen Kaup. By
Leonhard Stejneger. Zeitsch. fur die gesammte Ornithologie, I, pp. 86-92, pi. v.

<SSS.]

Recent Literature.

95

Scandinavia; (i a) L. muta vulgaris, the Alps of Southern Europe, the
Pjwanees, and probably Scotland; (2) L. ridgivayi, Commander Islands;
(3) L. kyperborea, , Spitzbergen ; (4) L. islandorum , Iceland; (5) L.
rupestris , Arctic America and the Siberian tundras; (5«) L. rupestris
remhardti, Greenland; (5 b) L. rupestris nelsoni, Unalashka; (5c) L.
rupestris atkhensis, Atlcha (Alutian Islands) ; (6) L. lettcura, Rocky and
Cascade Mountains. The synonymy and distinctive characters of each
form are briefly given. The paper is here and there marred by typograph¬
ical errors, for which the author is doubtless not responsible.— J. A. A.

Stejneger on New Species of Birds from Kamtschatka and the Com¬
mander Islands.* — These are : (1) Pica camtschatica , (2) Corvus greb-
nitzskii , (3) Alauda blakistoni , (4) Dendrocopos immaculatus, (5)

Lagopus ridgivayi — all closely allied to species of Siberia or Japan.

Stejneger on Recent Ornithological Publications in the United States. +

— This is a carefully annotated list of all the more important works and
papers published in the United States between January 1, 1883, anc^ May
1, 1884, and numbers about 65 titles. The remarks about each are suffi¬
cient to indicate the general scope and character of the papers and works
mentioned. — J. A. A.

Merriam on a Bird New to the Bermudas, etc.J — The Song Sparrow
( Melospiza fasciata ) is added to the species of birds previously recorded
from these islands, and there are observations on three other species met
with there, namely, Pyranga rubra , Pelionetta perspicillata , and Cymo-
chorea leucorrhoa. — J. A. A.

Shufeldt on the Osteology of Ceryle alcyon.§— This is another of Dr.
Shufeldt’s carefully prepared osteological memoirs, and is devoted, as the
title indicates, to the osteology of our common Belted Kingfisher. The
osteological characters of the bird are fully detailed, and its structure com¬
pared with that of allied forms. The paper is illustrated by an excellent
plate, and figures in the text of the skull of Alcedo ispida. — J. A. A.

* Diagnoses of New Species of Birds from Kamtschatka and the Commander
Islands. Bv Leonhard Stejneger. Proc. Biolog. Soc. of Washington, II, pp. 97-98.
(Separates issued April io, 1884.)

t Die wichtigsten ornithologischen Publicationen aus den Vereinigten Staaten vom
1. Januar 1883 bis x. Mai 1884. Von Leonhard Stejneger. Zeitsch. fur die gesammte
Ornithologie, I, pp, 179-189, 1884.

+ On a Bird new to the Bermudas, with notes upon several other species of rare or
accidental occurrence in these Islands. By Clinton Hart Merriam, M.D. Bull. No. 25.
U. S. National Museum, pp. 283, 284, 1884.

Osteology of Ceryle alcyon. By R. W. Shufeldt, Captain Med. Corps, U. S.
Army Jje’to.] . Journ. of Anat. and Physiol., XVIII, pp. 279-294, pi. xiv.

96

Recent Literature.

[January

Shufeldt on the Avian Patella.* — An interesting paper, giving clear
descriptions and good figures of the knee-pan in Aptenodytes , Corvus,
Mergus , Sul a, Podiceps, Colymbus , Fulmarus , Phalacrocorax , and Hes-
perornis. The author adheres to the second view, that the patella does
not represent a ‘detached olecranon,’ and proves it by showing that the
sesamoid may coexist, as it does in Podiceps , with a very large cnemial
process of the tibia, the latter being the true antitype of the olecranon.

Nothing advances the progress of scientific ornithology more speedily
or more effectually than the anatomical studies of such men as Mac-
gillivray, Huxley, Garrod, Forbes, and Shufeldt. — E. C.

Minor Ornithological Publications.— The ‘Ornithologist and Oologist,’
Volume VIII, f contains the following (Nos. 669-771) : —

669. Breeding Habits of the Carolina and American Eared Grebes. —
Podilymbus podiceps and Dytes nigricollis californicus. By B. F. Goss.
Ornithologist and Oologist , Vol. VIII, pp. 1, 2.

670. Explanation. By J. G. Cooper. With a note by the Editor.
Ibid ., p. 2. — On the number of eggs laid by Owls.

671. Horned Grebe [ Dytes auritus\ in Conn\ecticuf\. By Chas. A.
Thompson. Ibid., p. 3.

672. Rare Specimens at Bangor , Me. By E. S. Bowler. Ibid., p. 3. —
Hawk Owl, Rough-legged Hawks, Snowy Owls, etc.

673. Fishing and Catching Ducks. By Wm. P. Tarrant. Ibid., p. 3.
— Ducks (species not stated) caught on set-lines, in 125 and 200 feet of
water in Lake Michigan.

674. White Heron (I le rodias alba egretta-). Byjno. H. Sage. Ibid.,
p. 4. — Shot at Saybrook, Conn., Aug. n, 1882. (Previously recorded by
same writer in O. and O., VII, p. 189. See antea , No. 443.)

675. Field Glass [ Ornithology ]. By G. R. C. Ibid., pp. 5, 6. (See
above, No. 412, in Bull. N. O. C., VIII, 236.)

676. Long-billed Marsh Wren. By B. B. Haines. Ibid., pp. 6, 7. —

Nesting habits as observed in New Jersey.

677. Crossbills [in Tennessee ]. By G. S. Smith. Ibid., p, 7. — Re¬
lates to the instances previously recorded by same writer in Bull. N. O. C.,
VII, 56.

678. Virginia Rail. Editorial. Ibid., p. 7. — Harry F. Haines col¬
lected 1,000 eggs of this species in one season on the salt meadows of
Elizabeth, N. J.

679. Notes from Hartford, [Conn.]. By Harry T. Gates. Ibid., p.
8. — Notes on various winter birds.

* Concerning some of the Forms assumed by the Patella in Birds. Proc. U. S. Nat.
Mus. Vol. vii, 1884, pp. 324-331. figg. 1-7.

f The ‘Ornithologist and Oologist' will not be hereafter indexed, as heretofore, in the
list of ‘Minor Ornithological Publications,’ owing in part to pressure on our space, but
mainly from the fact that it has become a publication of so much importance that none
of our readers should fail to have it in their libraries.

*S8s-]

Recent Literature.

97

6So Eggs in a Set. By Snowdon Howland. Ibid., p. 8. — Large
clutches of Catbird, Robin, etc., reported, and the nesting in odd places
by other species.

651. Notes from Galesburg, III. By C. W. Strumberg. Ibid., p. 8. —
Interesting notes on the nesting of several species.

652. Oological and Ornithological. By A. H. Mundt. Ibid., pp. 9,
10.— Notes on ths nesting of about 20 species at Fairburg, Ill.

683. Cardinal Grosbeak. By Edgar A. Small. Ibid., pp. 10, 11. —
Its nesting habits at Hagerstown, Md.

684. Blue Yellow-backed Warbler's Nest. Editorial. Ibid., pp. 12,
13-

685. Eggs in a Set. By M. Day Murphey, Jr. Ibid., p. 13. — Large
clutches of several species reported.

686. Corrections. By Robert Ridgway. Ibid., p. 13. — Of D. D.
Stone’s ‘Notes from Colorado,’ in O. and O., VII, p. 192. (See antea,
No. 446.)

6S7. Bobolinks. Editorial. Ibid., p. 14. — On their scarcity in Con¬
necticut, and their wholesale destruction by gunners along the Delaware
and southward in the fall. 1,000,000 Rails and Bobolinks killed near the
mouth of the Delaware “during the month of September alone.”

688. Savannah Sparrotv. By J. M. Howey. Ibid., p. 16. — “Breeds
commonly throughout Western New York.”

689. Rare Birds. By Chas. E. Bellows. Ibid., p. 16. — “Common
Cormorant (. Pkalacocorax carbo )” taken at Bridgton, N. J.

690. Among the Buteos. By J. M. W[hipple]. Ibid., pp. 17, 18. —

Notes on the nesting of various species near Norwich, Conn., during the
season of 1882. 104 eggs taken !

691. Notes from Nebraska. By H. A. Kline. Ibid., pp. 18, 19. — On
the nesting of several species of Hawks and Owls.

692. The Prothonotary Warbler. By D. E. Lantz. Ibid., pp. 19, 20.
— Its nesting habits at Manhattan, Kan.

693. Clark on “ Gull Island." By John N. Clark. Ibid., p. 21, with
cut (of a nesting Roseate Tern, swallowing a herring of nearly its own
size).

694. Ipswich Sparrow. By Moses B. Griffing. Ibid., p. 22. — Taken
on Shelter Island, N. Y. , Nov. 21, 1882.

695. Capt. Chas. E. Bendire, U. S. A. Editorial. Ibid., pp. 22, 23. —
Extracts from his letter of Dec. 29, 1882, recounting the results of his
natural history work the previous season, and announcing that ‘it has
been whispered’ that he is to complete the ‘North American Oology’ left
unfinished by the late Dr. T. M. Brewer.

697. Night Herons Breeding on the Marsh. By Delos Hatch. Ibid.,
p. 23. — Nesting in the grass and rushes of a marsh in Wisconsin.

698. Mississippi Valley Migration. By W. W. Cooke. Ibid., pp. 25-
2T 33> 34’ 4I-42» 49"53> 65-67, 73-75, S1-S3, 89-91.— Winter birds of St.
Louis, Mo., and Manhattan, Kan., compared (pp. 25-27) ; spring migra¬
tion of the Robin (pp. 33, 34) ; notes from various stations on winter

98

Recent Literature.

[ January

birds (pp. 41, 42) ; spring migration of Ducks and Geese, Blackbirds and
Bluebirds (pp. 49-53) ; Purple Martin, Brown Thrush and Black Snow¬
bird (pp. 65-67); Warblers (pp. 73-75, 81-83); Olive-backed Thrush,
Catbird, Kinglets, Brown Creeper, House Wren, Red-eyed Vireo, White-
bellied Swallow, and Scarlet Tanager (pp. 89-91).

699. Notes from Bloomington , Iud. By B. W. Everman. Ibid., pp.
27, 28. — Notes on the Mockingbird, Summer Redbir^l, Bobolink, and
Carolina Wren. White-winged and Red Crossbills reported as taken for
the first time in the State.

700. Odd Bird Songs. By S. Frank Aaron. Ibid., p. 28. — Relates
to Golden-crowned Thrush, Black-throated Green Warbler, and Maryland
Yellow-throat.

701. The Gannet , Tula [.«<:] bassana, or Solan Goose. ByJ. T. T.
Reed. Ibid., p. 30. — Its habits, etc., as observed in England.

702. American Redstart (Setophaga ruticilla'). By Dr. H. A. Atkins.
Ibid., p. 31. — Dates of its arrival at Locke, Michigan, for twenty-six
years.

703. White-bellied Nuthatch. By L. R. Rich. Ibid., p. 31. — Its nest
and eggs, taken at Saratoga, N. Y., described.

704. Notes from Connecticut. By C. M. Jones. Ibid., p. 32. — A pair
of Mallards shot at Eastford, Conn., Oct. 30, 1SS2.

705. Phoebe Birds in Winter. By Edgar A. Small. Ibid., p. 32.— At
Hagerstown, Md.

706. Yellow Rump Warbler. By A. Hall. Ibid., p. 32. — Shot Jan.
13, 1883, in Northern Ohio.

707. Oological. By Snowdon Howland. Ibid., p. 35. — Chiefly re¬
lates to the eggs of Clapper, Virginia, and Sora Rails.

708. Goldeti Eagle's Nest and Eggs. By Will Stembeck. Ibid., p.

36. — Locality, Hollister, Cal.

709. Ash-throated Flycatcher ( Myiarchus cinerascens [sz'c] . By W.
O. Emerson. Ibid., p. 36. — Its nesting habits, at Haywards, Cal.

7x0. The Blue-zvinged Yellow Warbler. By J. N. Clark. Ibid., pp.

37, 38. — Its nesting in Southern Connecticut, where “it is quite common
in the migrations.”

71 1. The Clapper Rail. By B. B. Ibid., p. 40. — Its abundance,
habits, etc., in the marshes of Elizabeth, N. J.

712. Brief Ornithological Notes from Newfoundland. By C. Hart
Merriam, M. D. Ibid., p. 43. — On birds seen on a sealing cruise, and
about St. John’s, in March and April. 1SS3.

713. Ruby-crowned Kinglet. By Fred. T. Jencks. Ibid., p. 45. — Only
males found to have crests.

714. An April Walk. By J. M. W[hipple]. Ibid., pp. 44. 45. —
Desultory notes on birds observed April 10, 1883, at Norwich, Conn.

715. Cardinal Grosbeak. By W. T. Warwick. Ibid., p. 46. — On its
time of nesting at Washington, Pa.

716. Crows Eating Herons' Eggs. By A. G. Van Aken. Ibid., p. 46.

■SSS.J

Recent Literature.

99

717. Lesser Red Poll (HSgiothus linaria). By C. O. Tracy. Ibid.,
p. 47. — “Nest and eggs of this species” found “the last of March, 1878,”
at Taftsville, Vt. ! The species was doubtless the Pine Finch ( Chrysomi -
iris Minus') .

718. Stormy Petrel ( Thalassidrotna pelagica'). By O. B. Deane.
Ibid., p. 47. — Shot at Springfield, Mass., “a few years ago.” (The
species was evidently a ‘Stormy’ Petrel, but probably not T. pelagica .)

719. Ipswich Sparrotv. By Wm. Dutcher. Ibid., p. 48. — Eight, out
of ten seen, taken at Great South Beach, L. I., in January and February,
1883.

720. Plain English. By Montague Chamberlain. Ibid., pp. 53, 54. —
Ostensibly a plea for plain, untechnical language in works on natural
history.

721. Bewick's Wren. By Howard Jones. Ibid., p. 54. — Description
of its nest and eggs, found at Circleville, Ohio.

722. Sharp-shinned Hawk. Red-headed Woodpecker. House Spar¬
row. By W. B. Fonda. Ibid., p. 55. — The Hawk nesting in a Wood¬
pecker’s hole.

723. Birds in Confinement. By Annie Trumbull Slosson. Ibid., p.
55. — An albinistic Catbird, a Myrtle Bird, and Chewink.

724. Curious Nesting Place. Editorial. Ibid., p. 56. — House Spar¬
rows nesting inside of a depot gong.

725. An Unrecorded Habit of the Red-Headed Woodpecker. By
Howard Jones. Ibid., p. 56. — Robbing the nests of Cliff Swallows and
sucking Hen’s eggs !

726. Ruby-crowned Kinglet. By Wm. Brewster. Ibid., p. 56. —

Females, as a rule, lack the scarlet crown-patch. .

727. A Reply to Dr. Cones. By Montague Chamberlain. Ibid., pp.
57-59. (From the Quebec ‘Morning Chronicle.’) — Relates mainly to
questions of nomenclature.

728. Short-eared Owl. Editorial. Ibid., pp. 60,61. — On its habits
and distribution, with quotations from authors and interesting new mat¬
ter furnished by H. A. Kline and G. A. McCallum.

729. Long-eared Owl. By F. H. C[arpenter]. Ibid., pp. 61, 62. — Its
nesting habits and eggs.

730. Canada Jay. By F. H. C[arpenter]. Ibid., p. 62. — Description
of nests and eggs found in Northwestern Maine, March 16 and 20, 1881.

731. Woodcock and Turtle. Editorial. Ibid., p. 63. — The former
caught by the latter.

732. The Black-headed Grosbeak ( Zamelodia melanocephalai). By
C. W. Beckham. Ibid., p. 63. — A male found incubating.

733. Least Bittern. Bv Snowdon Howland. Ibid., p- 64. — An in¬
stance of peculiar behavior.

734. Greater Yellozv-legs. By Thos. Morgan. Ibid., p. 67. — Nest of
Totanus melanoleucus found at Somerville, N. J. ( !)

735. Great-horned Owls. By F. H. C[arpenter]. Ibid., p. 6S. —
Eggs found in one nest for eleven successive years; the twelfth year it
was found that the nesting-tree had been destroyed.

IOO

Recent Literature.

[January

736. Red Crossbills. By A. H. Helme. Ibid., p. 68. — Found breeding,
and nest and eggs secured, April 10, 1S83, near Miller’s Place, L. I., N. Y.

737. Barred OvjI. By F. H. C[arpenter]. Ibid., pp. 69, 70. — Its
nesting habits, as observed at Rehoboth, Mass.

738. Notes front California. By W. O. Emerson. Ibid., p. 70. —
Brief references to the nesting of various species.

739. Flying Squirrels and Their Work. Editorial. Ibid., p. 70. —
Suspected of destroying birds’ eggs.

740. Notes from Greenfield, Mass. By S. W. Comstock. — Nesting of
Dendrceca blackburnice and Sitta carolinensis, etc.

741. Arrivals. By C. O. Tracy. Ibid., p. 71. — Among early spring
arrivals, at Taftsville, Vt. , the Shore Lark is mentioned as seen for the
first time at this locality.

742. Rose-breasted Grosbeak. By Chas. Edw. Prior. Ibid., p. 71.

743. Late Nesting. By G. S. Agersborg. Ibid., p. 71. — Marsh
Hawk and Mallard with fresh eggs, July 4, at Vermillion, D. T.

744. Swamp Sf arrow. By C. H. Wilder. Ibid., p. 71. — A previous
record of its breeding should be corrected to read ‘Song Sparrow.’

745. Pigeon Hawk. Sparrow Hawk. By Chhrles D. Gibson. Ibid.,
p. 72. — Both (!) species found breeding at Brandywine Springs, Del.

746. Alex. Wilson. Editorial. Ibid., p. 76. — Portrait of Wilson,
with an account of the same, etc.

747. Boat-Tailed Grackle. By Edgar A. Small. Ibid., p. 76. —
Breeds in suitable localities as far north, along the Chesapeake Bay, as
Kent Co., Md.

74S. Hairy Woodpecker. (Pic us villosusy) By J. N. Clark. Ibid., pp.
77> 78.- — Nesting near Saybrook, Conn.

749. Curious Nesting [of a Blue fay] . Blue fays Tame. ByJ. N.
Clark. Ibid., p. 78.

750. Nesting Notes from Connecticut. ByJ. L. Goff. Ibid., p. 78.

751. Notes from San Jose , Cal. By A. L. Parkhurst. Ibid., p. 79. —
On nesting of Black-headed Grosbeak, Elanus glaucus, Phalcenoptilus
nuttalli, etc.

75 2. Audubon. By W. S. J. Ibid., p. 79. — Description of Audubon’s
mill at Henderson, Ky.

753. Winter Birds [at Saybrook, Conn.]. By John H. Sage. Ibid.,
p. 80.

754. White Herons. By W. T. Warrick. Ibid., p. So. — Seven shot,
and many more seen, at Washington, Pa.

755. Pigeon Hawks. By Charles D. Gibson. Ibid., p. So. — Affirming
the correctness of his previous note (see above, No. 745), on the breeding
of this species in Delaware, where, he adds, “the Pigeon Hawk is
resident.”

756. Ruby-Crozvned Kinglet. By D. D. Stone. Ibid., pp. 83, 84. —
Its nest, eggs, and breeding habits as observed in Colorado.

757. Short-eared Owl. By F. H. Carpenter. Ibid., p. 84. — Its
breeding habits at Rehoboth, Mass.

iSSs-3 Recent Literature. * IOI

758. Clarke' & Crow in Southern Dakota. By G. Ayersborg [=Agers-
borg]. Ibid . , p. 84.

759. The Hawks of '83. By f. M. W[liipple]. Ibid., p. 85.

760. Downy Woodpecker. By John M. Hovvey. Ibid., p. 85.

761. Baltimore Oriole [<?s a Cage Bird ] . By W. L. Scott. Ibid.,
p. S6.

762. [Nest of the~\ Least Bittern. By Charles H. Neff. Ibid., p. S6.

763. '‘‘‘Monkey-Faced Ozuls." By W. P. Tarrant. Ibid., p. 87, with
cut.- — Obviously the Barn Owl.

764. Interesting Notes. By Charles D. Gibson. Ibid., pp. 87, 88.

765. A Surprised Blue Jay. By S. H. L. Ibid., p. 88. (From
the Germantown ‘Telegraph.')

766. Change of Ownership. Editorial. Ibid., p. 92. — Valedictorj',
and announcement of the transfer of the ‘O. and O.’ to Mr. Frank B.
Webster of Pawtucket, R. I.

767. Notes from Manhattan, Kan. By D. E. Lantz. Ibid., p. 92. —
On the nesting of a few species.

768. Screech Owls Breeding in Confinement. By F. H. Carpenter.
Ibid., pp. 93, 94.

769. Snow Buntings and Pileated Woodpeckers. By Charles D. Gib¬
son. Ibid., p. 94.

770. Bell's Vireo — ( Vireo belli. By D. E. Lantz. Ibid., pp. 94, 95.

771. Red-headed Woodpeckers. By Moses B. Griffing. Ibid., p. 95.
— At Shelter Island, N. Y.

772. Fellow-breasted Chat. By F. H. Carpenter. Ibid., p. 96. — Breed¬
ing at Rehoboth, Mass. — J. A. A.

Publications Received. — Barrows, W. B. Birds of the Lower Uru¬
guay. (Bull. N. O. C., VIII, and Auk, I.)

Cory, C. B. The Birds of Haiti and San Domingo. Part III, 18S4, 4to,
pp. 112-160, pi 1 . 6.

Garman, S- On the Use of Polynomials as Names in Zoology. (Proc.
Boston Soc. Nat. Hist.. 1884, pp. 7 [repaged].)

Gurney, J. H., Jr. (1) Catalogue of the Birds of Norfolk. London,
1884. 8vo. pp. 47. (2) On the ‘Hairy’ Variety of the Moorhen (Gallinula

chloropus). (Trans. Norfolk and Norwich Naturalists’ Soc., Ill, pp. 581-
5^7-) (3) On the Occurrence of a Flock of the Arctic Blue-throated

Warbler (Erithacus suecica) in Norfolk. (Ibid., pp. 597-601.)

Ingersoll, Ernest. Country Cousins : Short Studies in the Natural
History of the United States. New York, 1884, 8vo. pp. 252. Illus¬
trated.

Sharpe, R. Bowdler. (1) Notes on Timeliidse. (Notes from the Ley¬
den Mus., VI, pp. 167-178.) (2) On an Apparently Undescribed Genus

[Orthnocichla] of Wrens from Timor. (Ibid., pp. 179, 180.)

Shufeldt, R. W. Osteology of Numenius longirostris, with Notes upon
the Skeletons of other American Limicolie. (Journ. Anat. and Phys.,
XIX, pp. 51-82, pll. iv, v.

102

General Notes.

[January

American Naturalist, Nov., Dec., 1884, Jan., 1SS5.

Bulletin Essex Institute, XV, Nos. 7-9, XVI, Nos. 4-6.

Canadian Science Monthly, Sept., 1883.

Journal Cincinnati Soc. Nat. Hist., VII, Nos. 1-3.

Naturalist, The, A Journ. of Nat. Hist, for the North of England, Nos.
112-113, Nov., Dec., 1SS4.

Ornithologist and Oologist, Aug.-Dee., 1884.

Proceedings Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, 1SS4, Pt. II.

Random Notes on Natural History, I, Nos. 10-12, 1884.

Science Record, II, Nos. 11, 12.

Zeitschrift fur die gesammte Ornithologie, I, Heft 3.

Zoologist, Oct., Nov., Dec., 1884.

GENERAL NOTES.

Albino Robins ( Tardus migrator ius). — Mv friend James M. LeMoine,
Esq., informs tne that he has just added to his fine collection at Spencer
Grange, Quebec, a pure white Robin, said to be the first seen in that
vicinity. I have lately examined an albino of this species recently cap¬
tured near St. John. The only colored feathers to be seen on the bird are
three single ones forming spots on the breast. — Montague Chamberlain,
St. John , N. B.

Nest and Eggs of the Golden-winged Warbler ( Helm inthophila chry-
soptera). — This bird selects a semi-swampy situation, overgrown with
bushes, in which to nest. It commences to build the last of May or first of
June. The nest is placed on the ground, and is- supported laterally by
three or four bushes situated from four to five inches apart. It is com¬
posed externally of dry leaves placed edgewise, and well lined with fine
bark fibres, interspersed with a few coarse hairs. The nest when finished
measures, inside, three and one-half to four inches in depth, and one and
one half to two inches in diameter; the sides are nearly parallel, only
slightly contracted above. It is well concealed by the overhanging
bushes and leaves.

The eggs (four or five in number) measure: the largest, .52 X -7«;
smallest .46 X .62. The average is within a fraction of .50 X 68; they are
white, sparingly sprinkled and blotched with light reddish brown, more
on the greater end.

I have found hut two nests, one, which had young, July 17: the other
I discovered while the birds were building. When secured, June 10. it
contained fiVe eggs, one of which was a Cowbird’s.

Mr. 11. F. Goss of Pewaukee has, in his magnificent collection, thirteen
nests, containing between fifty and sixty eggs — all taken by one collector

«s-]

General Notes.

i°3

in the town of Summerfield, Monroe County, Michigan. I doubt if all the
nests together of this Warbler previously found equals this number.
— P. R. IIoy, M. D., Racine, Wise.

Nest and Eggs of the Blackburnian Warbler. — On the 23d of May,
1879, my lamented friend, the late A. Jenings Dayan, pointed out to me,
high in a lofty pine, the yet unfinished nest of the Blackburnian Warbler
{ Dendrceca b lac kb u mice). The exact locality was a grove of large white
pines ( P intis strobus') on a dry hill just east of Black River, at Lyon’s
Falls, Lewis County, New York. Some days previously Mr. Dayan had
observed the female bird carrying in her bill a downy substance which
afterwards proved to be the tufted seeds of the cat-tail. By the aid of a
field-glass, after many hours of patient watching, he finally discovered the
nest. On the 2d of June he ascended the tree and secured the prize. It
was saddled on a horizontal limb twenty-five and a half metres (about
eighty-four feet) from the ground, and three metres (about ten feet) from
the trunk. The limb measured 15 mm. in diameter where the nest was
attached. The nest contained four fresh eggs of the Blackburnian War¬
bler and one of the Cowbird ( Molothrus ater).

Authentic published descriptions of the nest and eggs of this Warbler
are so few in number, and so meagre in exact details, that I make no
apology for presenting the following: the eggs measure, respectively (all
measurements being in millimetres), 12.80 X 17.60, 12.60 X 17.80, 12.60
X 18, and 12.80 X 17.60. The ground-color is pale bluish-green, spotted
all over with umber-brown of varying intensity, the spots tending as usual
to form a ring at the large end. One differs from the rest in being well
sprinkled with blotches of rich dark-umber, which coalesce into a broad
zone around the large end. The nest is large, substantial, and very com¬
pact. It consists almost entirely of a thick and densely woven mat of the
soft down of the cat-tail ( Typha latifolia ), with seeds attached, and is
lined with fine lichens, horse hair, and a piece of white thread. On the
outside is an irregular covering of small twigs and rootlets, with here and
there a stem of moss or a bit of lichen, The outside diameter of this
rough envelope is 125 mm. ; outside diameter of cup or nest proper, 74
mm. ; outside height, 53 mm. on one side and 42 mm. on the other. The
inside of the cup measures 50 mm. in diameter and 29 mm. in depth. —
C. Hart Merriam, Locust Grove, N. T.

Nesting of the Worm-eating Warbler ( Hclmitherus vermivorus ) in
Virginia. — Although of late years the nest of the Worm-eating Warbler
has been met with sufficiently often to dispel the obscurity which previous
to 1869 rested upon the breeding habits of this bird, its discovery, espec¬
ially in localities where it is not known to have been already found, is still
a matter of considerable interest. While walking along an unfrequented
road through the woods near Cobham, Albemarle County, Virginia, on
May 19, 1884, my attention was attracted by the notes of a bird evidently
in anxiety, and on looking for their source I found that they proceeded
from one of these Warblers, which are not very rare in that vicinity in

General JVoles.

[January

IO4

the spring. I remained quite still, and the bird, which came very close
to me, finally betrayed the position of its nest by flying towards it. This
was situated about fifteen feet from the road ; placed as usual on the
ground, which was covered with dead leaves. It was embedded in a
slight depression, and was partially concealed by a diminutive plant
which grew alongside. It was neatly but not elaborately constructed of
dry leaves and catkins, and was lined inside with the small, flexible, red¬
dish brown stalks of a small plant, its* dimensions being approximately as
follows: external width, 3^ inches; internal width, inches; external
depth, 25 inches; internal depth i| inches. It contained four freshly laid
eggs, the appearance of which corresponded to the descriptions of other
observers, their color being white, dotted with spots of various shades of
light reddish-brown, running together at the larger end, and intermingled
with a few spots of lilac. They measured respectively .66 X .54, .68 X .54,
.67 X .54, and .67 X .54 inches. As far as I have ascertained, the nest of
this species has not before been definitely reported from any point south
of the neighbourhood of Washington. — William C. Rives, Jr., M. D.
Newport , R. /.

Oporonis agilis and Dendrceca palmarum palmarum at Shelburne, near
Gorham, New Hampshire. — On September 14, 1884, while collecting near
the ‘Dryad Camp’ on the side of Mt. Baldcap (altitude approximately 800
feet), I secured a female Connecticut Warbler. When seen it was hopping
about in a tangle of hobble bushes and low alders, which covered a small
piece of swampy ground in high open woods. No others were seen
although I looked carefully for them, and went to the same place several
times hoping to find more. This adds the Connecticut Warbler to the
birds of New Hampshire.

I shot a typical specimen of the western variety of the Redpoll Warbler
( Dendrceca palmarum palmarum ), on September 16, 1884. It was in a
large mixed flock of Warblers, Chickadees, etc., which were feeding in a
row of low birches by the roadside. The eastern form (var. kypockrysea)
was not seen, although I collected steadily until September 24. This is, I
believe, the first specimen of D. palmarum which has been taken in New
Hampshire; the other five New England specimens being all from
Massachusetts. — Arthur P. Chadbourne, Cambridge , Mass.

Swainson’s Warbler off Southern Florida. — One of the most interesting
facts brought to light by the Committee on Bird Migration is the discovery
of Swainson’s Warbler ( Heloncea swainsoni ) off Southern Florida, and
the establishment of a fixed point in the line of its autumnal migration.
On the night of the 14th of September, 1884, ten of these rare Warblers
struck the lighthouse at Sombrero Key, one of the Florida Reefs. On
the 15th about the same number struck, and on the 21st several more.

For the possession of this valuable information the Committee is in¬
debted to the kindness of Mr. M. E. Spencer, keeper of the light, who for¬
warded specimens for identification — C. Hart Merriam. Locust Grove ,

n. r.

■885-3

General Notes.

io5

Swainson’s Warbler — An Omission. — In my article on Swainson’s
Warbler in this number of ‘The Auk,’ I neglected to refer to an announce¬
ment bv Dr. G. E. Manigault (Science Record, II, Feb., 1SS4, p. 34)
of the capture of two specimens near Charleston by Mr. Wayne in
August, 1S83. It is, perhaps, enough to say in this connection that I
have been since assured by Mr. Wayne that these birds were erroneously
identified, and that they were certainly not Swainson’s Warblers. — Wil¬
liam Brewster, Cambridge , Mass.

The Red Crossbill Breeding in Eastern Massachusetts. — Late in May,
1884, I received information that a flock of Loxia curvirostra americana
had been seen on the outskirts of the town. Now this was a bird I had been
looking for in vain for a number of years, my last record being about ten
years ago, and that flock made but a short stay. So on the 31st I visited
the locality named, which was ‘just the place’ for them, being a ledgy
tract of pitch-pine, bordering on an alder and maple swamp. I found the
flock there, about ten birds, and secured a pair, male and female, in fine
adult plumage. On examination I concluded they had not yet bred, and
were not likely to for some time. Thinking it probable some would nest
there, I made several trips to the grove in June and July, but without
result. I requested the man who owned the premises and lived near by,
and who wras quite interested in my search, to be on the watch for anv
young birds, and about the middle of July, was gratified with the informa¬
tion that he had twice seen at close quarters a pair of old birds feeding
their young; and he has reported their presence quite frequently since,
the last time being as lately as November 15.

I regret that I cannot fix the date of hatching (interesting from being so
late in the season), and also that I cannot give this at ’first hand’; but
my ‘assistant observer’ is reliable, and has often given me items of orni¬
thological value. — F. C. Browne. Framingham, Mass.

The Ipswich Sparrow {Passer cuius princess') in Delaware. — Two speci¬
mens obtained Nov. 22, 1883, constitute, I believe, the first record of this
species for the State, and the only record south of Seven Mile Beach. N. J.
I secured them among the sandhills of Rehoboth Beach, about seven
miles south of Cape Henlopen, and might have found others had not my
available time been limited to one hour’s search. — J. Dwight, Jr., New
York.

Peucaea aestiValis and its Subspecies illinoensis. — While at Washington
last April I happened to mention to Mr. Ridgway that I had taken three
specimens of what seemed to be his Peuccea aestivalis illinoensis at Charles¬
ton. South Carolina, in May, 1883. This led to an examination of Audu¬
bon’s type of Fringilla bachmani (preserved in the collection of the
National Museum) which very unexpectedly turned out to be also
referable to the red inland form instead of. as has been previously
assumed, to the dark, black-streaked one of Georgia and Florida. Hence

io6

General Notes.

[January

illinoensis Ridgway, 1879, must become a synonym of bachmani Audu¬
bon, 1834. It may be added that there is no doubt whatever that Lichten¬
stein’s Fringilla cestivalis was based on specimens of the dark race. The
two will accordingly stand as follows :

Peucaea aestivalis (dcht.) Cab. — Habitat , Florida and Southern

Georgia.

Peucaea aestivalis bachmani ( And .) Bre-wst. — Habitat, South Caro¬
lina, Alabama, Texas, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Southern Illinois and
Indiana.

The respective distribution of these two forms remains to be definitely
ascertained. Charleston, South Carolina, seems to be the only point on the
Atlantic Coast where var. bachmani— as we must now call the red bird—
has been found. It breeds there in abundance, as I learned during the
past season (1884), when I collected a series of about fifty specimens in
April and May. Some of them are intermediates, and a few approach
cestivalis rather closely, but the majority are essentially typical bachmani.
— William Brewster, Cambridge , Mass.

The Black-throated Bunting in Maine. — On Sept. 29, 1884, I shot a
Black-throated Bunting ( Sfiiza americana') at Job’s Island, one of the
smaller islands in Penobscot Bay, Maine. The bird was found in a grass-
field near a farm-house, and proved to be a young male of the year in
good plumage. This is, I believe, the first instance of its capture north
of Massachusetts.

The fact that the specimen was a young of the year, and that it was
taken during the autumn migration, would lead one to think it had been
reared in the region where it was found, or even farther north. — Charles
W. Townsend, Cambridge , Mass.

Foster Parents of the Cowbird. — During the season of 1884 I found
young Cowbirds ( Molothrus ater) in the nests of the Kingbird, House
Wren, and Chipping Sparrow. — William L. Kells. Listowel , Ontario.

Nest and Eggs of the Rusty Grackle ( Scolecophagus ferruginous). — I
have found but one nest of this species, but its location differs so from
that given in the books that I am induced to record a description of it.
During the spring of 1884 a pair of Rusty Grackles were noticed for
several weeks about the garden of a neighbor in the suburbs of St. John,
and apparently making their head-quarters in a large spruce which grew
within 30 feet of the house, on the edge of a lawn that formed the daily
playground of a bevy of children.

I had spent many an hour looking for the nest of this species “among
the foliage of low alders overhanging the water,” “in low trees and bushes
in moist places,” and “in swampy tangle,” and I was puzzled to deter¬
mine why this pair were spending the breeding season far away from all
such surroundings. There was no doubt about the identification of the
birds; I had grown familiar with their appearance from handling numer¬
ous specimens, and I saw these daily, frequently within a few feet of me.

1885.]

General Notes. .

I07

They did not appear in the least disturbed by my presence, but if a Crow
invaded their territory it was at once made the object of a vigorous
assault. The Grackles were, however, frequently chased by both Robins
and Rev-eyed Vireos.

At last something aroused my suspicion that a nest was in that spruce,
and on June 44 I climbed up to investigate the matter. When my head
was about 28 feet from the ground and among the dense foliage of the
upper branches I came in sight of a bulky nest— extremely large for the size
of the bird — set close to the stem and loosely laid upon a limb, portions of
it spreading over several smaller branches and twigs. But it was merely
resting upon them, they being not imbedded in the mud which formed
part of the structure. In the nest were two young birds and two eggs
unhatched; the latter were secured and the youngsters left for future
study.

There was considerable difference in the size of the eggs and in their
coloration. The smaller of the two measured 1.09 X .76, and was very
similar in color and markings to those described in ‘New England Bird
Life.’ The largest egg was ‘pipped’ and was destroyed before measured.
The markings on it were less distinct than on the other, giving it a some¬
what clouded appearance.

On examining the nest it proved to be very roughly constructed, with¬
out any approach to artistic work. It was composed chiefly of dried vines
of honey-suckle loosely entwined at the sides and by an admixture of mud
welded into a solid mass at the bottom. There was no attempt at a
lining of any sort.

I noticed that while the young were in the nest both parents were
attentive in feeding them, though the male was more frequently found
guarding the nest, of which he was most watchful.— James W. Banks,
St. John, N. B.

A White Crow ( Corvus frugivorus). — I have to thank M. Dionne for
generously granting me permission to announce the addition of an albino
Crow to the Museum of Laval University of which he is in charge. The
specimen was taken near the city of Quebec. — Montague Chamberlain,
St. John, N. B.

A Remarkable Migration of Canada Jays. — On the 5th of September,
1884, Mr. Napoleon A. Comeau wrote me from his home at Godbout, on
the north shore of the entrance to the Gulf of St. Lawrence: ;‘We have
lately had a most extraordinary migration of the Canada Jay {Per iso reus') .
One afternoon I counted over a hundred in the open space near the old
Hudson’s Bay Company’s house here; and almost every day since the first
of this month it has been the same. I believe this unprecedented flight
must be owing to scarcity of berries in the interior, and, since they hap¬
pen to be plentiful along the coast this fall, the birds follow the shore to
feed on them.” — C. Hart Merriam, Locust Grove, New York.

General Notes.

[ January

108

The Kingbird in a New Role. — The following note is from the pen of
my friend, the Rev. Frank W. Ritchie, who has courteously permitted me
to publish it.

“On the afternoon of June 15, 1SS4, I was walking near the bank of the
Massawipi River when my attention was drawn to a pair of Crow Black¬
birds by their cries of evident distress, and, upon looking to see the cause
of the outcry, observed, in a tree near by, a Crow with an almost fully
fledged Blackbird dangling from its beak. In a few moments afterwards
the Crow started across the river, the parents of its victim in hot pursuit,
and when about midway the stream was charged upon by a Kingbird with
such vigor that the young Blackbird was released, and half fell, half
fluttered in a slanting direction toward the shore, the Kingbird following,
and by flying under and against the youngster was evidently endeavoring
to assist it in reaching the shore. Some bushes intervened between me
and the birds, as they approached the water, and though I rushed down
quickly, to observe the end of this interesting scene, by the time I reached
the edge of the bank the birds had disappeared. As I could see nothing of
the young bird’s body floating on the water, I concluded that the King¬
bird had succeeded in its generous endeavor.” — Montague Chamberlain,
St. John. N. B.

Late Occurrence of the Phoebe ( Sayornis f asciis') at Brewer, Maine. — On
Nov. 23 (1SS4), when the snow here was six inches deep, and the Penob¬
scot River frozen over above the dam, a Phoebe came into my garden and
remained a long time. As it was Sunday I did not shoot him, but there
is no doubt as to his identity, for my daughter and I stood within a few
feet of him and watched him catch insects over a smoking manure heap. —
Manly Hardy, B reiver, Maine.

Hawk Owls in New England. — Although the months of October and
November, 1884, do not seem to have been characterized by any special
meteorological phenomena, they will be long remembered by ornitholo¬
gists and collectors throughout Northern New England from the fact that
they brought to this region a flight of Hawk Owls altogether unparalleled
in any previous year of which we have definite records. This inroad
seems to have begun late in October and to have lasted nearly through
November. It apparently extended over most of Northern Maine and
New Hampshire, but I have no evidence that it reached Massachusetts.
Some idea of the abundance of the birds majj be had from the fact (for
which I am indebted to Mr. Manly Hardy) that a single taxidermist in
Bangor, Maine (Mr. Bowler), received no less than twenty-eight freshly-
killed specimens in the course of a few weeks. Most of our Boston taxi¬
dermists also had from three to six each (all from Northern Maine or
New Hampshire), and at Lake Umbagog, Oxford County, Maine, I se¬
cured four, shot respectively Oct. 25, Oct. 31, Nov. 15, Nov. 16.

These figures doubtless represent but a small proportion of the total
number killed, for in the region over which the birds spread few persons

sSSS.]

General Notes.

IO9

are aware that an Owl has any commercial value, although every one
shoots the despised bird at sight. Thus for every one preserved a dozen
were probably thrown away. As instancing this, I quote the following
from a short note in ‘Forest and Stream’,* signed Ned Norton, and dated
at Colebrooke, N. H., Dec. 1 : — “Hawk Owls came three weeks ago in
greater numbers than ever seen before. Farmers’ sons have been killing
them all over the country.”

The account of this species in ‘New England Bird Life’ (Part II, p. 96)
would lead one to infer that while “a rare and irregular winter visitor to
Massachusetts,” it is of regular and rather common occurrence through¬
out Northern New England. This is certainly a mistake, as every col¬
lector who has any practical knowledge of our fauna knows. Indeed the
bird is ordinarily one of the very rarest of our Owl's- — so rare, in fact, that
during an experience of some twenty years previous to 1884 I had never
seen either a living or freshly-killed specimen.

In respect to the remarkable migration just described, it may be well to
add that all the specimens which I have examined belong to the American
form, Sarnia funerea (L.) Rich. & Sw. — -William Brewster, Cam¬
bridge. Mass.

The Turkey Buzzard in Central New York. — I have lately examined all
that remains of a Cathartes aura which was killed in Oneida County, N.Y.,
in May, 1879. When first seen he was in company with three others in a
small grove in Westmoreland Township, and was shot by Mr. Lavello J.
Groves, of that town, who had him. mounted and preserved. This is cer¬
tainly the first record for the County and, I think, for this part of the
State. — Egbert Bagg, Jr., Utica, N. T.

Recent Occurrence of the Black Vulture in Ohio. — A Black Vulture
{Cat barista at rata'), in company with some Crows, flew into the Zoolog¬
ical Garden on the afternoon of Dec. 4, 1884. Spying one of the same
species in one of the outer aviaries, it deserted its companions and
alighted on the wire netting covering the aviary. From thence it flew
on to the lower limb of a large tree just opposite, and becoming fright¬
ened at the attempts of the keepers to capture it, circled to a great height
and slowly sailed off in an easterly direction. — Frank J. Thompson,
Zoological Garden, Cincinnati , O.

A New Bird for Illinois. — In a letter from Mr. Ridgway, dated Oct. 25,
1884, he says: “Among the lot of birds you sent 11s last week was a
specimen of Buteo borealis bride ri (orig. No. 575), a very typical speci.
men, from Halfday, Illinois, July 25, 1876. This specimen is particularly
acceptable since the race was previously unrepresented in our collection.
It also adds one bird to the fauna of Illinois !” Referring to my Record I
find that No. 575 was one of two large Hawks (the other a Buteo borealis)
brought into camp by one of our party while on a collecting trip along

* Vol. XXIII, No. 19, Dec. 4, 1884, p. 368.

I IO

General Notes.

[January

the Des Plaines River, thirty miles northwest of Chicago. It is an adult
female, and measured in the flesh 21.75 inches in length and 40 inches in
extent. It was captured while perched on a stake in a field not far from
the ‘big woods.’ Another large, light colored Hawk was seen which
might have been the male, but it was too wary to allow a near approach.
— H. K. Coale, Chicago , III.

The Great White Egret and the Yellow Rail in Ottawa. Canada. — In

the ornithological collection of the Geological and Natural History
Survey of Canada are two mounted specimens which, from the localities
of their capture, deserve special notice. The first of these is a fine spring
male of Herodias egretta , which was shot in the spring of 1S83 at Rock-
liffe, Ont., by Mr. Sidney H. McIntyre, and presented by him to the
Survey. In answer to a letter of inquiry Mr. W. H. McIntyre writes :
“Two of these birds are all that were ever seen here. They seemed to be
a pair, and after this one was shot the other stayed around for a day or
two and then left, and we have seen no more like them. I cannot give
date of the shooting; it was shot, however, by my son Sidney H.
McIntyre within about one half mile of our house at Rockliffe.” Rocklifte
is on the Ottawa River, about lat. 770 50' north, long. 46° 08' west, making,
as far as I am aware, the most northerly record of the Egret.

The other specimen is a spring bird of Porzana noveboracensis shot on
Loronto marshes in June, 1874, by Mr. Herring, the taxidermist of the
Survey. Mr. Herring tells me that although this is the only specimen he
has ever actually shot, he is quite certain that he has on several other
occasions ‘put up’ specimens of this Rail in the same locality. — W. L.
Scott, Ottawa, Canada.

The CEdicnemus dominicensis in Confinement. — In September, 1883,
the Society received two Thick-knees, which were evidently young birds,
with their plumage in bad condition. Being informed that they came
from South America, they were provisionally called bistriatus. It was
the latter part of last September (1SS4) before they were properly iden¬
tified as CEdicnemus dominicensis Cory (Auk, 1884, p. 4). They have
become exceedingly tame ; are in full plumage, and during the summer
nights make the whole garden ring with their peculiar shrill notes. —
Frank J. Thompson, Zoological Garden, Cincinnati , O.

The Western Semipalmated Sandpiper on the Coast of Virginia. — As

there are but few recorded captures up to this time of E reunetes pusillns
occidentalis in the Eastern Province, it is perhaps worth while to mention
its occurrence at Virginia Beach, where Mr. Henry Seebohm and the
writer met with it on Sept. 6 and 7, 1884. It was in company with
E. pusillns and several other species of the smaller Waders, all of which
appeared to be abundant. Several of the birds (E. occidentalis') were
shot but only one was preserved, which was seen and identified by
Mr. Ridgway. E. pusillns was also taken, so there was no chance
of confounding the two forms. Virginia Beach, Va., is on the Atlantic
coast, twenty miles east of Norfolk.- — C. W. Beckham, Washington, D.C.

:SS5.]

General Notes.

I I I

The Canada Goose. — Mr. James P. Howley, in his article entitled ‘The
Canada Goose (. Bernicla canadensis ),’ in the October ‘Auk’, p. 310, lines
33 and 34, states that they “require six months to mature.” This is con¬
trary to my observations regarding the breeding of this bird. My notes,
however, are entirely confined to their breeding while in a state of captivity.
During the last week in May, 1S79, I saw some goslings, just hatched, be¬
longing to Capt. Lane, of Shinnecock Bay, Long Island, N. Y. August
16, I saw them again and was unable to distinguish them from the rest of
the flock by their size or plumage. The present season Capt. Lane raised
nineteen Geese. I saw the flock daily from June 26 to July 25, and during
the latter part of the time the young birds were hardly distinguishable
from the old ones, except by the solicitude the parents displayed for the
safety of their progeny. Capt. Lane has had remarkable success in breed¬
ing Canada Geese in confinement, and has kindly furnished me with the
following information regarding their habits during the incubating sea¬
son : “They make their nests of dried grass, raising them about twelve
inches from the ground. They feather them when thejr begin to lay,
which is about May 1. None lay until three years old; the first season
four eggs are laid, five the second season, and when older six and seven.
A goose never has more than one mate. The gander never sits on the
nest, but while the goose is sitting never leaves her. The time of incu¬
bation is four weeks. The young when hatched are strong enough to take
care of themselves, that is, they eat grass and walk and swim as soon as
they get dry. They will eat meal on the second day. They are in the
down four weeks, and are fully grown in six weeks. When swimming,
the gander goes ahead, the young next, and the goose follows, invaria¬
bly.” — Wm. Ditcher. New York City.

The Eider Ducks of the New England Coast. — In view of the general
confusion and ignorance respecting New England Water Birds, it may be
not amiss to call attention to the fact that two forms of the Eider Duck
are found regularly in winter on our coast. Of these Dresser’s Eider
(Somateria dresseri) is the commoner, as well as probably the only one
which breeds within our limits. The other, Somateria mollissima proper,
is much less numerous, but still far from rare or accidental. It doubtless
reaches Massachusetts, but I do not remember to have seen specimens
from any point south of the mouth of the Penobscot River, Maine. The
best authorities now regard dresseri as specifically distinct from mollis¬
sima. — William Brewster. Cambridge. Mass.

The White Pelican on Lake Ontario. — In the last number of ‘The Auk'
(p. 395) Mr. Mcllwraith records a visit of five White Pelicans to the west
end of Lake Ontario, March 13, 1884. The birds had evidently spent
some time in the neighborhood, for I learn from Capt. Thos. Campbell,
Keeper of Burlington Bay Lighthouse, that four Pelicans were seen there
February 5-7, 1884. — C. Hart Merriam, Locust Grove, N. Y.

I I 2

General Notes.

[January

The Common Cormorant off Boston Harbor. — On the 22d of Septem¬
ber, 1SS4, while shooting on the ‘Graves,’ a dry reef a few miles off the
entrance to Boston Harbor, I secured a Common Cormorant ( Phalacroco -
rax carbo). It was the only one seen, the rest of the Cormorants being
P. dilophus , and at once attracted my companion’s notice by its large size
and whitish underparts. Inquiries made of local collectors and fishermen
failed to elicit any proof of its occurrence at this point, although ‘way
north’ they ‘saw them often.’ — Wm. A. Jeffries, Boston , Mass.

The Common Cormorant in Massachusetts. — Although several recent
authors have characterized Phalacrocorax carbo as a common fall or win¬
ter visitor to this State, the specimen recorded by Mr. Jdft'ries in the pre¬
ceding paragraph is the only authentic Massachusetts one of which I have
any present knowledge. Very probably there are a few others scattered
about in collections, but it is nearly certain that the bird, so far from
being common, is extremely rare here. Along the coast of Maine, how¬
ever, it winters regularly and in large numbers, especially at some small
islands near the mouth of the Penobscot River, whence I have received
several specimens through the kindness of Mr. Manly Hardy. This gen¬
tleman writes me that P. dilophus is not found there in winter, nor have I
any record of its wintering in Massachusetts, although it is a common
spring and fall migrant here. — William Brewster, Cambridge. Mass.

Rare Summer Residents in Kansas. — On the 26th of fune, 1S84, at
Fort Wallace, on and about a pond made by damming the Smoky Hill
River, I saw four pairs of American Coots ( Fulica americana ), six
pairs of Shovellers ( Spatula clypeata ), one pair of Blue-winged Teal
( Querquedula cyanoptera) , a female Gadwall ( Chaulelasmus streperus) ,
and a small fiock of Yellow-headed Blackbirds ( Xanthocephalus icteroceph-
alus). From the actions of the birds I think their breeding grounds were
on the small, bog-like islands, covered by a thick growth of grass and
weeds, and also flags in places. The next day near Ellis, on Big Creek,
I saw a female Hooded Merganser (. Lophodytes cueullatus .)

On July 5 following, near Lawrence, in an old channel of the Kansas
River, I saw several pairs of American Coots, one pair of Mallards (Anas
boscas) , and, skimming over and about the water, a Black Tern ( Hydro -
chelidon lariformis surinamensis) , and, at the edge of the timber border¬
ing the slough, an Acadian Flycatcher (Empidonax acadicus), a Black-
and-white Creeper ( Mniotilta varia ), feeding its young, and a pair of
Blue Grosbeaks ( Guiraca c ter idea) , with three young birds following
them in their flights, clamorous for food; and on the nth of the same
month, at Topeka, a male Black-headed Grosbeak ( Zamelodia melano-
cephala) .

Both of the Grosbeaks mentioned are quite common in the western and
middle parts of the State, the Blue breeding as far east as Manhattan.
Their occurrence east of that locality is rare. Prior to this I had not
observed the Black-headed east of Ellis, but Professor D. E. Lantz writes

iS85-]

General Notes.

n3

me that on the 14th of August last he saw at Concordia quite a number,
mostly young birds, and that Dr. C. P. Blachly has in his collection a
female shot some three years ago at Manhattan. — N. S. Goss, Topeka ,
Kan.

Third Addendum to List of Birds Ascertained to Occur within Ten
Miles from Point des Monts, Province of Quebec, Canada; Based
Chiefly upon the Notes of Napoleon A. Comeau. — (For the original list
and first and second addenda see Bull. Nutt. Ornith. Club. Vol. VII, No. 4,
Oct., 1882, pp. 233-242; Vol. VIII, No. 4, Oct., 1883, p. 244; and The Auk,
Vol. I, No. 3, July, 18S4, p. 295.)

1 7 1 . Anorthura troglodytes hyemalis. — A pair of Winter Wrens spent
the past summer (1884) at Godbout. They were first seen July 7. This
species was not observed in the Gulf by either Mr. Brewster or myself,
though it is common in Newfoundland.

172. Somateria dresseri. — Mr. William Brewster has recently called
my attention to the fact that among the skins of Eider Ducks sent me bjr
Air. Comeau are examples of both S. mollissima and .S’, dresser i.

173. Tachypetes aquila. — A Frigate Pelican was seen and shot at by
Mr. Comeau at Godbout August 13, 18S4. It had previously been seen
(about the end of July) by the keeper of the lightship at Manicougan,
about forty miles higher up the river.

A second specimen of the Wheatear ( Saxicola oenanthe) was taken
at Godbout, September 19, 1884, and was exhibited by Mr. Comeau
at the late meeting of the American Ornithologists’ Union. — C. Hart
Merriam, Locust Grove , New York.

Albinism. — My attention was drawn to a note in the ‘Oologist’ for
April last, in which the writer gives his experience in albinism and asks
for an explanation of these freaks of nature. In order to air my experi¬
ence, and at the same time to give a probable cause, which I would like,
for the sake of possible verification, other observers to look for in the
future, is the object of the present note.

True albinism is of course congenital, and is a condition in which
the normal pigmentary matter is deficient in the system of the individual
affected; in such cases the eyes are pink, and the skin with its appendages
are wdiite or nearly so. In the case of partial albinos, however, it is diffi¬
cult; their condition can probably be explained by some circumstances
occurring after birth which will account for the change in the color of the
skin, such for instance as the case given by the writer in the ‘Oologist,’
in which the skin had been injured on the back of a Swift, and next year
the patch of white feathers indicated the situation of the injury. The same
thing is familiar in the case of the horse whose back or shoulder is galled
by the harness; white patches appear, owing to lowered vitality of the in¬
jured part. These cases are familiar, but I wish to give possibly another
cause acting in the same way, only more general. It is this. When a boy
I shot among others a black squirrel peculiarly marked, it having a per-

Correspondence.

[January

1 H

fectly white tail, with some white about the head ; on making a post mortem
I discovered through a rent in the intestines a tape-worm about 20 feet in
length. Did not wonder then that his head was gray. A few years after a
partially white Red-winged Blackbird (. Agelceus phceniceus') was taken,
which also contained two or three taenia ; next a partial albino Mallard;
then a Robin (Tardus migratorius) with a white head and mottled back
and breast. All were mounted, and ‘are now in my collection. Each of
these had two or more tape-worms in their intestines. I am aware that
birds, especially some species, are particularly obnoxious to tape-worms,
and the above may have been merely coincidences; still it has been
observed sufficiently often to make the fact suspicious as a cause of
albinism. — G. A. M’Callum, Dunnville , Ont.

CORRESPONDENCE.

[1 Correspondents are requested to write brietly and to the point. No attention will
be paid to anotiymous communications l\

To the Editors of The Auk : —

Sirs: I see by the last number of ‘The Auk’ that the Committee on
Nomenclature is undecided whether to adopt the name ‘Junco’ or ‘Snow¬
bird’ as the vernacular name of Junco hiemalis. The bird in question is
here, and in many other parts of its range, not a ‘Snowbird’ at all, as
it almost invariably leaves for the South before there is any snow, and
does not return till the ground is completely clear. I think this should
be sufficient to decide the question in favor of ‘Junco,’ as in my opinion
a bird should always bear a name which is applicable to it in every part
of its range.

The same argument applies with equal or still greater force to the name
‘Winter Wren.’ Anorthura troglodytes hyemalis spends the summer in
the hills near here, but is never found here during the cold weather; and
people here have frequently remarked on the absurdity of our having to
call an essentially summer bird the ‘Winter Wren.’ It may be urged
that we have no choice in the matter, as there is no other name for the
bird; but why cannot some descriptive name, such as ‘Short-tailed Wren,’
be invented. Many will doubtless say that the old name is too well
established to admit of its removal ; but the Committee has, I under¬
stand, in some instances made changes even more radical than this, and
on no stronger ground; and it does seem a pity, when a thorough and
final revision of the nomenclature is in progress, to allow a misnomer
like ‘Winter Wren’ to stand. For surely a name must be considered a
misnomer which is inapplicable in a bird’s summer home — the place
where by far the most important part of its life’s drama is enacted.

Ottawa , November 19, 1884.

W. L. Scott

I SS4. ]

Notes and News.

115

NOTES AND NEWS.

Dr. R. W. Shufeldt, Capt. Med. Corps, U. S. Army, is now on duty in
the field, being stationed at Fort Wingate, N. M. He is at present busily
engaged on a memoir on the anatomy of the Alcidse, for which many of
the drawings are already completed. He would, however, be glad to re¬
ceive additional tnaterial in illustration of the group, either skeletons or
parts of skeletons, or, still better, specimens in spirits. He would like to
borrow such material, giving due credit therefor in his forthcoming
memoir. Sterna, skeletons, and skulls may be readily sent by mail, and
alcoholics in like manner, if first thoroughly drained of alcohol and then
well wrapped.

Dr. Wilhelm Blasius has published in the ‘Journal fur Ornithologie’ for
January, 1S84, a memoir of 125 pages on the Great Auk ( Alca impennis
Linn.). He gives the history of all known extant specimens, numbering
76 skins and mounted specimens, 9 skeletons, and 68 eggs. The number
of skeletons, however, should be reduced to 8, as the Museum of Compar¬
ative Zoology is credited with two, whereas it has but one. Dr. Blasius
gives a resume of the literature of the subject, and the history in detail of
each specimen known to exist.

‘The Naturalist in Florida’ is the name of an illustrated bi-monthly sheet,
edited by C. J. Maynard, which it is intended “shall occupy a peculiar
field of its own, .... that of bringing before the people facts either new or
interesting of the Natural History of Florida and its vicinity.” Three
numbers have already appeared, and contain several papers, by the editor,
of interest on birds.

In a sale ‘Catalogue of Bahama Birds’ Skins, Nests, and Eggs,’ Mr. C.
J. Maynard has described a new species of Woodpecker, under the name
Picks insularis. Its nearest ally is Picks villosus of North America, from
which, however, it appears to be specifically distinct. The description is
published as an extract from “Mr. Maynard’s forthcoming work, entitled
‘A Naturalist in the Bahamas.’” The publication of new species in
ephemeral sale catalogues has been repeatedly characterized as reprehensi¬
ble, and the present case seems fully open to such criticism, there being
no lack of proper media for such announcements. Mr. Maynard secured, on
his last winter’s trip to the Bahamas, fine series of several very rare
species, and many interesting notes on Bahama birds may doubtless be
safely anticipated in the above-named work which he proposes soon to
publish.

‘The Young Oologist,’ a monthly of sixteen pages, edited and pub¬
lished by Mr. Frank H. Lattin, of Gaines, Orleans Co., N. Y., has nearly
completed its first volume. As its name indicates, it is devoted to oology,
and is published in the interest of young ornithologists, but each number
contains more or less matter of permanent value.

Notes and News.

[ January

1 16

At a meeting of the Nuttall Ornithological Club, held Dec. 2, 1884, the
annual election of officers was had, resulting in the re-election of the pres¬
ent incumbents, except Vice-President J. A. Jeffries, absent in Europe'
The officers 101-1885 are as follows : President, William Brewster; Vice-
President, W. A. Jeffries; Recording Secretary, Henry A. Purdie ; Cor¬
responding Secretary, J. A. Allen; Treasurer, Charles F. Batchelder.
The meetings are held the first and third Tuesdays of each month, from
October to June, inclusive. At the December meetings papers were read
by Mr. Brewster, on ‘Swainson’s Warbler,’ on ‘The Heath Hen of Massa¬
chusetts,’ and on an interesting collection of birds made by Mr. F.
Stephens in Arizona; and by Mr. Allen on ‘Sexual Selection and the
Nesting of Birds’; and various briefer communications were made by
other members.

At the December meeting of the Ridgway Ornithological Club, donations
of skins were announced from Mr. H. L. Fulton, and the following
papers were read: ‘The Genus HelmintkofihagaJ by Dr. Morris Gibbs;
‘The White-rumped Shrike’ (impaling insects on barbed-wire fence), by
Geo. H. Ragsdale; ‘The Economic Structure of Birds’ Crests,’ by H. K.
Coale.

Ornithologists will be interested to learn that the celebrated collec¬
tion of Birds’ eggs and nests, belonging to the well-known ornithologist,
Dr. A. C. E. Baldamus, of Coburg, Germany, is now offered for sale. This
collection is without doubt one of the richest of its kind in the world,
numbering nearly 2,000 species, and some 10,000 specimens. It is espec¬
ially rich in the nests and eggs of European birds, and has been gathered
with the greatest care as regards identification and authentication. A
printed catalogue of the collection has been prepared, giving a list of the
species represented, and the number and character of the specimens of
each included. It is greatly to be hoped that the collection may be secured
for some museum in this country.

In the October number of ‘The Auk’ its readers were invited, in behalf
of the A. O. U. Committee on the Nomenclature and Classification of
North American Birds, to notify the Editor of this Journal of their pref¬
erences in respect to the names ‘Junco’ and ‘Snowbird,’ and ‘Vireo’ and
‘Greenlet,’ for the English designations of the species, respectively, of
the genera Junco and Vireo. Twenty-four persons have responded,
as follows: For Junco, 18; for Snowbird, 6; for Vireo, 22; for Greenlet,
2. Several writers have given at length their reasons for preferring Junco
to Snowbird, besides the formal letter given in this issue in the depart¬
ment of ‘Corre»pondence.’

>SSS.]

Bird Migration.

117

SUPPLEMENT.

COMMITTEE ON THE MIGRATION AND GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION
OP NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS.

Circular for 1885.

The Committee on Bird Migration, during the first year of its
existence (1884), distributed six thousand circulars, and in reply
has received returns from more than a thousand observers. The
area over which these observers are scattered is co-extensive with
the boundaries of the inhabited portions of the North American
Continent, and includes parts of the West Indies, Central, and
South America. Stations now exist in every state in the Union,
and in every Territory excepting Nevada. Exclusive of Spanish
America, the extreme points from which reports have actually
been received will appear from the following statement : In the
East, the southernmost station is Sombrero Key, oft' Southern
Florida (latitude 24° 37') ; and the northernmost, Belle Isle, off'
Labrador (latitude 51° 53'). In the West, reports have come to
hand from Arizona and Southern California, and from Point Bar-
row, the most northerly point of Arctic Alaska (lat. 71° 18').
The easternmost station from which data have been received is
St. John’s, Newfoundland (west longitude 52° 45'), projecting
well into the Atlantic ; while on the lJacific the Committee has
observers at various points in California, Oregon. Washington,
and British Columbia.

Hence it appears that the migration stations of the American
Ornithologists’ Union, exclusive of those in Spanish America, are
sprinkled over 46° 41' of latitude (approximately three thousand
two hundred miles in a north and south direction), and 72° 15' of
longitude (approximately three thousand five hundred miles in an
east and west direction). The distance in a straight line between
the two most remote points (Sombrero Key and Point Barrow) is
about four thousand three hundred miles.

For convenience in collecting the enormous mass of material ac¬
cumulated by the Committee, the territory under investigation has
been divided into sixteen districts, each of which has been placed
under the immediate direction of a competent Superintendent.
The Districts, with their respective Superintendents, are : —

Alaska, Supt., John Murdoch, Smithsonian Inst., Washington, D. C.

North-west Territories, Supt., Ernest E. T. Seton, Assinaboia, via
Carberry, Manitoba.

Newfoundland, Supt., James P. Howlev, St. John’s, Newfoundland.

British Columbia, Supt., John Fannin, Burrard Inlet, British Colum¬
bia.

Manitoba. Supt., Prof. \V. W. Cooke, Moorhead, Minnesota.

Quebec and the Maritime Provinces, Supt., Montague Chamber-
- lain, St. John, New Brunswick.

Ontario, Supt., Thomas Mcllwraith, Hamilton, Ontario.

New England, Supt., John H. Sage, Portland, Conn.

Bird Migration.

[ January

1 18

Atlantic District (New York [excepting Long Island], Pennsylva¬
nia, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South
Carolina), Supt., Dr. A. K. Fisher, Sing Sing, New York.

Long Island, New York, Supt., William Dutcher, 231 West 128th St.,
New York City.

Middle-eastern District (Southern Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, West
Virginia, Kentucky and Tennessee east of the Tennessee River, Alabama,
Georgia, Florida), Supt., Dr. J. M. Wheaton, Columbus, Ohio.

Mississippi Valley District (Dakota. Minnesota, Wisconsin, North¬
ern Peninsula of Michigan, Nebraska, Iowa, Illinois, Kansas, Missouri,
Indian Territory, Arkansas, the small portions of Kentucky and Tennes¬
see west of the Tennessee River, Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi), Supt.,
Prof. W. W. Cooke, Moorhead, Minnesota.

Rocky Mountain District (Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Utah, Colo¬
rado, Arizona, New Mexico), Supt., Dr. Edgar A. Mearns, Camp Verde,
Arizona.

Pacific District (Washington, Oregon, California, Nevada), Supt.,
L. Belding, Stockton, California.

Light-house Division of North America, Supt., Dr. C. Hart Mer-
riam, Locust Grove, New York.

Light-house Division of Spanish America, Supt., L. S. Foster, 35
Pine Street, New York City.

Instructions to Collaborators.

The Committee particularly desires from each observer a brief
but careful description of the principal physical features, including
latitude, longitude, and altitude, of the locality which is the seat
of his observations.

The data collected may conveniently be arranged in three gen¬
eral classes : a. Ornithological Phenomena, b. Meteorological
Phenomena, c. Contemporary and Correlative Phenomena.

(a) Ornithological Phenomena.

Each observer is requested to prepare, at his earliest conven¬
ience, a complete list of the birds known to occur in the vicinity
of his Station, and to indicate (by the abbreviations enclosed in
parentheses) to which of the following five categories each species
pertains : —

1. Permanent Residents , or those that are found regularly
throughout the year (R).

2. Winter Visitants , or those that occur only during the winter
season, passing north in the spring (WV).

8. Transient Visitants, or those that occur only during the
migrations, in spring and fall (TV).

4. Summer Residents , or those that are known to breed, but
which depart southward before winter (SR).

5. Accidental Visitants, or stragglers from remote districts
(AV).

It is desirable also to indicate the relative abundance of the dif¬
ferent species, the terms to be employed for this purpose being :
Abundant, Common, Tolerably Common, Rare.

iSSj.]

Bird Migration.

II9

If you are in a position to observe the lines of flight of birds,
have you noticed whether or not such lines are influenced by the
topography of the country, and if so, to what extent?

if a mountain intercepts the line of flight, what kinds of birds
pass around it, and what kinds pass over it?

What localities in your neighborhood are sought as resting-
places by the various kinds of migrating birds? Can you give any
reason for this selection ?

What kinds ot birds generally move in flocks, and what kinds in
pairs or singly ?

Are you familiar with any kinds of birds in which the males and
females, and old and young, fly in separate flocks? In many spe¬
cies the males arrive in advance of the females, hence it is impor¬
tant to note the sex of the first comers, and the date at which the
opposite sex is first seen.

Have you observed from year to year any increase or decrease
in the numbers of any kind of bird known to you? If so, do you
attribute such change to altered conditions in the bird’s breeding-
grounds? If not, can you assign a cause?

Have you observed the increase or decrease of one species to
affect the numbers of another species? If so, can you explain the
fact ?

Has any kind disappeared altogether, and if so, can you assign
a cause for this disappearance ?

Among the birds which are now common about your station is
there an}' kind that was formerly rare or absent? If so, can 3011
explain the fact?

Among the birds which breed regularly in your vicinity have
you ever observed an individual which by7 some personal pecu¬
liarity (such as the presence of white or dark feathers where they
do not belong, or by some deformity) could readily be distinguished
from others of its kind? If so, has this bird returned to the same
place to nest year after year?

In recording arrivals and departures it is highly important to
distinguish between the movements of irregular stragglers, of the
advance guard or ‘van,’ and of the principal mass or ‘bulk’ of
the species. For this purpose observers are requested to note : —

1. When the species is first seen.

2. When it is next seen.

3. When it becomes common.

4. When the bulk departs.

5. When the last individual is seen.

In addition to the above data, which all observers are requested
to furnish, the Committee particularly desires exact records of
every increase and decrease in the numbers of a given species over
a given area ; for it is only by the knowledge of the daily7 fluctua¬
tions of the same species in the same place that the progress and
movements of a ‘flight,’ or ‘bird-wave,’ can be traced. Such data
can be contributed by experienced observers only, and in their
procurement much time must be spent in the field. During the
progress of the migratory movement the observer should go over

I 20

Bird Migration.

[January

the same ground day after day, and, if possible, both early in the
morning and late in the afternoon. He should visit woodlands,
thickets of dense undergrowth, and open .fields ; and, if possible,
both swamp and upland should fall under his daily scrutiny.

The above may be regarded as essential data. There are many
other noteworthy details that bear more or less directly upon the
complicated problems’ involved in the study of migration. Among
such may be mentioned the bodily condition of tiie bird (whether
fat or lean), the moult, and the periods of song. The time of
mating, when observed, should always be recorded.

The Committee desires positive information concerning the food
of all birds.

(l>) Meteorological Phenomena.

The Committee desires information upon : —

1. The direction and force of the wind.

2. The direction, character and duration of storms.

3. The general conditions of the atmosphere, including rain¬
fall.

4. The succession of marked warm and cold waves, including
a record of all sudden changes of temperature.

(c) Contemporary and Correlative Phenomena.

The Committee desires that the data under this head be as full
and complete as possible, and requests exact information upon : —

1. The date at which the first toad is seen.

2. The date at which the first frog is heard.

3. The date at which the first tree-toad or ‘peeper’ is heard.

4. -The dates at which certain mammals and reptiles enter
upon and emerge from the state of hibernation.

5. The dates at which various insects are first seen.

6. The dates of the flowering of various plants.

7. The dates of the leafing and falling of the leaves of vari¬
ous trees and shrubs.

8. The dates of the breaking up and the disappearance of the

ice in rivers and lakes in spring, and of the freezing over of the

same in the fall.

It must not be supposed, because the Committee asks for a
large amount of information upon a variety of subjects, that
meager or isolated records are not desired. Quite the contrary is
true. Comparatively few of the observers are ornithologists, or
even bird collectors, the great majority being intelligent farmers,
tradesmen, and light-keepers. Those who know only the com¬
monest birds, such as the Robin, Bluebird, Bobolink, Martin,
Hummingbird, and Chimmey Swift, can furnish important data,
and their services are eagerly sought.

C. Hart Merriam, M. D.,

Chairman of Committee on Migration ,
Locust Grove. Lewis County ,

' New York.

THE AUK:

A QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF

ORNITHOLOGY.

vol. ii. April, 1885. No. 2.

WINTER NOTES FROM NEW MEXICO.

BY CHARLES F. BATCHELDER.

In December, 1882, I had the good fortune to pass three weeks
at Las Vegas Hot Springs, New Mexico, and though at that
season the species of birds met with were few in number, yet as
most of them were quite abundant, I think some account of my
observations may not be without* interest. The following notes
refer to the time between December 4 and 23.

The Hot Springs are in the northern part of New Mexico, in
San Miguel County, six miles northwest of Las Vegas, and are
situated in the canon of the Gallinas River, just above where that
stream emerges from the foot-hills of the mountains of the Spanish
Range — the extreme southeastern range of the Rockies — into the
elevated plains that are characteristic of a great part of the Terri¬
tory. The town of Las Vegas, which is out on the plains, has
an altitude above the sea of 6452 feet, while that of the Hot Springs
is 6768 feet, the surrounding hills reaching several hundred feet
higher. The climate is delightful at this time of year. The dry
air and cloudless sky allow the warm rays of the sun to have
their full effect, and heavy clothing is quite unnecessary, often
unbearable. One can sit still on a warm sunny hillside with the
birds singing around him, and look across at the shady side of the
canon opposite, yet white with snow that fell several weeks
before, while on still, shaded pools on the stream below a supply

122

Batchelder. Winter Notes from Nezv Mexico.

[April

of ice is being harvested for the use of the hotels at the Hot
Springs. The nights are quite cool, so that a thick skim of ice
is formed nearly every night on water that is not in motion, but
it disappears like magic before the morning sun. During the
latter part of December there were several slight snowstorms,
but the hot sun and dry air soon left no traces of them save in
shaded spots out of reach of the sunshine. In the middle of the
winter there is doubtless some severe cold, as would naturally be
expected at such an altitude.

Just below the Hot Springs the canon of the Gallinas gradually
broadens out, and the hills become lower and farther apart before
they finally sink into the plains and the canon comes to an end.
The stream itself first runs between low bluffs where it has cut
its way through a small plateau of superficial gravel deposits,
and then spreads itself out over a shallow, stony bed where the
valley widens out as it approaches the broad plains that stretch
indefinitely to the south and east, broken only here and there
by some outlying low hill whose flat-topped ridge and steep,
deeply eroded sides give it the appearance at a distance of
a huge fortification.

In the lower part of its course the flow of the river is impeded
in various places by rude dams made out of brush by the Mexi¬
can inhabitants of several liitle adobe villages. Small ponds are
thus formed from which run ditches carrying the water to irrigate
their outlying fields.

Above the springs the canon narrows, and winds along for
many miles shut in by steep, rounded hills, oil whose barren
sides only a scanty vegetation obtains a foothold among the
gravel and loose stones and occasional ledges that form their sur¬
face. These hills are here and there varied by perpendicular
cliffs that tower above the stream, while every now and then one
comes upon a narrow ravine or side-canon that winds its way
back between the hills, gradually rising and becoming narrower
and with steeper sides as it gets farther from the main canon
until it ends high up among the hills. These ravines are usually
dry, though in some a feeble little stream struggles to exist.

The canon itself varies greatly in its width. In some places
the hills crowd down upon it until there is hardly room for a
footpath between the brawling stream and the steep rocky sides.
Again the hills retreat, and the canon opens out into a little

t SSs . ]

BatciieLder, Winter Notes from Neiv Mexico.

I 2 3

valley whose level bottom here and there shows signs of cultiva¬
tion, forcibly reminding one of the scarcity of land available for
such uses. These openings are of small extent, seldom covering
more than a few acres.

Through these level stretches the stream ripples along gently
over its stony bed. Here it is about twenty feet wide, and is
shallow, hardly more than a foot in depth, but in the narrower
places it becomes more of a mountain torrent, and leaps noisily
over the rocks, with clear, deep pools, and here and there a water¬
fall.

The bottom of the canon, in places where it broadens out, bears
patches of tall weeds and clumps of low scrub oaks, but there are
few trees worthy of the name, except on the hills, which are
wooded with a scattering growth of various species of Conifers;,
of which Pinus ponderosa , P. edulls , Juniperus occidentalism
and Abies donglasi are the commonest, named in the order of
their abundance. Pinus ponderosa far outnumbers the others,
and is most important, furnishing the chief supply of timber and
firewood. On the more open parts of the hills there are low
scrubby oaks growing mostly in thick clumps.

Passing the various hot springs that come boiling to the sur¬
face at numerous points along the stream, a short walk up the
Canon brings you to one of the openings where the retreating
hills leave a level stretch of a few acres. Among the thick
clumps of low scrub oaks that are scattered over it. or in the
large patches of tall dead weeds, I was sure to find companies of
Juticos {pf/nico oregonus and J. caniceps ) busily searching the
ground for fallen seeds. Of all the species that I met with, the
J uncos were decidedly the most abundant. They were to be
seen everywhere ; it was hard to find a spot they did not like ;
but these were their favorite haunts. Among the pines on the
hills, or in the thickets of willows down the river, they were in
small parties, but here they were in large flocks. They moved
about a good deal, straggling along one or two at a time, though
occasionally a number would fly in a tolerably compact flock.
They were shyer and more restless than jf. hy emails, and
quicker in their motions. They were noisier, too, and their
notes seemed louder, but less harsh. I noticed no difference
between the habits of the two species. They were always
together in the same flocks, and seemed on the best of terms.

1 24

Batchelder, Winter Notes from New Mexico.

[April

On my arrival (December 4) J. caniceps was much the more
numerous, there being three or four of them to one y. oregonus ,
but as the time went on its numbers diminished, while those of
y. oregonus increased, until by the middle of the month far the
greater part were of the latter species. I think they were all
slowly migrating, and that y. caniceps went first. As its ranks
were gradually thinned out, fresh arrivals of y. oregonus filled the
vacant places, so that their abundance on the whole remained
about the same. Their numbers varied a little, however, from
time to time ; some days there were more Juncos than on others.
December 20, in particular, I noticed them in unusually large
numbers. Whether this had any connection with the fact that
we had a snowstorm the following day, is one of those things
that unfortunately cannot be proved.

These great stretches of weeds were favorite resorts, too, of the
Pine Finches ( Chrysomitris pinus ) ; frequently at my approach a
flock of perhaps fifty would rise from the weeds where they had
been completely hidden as they clung to them feasting on their
multitude of seeds. Then for a long time they would circle
around overhead, sometimes going as far as the further side
of the canon, again confining themselves to a much smaller
orbit, their circles varying from a hundred yards to a quarter
of a mile in diameter. Finally they would settle in some other
weed patch a short distance off. or even in a pine on the edge
of the hills, unless they decided that their suspicions of impend¬
ing danger were well founded, and so disappeared behind some
hill as they sought another feeding ground elsewhere. Some¬
times the flock as it circled round and round would break up
into two, one of which would, after a while, either depart to
some more distant place or return and mingle with the other.

In crossing these level stretches, the Gallinas, in its hurrying
course, has cut its channel down through the superficial deposits,
of which they are formed, to a considerable depth, and along the
banks thus made there grows a fringe of bushes in which I
occasionally found a solitary Song Sparrow (J Iclospiza fasciata
montana ) that dodged back and forth with a restless shyness that
made its life by no means an easy sacrifice. Here, too, one day
(December 12) 1 came across an immature Zonotrichia inter¬
media. the only one of this species met with during my stay.
Possibly it was merely a straggler there, for a bird naturally of

•88S-]

Batchelder, Winter Notes from New Mexico.

I25

such gregarious habits would hardly be contented to lead a
solitary life, were it possible for it to find others of its kind
anywhere in the neighborhood.

Following up the canon farther I was often tempted to turn
aside and climb the steep pine-covered hills that border it. Here
my first greetings were frequently the harsh screams of a small
party of Long-crested Jays ( Cyanocitta stelleri macrolopha )
that were lurking warily among the pines. If I had come very
quietly I sometimes found them feeding on the ground, but, ever
on the alert, at the slightest alarm they would take to the shelter
of the thick upper branches of the pines, where at their leisure
they could silently dodge from one tree to another and disappear
over the hills, easily distancing pursuit, for, in the thin atmos¬
phere of that altitude, chasing birds up hills which offer a footing
ot loose stones, is no easy matter. If, however, they have not
been frightened, they will stay about in the pines, giving one
glimpses of their brilliant plumage as they try to satisfy their
curiosity about the invader of their domain, while they fill him
with amazement at the noisiness and variety of their harsh and
penetrating notes. They are more often to be found on the top
of the ridges than at the bottom of the ravines, and seem to
prefer places where the scattered pines grow most thickly, and
also trees that are not very high and whose branches are dense.
Occasionally they take to the pinons at the head of a ravine, and
I have even found them in a clump of scrub oaks high up on the
hills.

Like others of their family, when the flock is moving from
place to place they never fly all at (nice, but go quietly one at a
time at short intervals, as if they did not like to attract too much
attention to their movements. In crossing a ravine, or in any
prolonged flight, they are apt to set their wings, and sail like
a Canada Jay.

Their commonest cry is a whee-eesh , long drawn out, rather
wheezy, and with a penetrating character suggestive of the Cat¬
bird's cry. Another note, not heard as often, is one repeated
several times, that sounds like a weak, harsh imitation of the
wake-up of Colaptes auratus.

They have one noticeable habit, especially when wounded, to
alighting on a lower branch of a pine close to the trunk, and
then hopping up from branch to branch, with short pauses, until

Batchelder, Winter Notes from New Mexico.

| April

I 2 6

lost to sight in the top of the tree. Like all Jays they are of by
no means confiding nature, and though not extremely shy, are
very wary. When they see you coming they will peer at you
suspiciously through the branches, and then very likely conceal
themselves, or prudently take flight.

Walking on across the hills, I did not often go far without
coming upon a troop of Nuthatches roving about among the
pines. There would be from half a dozen to a dozen or more
Pygmy Nuthatches ( Sitta pygmcea ) in the party, and usually one
or two of their Slender-billed cousins ( Sitta carolinensis acu-
leata) , frequently several Mountain Chickadees ( Parus mon-
tanus ), and occasionally a Creeper or two ( Certhia familiaris).
Two or three times I found a Gairdner’s Woodpecker ( Picus
pubescens gairdneri ) that had joined the company. The
Pygmy Nuthatches, though the smallest, not only excelled in
numbers, but were by far the most self-asserting and noisy.
They were very active, moving about rapidly among the
branches of the pines in their search for food. Their motions
had much more of the Chickadee character and less of the
Creeper than I have seen in the other American Nuthatches.
They frequented chiefly the smaller branches, flying from branch
to branch, perching like any other bird, swinging and bending
about to reach their food like a Chickadee, and not often running
along the trunks and branches cfc la Certhia. Occasionally one
would stop and hammer on a branch like a Woodpecker, making
a noise that seemed out of proportion to so small a bird. Indeed
it could be heard at quite a little distance, and might almost be
mistaken for the tapping of one of the smaller Woodpeckers.

Thev uttered their notes almost unceasingly, and the where¬
abouts of a flock could be easily discovered some distance ofl’.
None of their notes have the harsh hank- like character of the
other Nuthatches. The one most constantly to be heard was a
chip that had a very Sparrow-like sound This was usually
uttered several times in quick succession. Once one indulged in
an attempt at song. The individual notes were much like the
ordinary chip , but the general effect was a not nnpleasing war¬
ble. He uttered mere snatches of his song, however, as if he
were aware that it was out of season, and as if some passing-
thought of spring time had merely recalled it to his mind.

Thev are excitable little birds, and showed much concern
when I had shot one of their company, scolding me vigorously

<SS5.]

Batchelder, Winter Notes from Nevj Mexico.

127

for my evil doing. Possibly sympathy for their companion was
not the only cause of their excitement, for an unsuccessful shot
aroused a great deal of noise among them for a few moments.

In their habits and notes the Slender-billed Nuthatches seemed
to differ in no way from .S', carolinensis , except that their cry
was more plaintive and querulous, and lacked the resonant twang
of the eastern bird.

The Mountain Chickadees behaved much like P. atricapillus ,
but their motions were quicker, and they seemed more restless,
seldom staying long in one spot; and, perhaps for this reason,
they did not appear to be as tame. Their notes are quite similar,
but by no means identical. They have a phe-be much like that
of the Blackcap, but feebler, harsher, and without its melodious
qualities. They utter a deb,- deb. that is weaker and less resonant
than the corresponding notes of P. atricapillus , and a chifik-a-
cheb-chee much like the other’s chick-a-deb-deb , but like their
other notes differing by being rather feebler and harsher.

The Gairdner’s Woodpeckers were not abundant. Besides
those met with in company with the Nuthatches and Chick¬
adees on the hills, I saw only two others. These were among
the low willows bordering the river below the mouth of the
canon. However, they were commoner than Harris’s Wood¬
pecker ( Picus villosus harrisi ) , of which I saw not more than
two or three altogether. They were on the highest parts of the
hills, and were solitary birds. The onlv other Woodpecker met
with was Colaptes mexicanus , which, though more numerous
than Harris’s, was far from abundant. I saw perhaps half a
dozen during my three week’s stay, all of them on the hills.

The diet of most of these birds included but a small proportion
of insects. An examination of the stomach of every indi¬
vidual shot showed that both species of Nuthatches fed chiefly
on vegetable substances, probablv the seeds of the pines. They
ate sparingly of insects, but the frequent presence of gravel in
their stomachs showed that their habitual food was vegetable.
In Parus montanus every stomach examined contained seeds or
other vegetable substances, and in nearly every case some gravel.
In two out of five there were some insects in addition to the
other food. Even the Creepers ate more largely of seeds than of
insects, and a Harris’s Woodpecker had filled his stomach with
fragments apparently either of pirion seeds or acorns, with the
addition of but a few insects. Whether this diet was due to

128

Batchelder, Winter Notes from New Mexico.

[April

preference or to a scarcity of suitable insects is a question for the
entomologists.

On the top of one of the smaller hills one day (December 20)
I came upon a small flock of Crossbills. They were scattered
about among the upper branches of the pines, where they were
busily feeding among a flock of Nuthatches and Chickadees.
I secured one bright male, but the others took fright and were
off, and I did not see them again. This one proves on compari¬
son to be Loxia curvirostris bendirei , and doubtless his com.
panions were of the same race.

I was following up one day the side of one of the ravines that
run from the main canon back among the hills, when, as I came
to a point where the increasing steepness of its sides showed
that I had nearly reached its head, I had my first sight of that
strange and interesting bird, Townsend’s Solitaire ( Myiades -
tes townsendi) . He was sitting motionless on one of the lower
branches of a pine close to the trunk, and was singing. As he
sat there he had somewhat the air of a Hermit Thrush. I could
not long resist the desire for a closer acquaintance, and when I
shot him he flew, wounded, and sailed with outstretched wings
for some distance along the hillside. On the wing he bore such
a striking resemblance to a Mockingbird, that my companion was
completely deceived, and exclaimed in surprise, “You’ve shot a
Mockingbird.”

Their song I heard several times. It is not loud and striking,
but is clear, sweetly modulated, and full of expression, and is
long, sustained. In its character it reminded me of the Blue¬
bird's ( Si alia si alls) warble, while occasional notes were sug¬
gestive of the Thrushes’ songs. It sounds as if it came from a
distance even when the singer is quite near. Almost all that I saw
or heard were high up on the steep sides of the ravines where they
were narrow and deep. The steep slopes were covered with
loose stones and gravel, with occasional ledges of rock, and bore
scattered pines and patches of scrub oak, and near the top.
pinons and occasional cedars.

Higher up on the top of the hills are the favorite haunts of the
Spurred Towhees [ Pipilo maciilatus megalonyx ), a species
which occurs in but small numbers. Those I found were in
large clumps of almost impenetrable scrub oaks, where they kept
on or near the ground and were consequently not easy to obtain.

•( To be continued.)

ISSS.]

Allen on Sexual Selection and the Nesting of Birds.

I 29

SEXUAL SELECTION AND THE NESTING OF
BIRDS.

BY J. A. ALLEN.

Mr. Henry Dixon, in a paper ‘On the Protective Colour of
Eggs,’* follows Mr. A. R. Wallace in dividing “birds into two
great classes — one in which the sexes are alike and of conspicu¬
ous or showy colours, and which nidificate in a covered site ; and
the other in which there is a marked difference between the
colour of the sexes, the male being showy and the female sombre,
and which nidificate in an open site” ; and he subdivides them
“into several minor groups, which will include all the ‘exceptions’
to either great rule.” Having once written on this subjectf
I return to it reluctantly, and only because there seems to be
something still to say on the other side.

Mr. Dixon’s first group consists of “Birds in which the plu¬
mage of the male is bright and conspicuous in colour, and that of
the female dull and sombre, and which nidificate in open sites.”
Under this heading, in referring to the fact that “the plumage of
the female bird is in a great many cases far more sombre than
that of the male,” he says: “Until recently the cause of this
phenomenon was never dreamed of. It is an ascertained fact that
the colour of many female birds is connected in no small degree
with their mode of nidijication, and that the sitting bird is pro¬
tected by the harmony which exists between its own sober plu¬
mage and the colour of the surroundings of its nesting- site. Let
us glance over the nesting-habits of some of our best-known birds,
and learn the working of this law.” As examples of this great
group he cites certain Pheasants and Grouse, various Ducks, the
Blackbird ( Merida merula) and Ring-Ouzel (Af. torquata) ,
several Finches and the Stonechat ( Pratincola rubicola ), in
which ‘the diversity of plumage between the sexes’ shields the
female during the season of nidification. In most of the
instances cited this is eminently true, but there are glaring excep¬
tions. Indeed, it will readily occur to ornithologists that several

* In Seebohm's ‘History of British Birds,’ Vol. II, Introduction, pp. x-xxxii.
t See paper entitled ‘An Inadequate “Theory of Birds' Nests," ’ in Bull. Nutt. Orn.
Club, Vol. Ill, 1878, pp. 23-32.

1^0 Allen on Sexual Selection and the Nesting of Birds.

[April

species of birds of the groups here instanced — species too in which
the sexual difference of plumage is at a maximum — resort to
hollow trees for greater safety, as is the case with the Wood
and Mandarin Ducks (genus A/x), the Buffle-heads (genus Clan-
gula ), and the Sheldrakes Merginae). In other cases, as in our
brilliantly colored Grosbeaks, where the female is dull-colored
as compared with the male, the male shares in the work of in¬
cubation, and is even so indiscreet as to indulge in ecstatic out¬
bursts of song while sitting on the eggs.

Mr. Dixon’s second group consists of “Birds in which the
plumage of both sexes is showy or brilliant in colour, and which
nidificate in open nests.” “This group,” Mr. Dixon says, “forms
one of those exceptions which, at first sight, appears seriously
to affect the reliability of the whole theory” ; but he believes “it
can be shown that the birds included in it may possibly secure
their safety in other ways.” Unquestionably this is the case ; at
least they appear to get on quite as well as do the plain plumaged
open nest builders. It certainly is true that, as our author states,
many “brightly plumaged birds are safe enough in the locali¬
ties where they build their nests.” Mr. Dixon even suggests that
“Some gaily attired female birds may have no special enemies
against which to guard — their brilliant or showy dress is no dis¬
advantage to them, as is the case with many conspicuous insects ;
and this fact may in itself explain why it is that they have
assumed such tints.” He even supposes that as some brilliant
females may have become so through natural selection, the}' may
have altered the form of their nest from an open to a covered
structure ; “and this would explain many of the apparent excep¬
tions to the general rule that gaily dressed female birds sit in
covered nests.” Unfortunately this is not susceptible of proof,
while the probabilities seem quite against the supposition. It
is true, as he adds, that we should “also take into consider¬
ation what colours are showy in certain haunts,” — that while
they would be “very conspicuous in some places they may be
especially protective in others.”

The third and last group of open nest builders instanced con¬
sists of those few species “in which the male is less brilliant
than the female,” as the Phalaropes, Dotterel, Emu, etc.

Passing to the second great division, ‘in which the nests are
concealed,’ the first group mentioned is composed of “Birds in

iSSs.j

Allen on Sexual Selection and the Nesting of Birds.

I3I

which both sexes are brightly coloured and which rear their
young in holes or covered nests.” As British representatives of
this group are cited the Kingfisher, the Woodpeckers, the Tits,
Gold-crests (Kinglets), and Nuthatches, the “showy Swallows
and Martins,” the “gaudy Rollers and brilliant Bee-eaters,” the
Hoopoe, Wall-Creeper, ’and Common Sheldrake, in which both
sexes are equally conspicuous and nest in holes. Reference is
also made to the American Orioles (Icteridae) and several Aus¬
tralian birds -

The next group consists of “Birds in which both sexes are dull
in colour, and which build covered nests from motives of safety
other than concealment.” Respecting this group Mr. Dixon
says, “I do not think that the fact of dull-coloured females sitting
in covered nests can be taken as a serious objection to the law
of bright-coloured females sitting in covered nests” : and cites
the many other obvious advantages mentioned by Darwin in his
■Descent of Man’ (Vol. II, p. 168), as protection from enemies
or the elements. These advantages are in man)' cases so evident
that it seems unnecessary to call in the far-fetched explanation
that plain-colored birds nest in this way because they ‘may’ have
descended •from some showy ancestor that built in a covered
nest.’ A number of instances are then cited showing the advan¬
tages other than concealment of a covered or domed nest, or
of nesting in holes in trees or banks. Other instances of cov¬
ered nests (presently to be cited) might have been added to show
that such nests are often constructed to serve especially as pro¬
tection from enemies.

The next group mentioned is that of “Birds in which the
female is duller in colour than the male, and which nidificate in
covered nests” ; and which is cited as furnishing “convincing
proofs of the theory of sexual selection”( !). Vet after mention¬
ing various species and genera of birds in which ‘the female
is far less brilliant than the male,’ it is suggestively admit¬
ted, “nevertheless she sits in a covered nest, although we
cannot see any valid reason why she should require concealment
du ring the period of incubation ; in all cases her colours are dull
and well adapted for safety in an open nest.” Among the
•possible explanations’ suggested is the very rational one that the
domed nests ••may be for the purpose of shielding the sitting
bird and its charge from cold, or rain, or from some special

Allen on Sexual Selection and the Nesting of Birds.

[April

*32

enemies.” Again, it serves to conceal the eggs, where they are,
as in many cases, conspicuous ; and also allows the gaudily plu-
maged male bird to assist in incubation ; yet this also happens
when the nestis an open one. ‘‘If we grant,” says Mr. Dixon,
“that these domed nests are built for other purposes than con¬
cealment of the sitting female, it is easy to explain the great
difference of colour between the sexes. The more brilliant
colours of the males have been obtained by sexual selection” ;
and proceeds to cite cases where the domed nest is evidently not
built for the purpose of concealing the female. This dictum,
however, appears to be the only ‘proof ’ educed from the consid¬
eration of this group, which furnishes such “convincing proofs
of the truths of the theory of natural selection.” The author
then considers ‘Birds’ Nests’ and ‘Birds’ Eggs, studied in relation
to their colour.’ The last subject is treated at some length in a
thoroughly rational and admirable manner, but respecting ‘Birds’
Nests’ we beg to offer one or two criticisms. But first let us
return to the first part of the subject, the coloration of female
birds in respect to the manner of nesting.

In my former paper on this subject I ventured to say, ‘“The
most surprising thing about Mr. Wallace’s ‘Theory of Bird’s Nests’
is its inadequacy,, and its irrelevancy to the facfs it was proposed
to explain” ; and further attention to the subject only serves to
confirm my conviction that the above statement was not incon¬
siderately made. Mr. Wallace says that the ‘first thing we are
taught’ by a consideration of the facts involved, is “that there is
no incapacity in the female sex among birds to receive the same
bright hues and strongly contrasted tints with which their part¬
ners are so often decorated, since whenever they are protected
and concealed during the period of incubation they are similarly
adorned."* In point of fact, however, this statement is far from
correct, for it often happens that where the males are especially
brilliantly colored and the females are exceptionally dull-colored,
they either build domed nests or nest in places of concealment,
as in the Superb Warblers (genus Malurus ) of Australia, and the
great family of Suubirds (Nectariniidaj) , etc. ;t while on the

* The italics are Mr. Wallace's own.

| Numerous individual cases may be cited among many other families, where the
rule is an open nest, and the exceptions of concealed or domed nests are presented bv
species in which the sexual contrast in the color of the birds is greater than among their
near allies which build an open nest.

iSSj.J

Allen on Sexual Selection and the Nesting of Birds.

133

other hand nearly as many birds (probably fully as manyi propor¬
tionately to their whole number) in which both sexes are among
the dullest plumaged of all birds, build a domed nest or nest in
holes. Take, for example, the great family of Wrens (Troglody-
tidae) , and especially the great South American family Dendro-
colaptidae, particularly its subfamilies Furnariinae and Synallaxinae,
in which the species as a rule build a domed nest, either of mud or
sticks. Some of these nests, as those of the genus Synallaxis and
its allies, are among the most remarkable examples of bird archi¬
tecture, being immense structures (compared with the size of the
builders) of sticks, which they enter bv narrow, winding passage¬
ways, or through long tubes of interlocked thorny twigs, the whole
structure being obviously contrived for the purpose of keeping,
out enemies. Even birds of the genera allied to Malurus , al¬
ready mentioned, consisting of species in which both sexes have
plain and -protective’ colors, also build domed nests. Even among
the Swallows and Martins it is the species having the plainest
colors which build in holes in banks, or in the otherwise most
concealed and protected situations. Again, the Creepers (genus
CertJiia) are sexually alike in color, and of eminently plain and
protective tints, yet they nest in holes. The Nuthatches and
Jits, at least many of them, are no more conspicuous in respect
to coloration than perhaps the average of birds which build
open nests. In the great familv of American Warblers (Mnio-
tiltida:), one of its plainest members, the Ovenbird (Slur us
auricapilhts) , and one of the few species of the family in which
the sexes are alike, builds a domed nest, contrary to the rule
prevailing in the family. In short, scarcely a family or subfam¬
ily among Passerine birds can be named in which we do not
meet with cases of just this character, some of them presenting
many such. Consequently it is not the rule that birds which
breed in domed nests or in places of concealment are brightly
or gayly colored, and that “whenever they [the females] are
protected and concealed during the period of incubation they
are similarly adorned ” (i.e., with “the same bri ght h ues and
strongly contrasted tints of their partners”).

In view of the real facts in the case, it seems not rash to assume
that concealment of the female during the period of incubation
has nothing, or at least very little, to do with this method of nidi-
fication, since it not only does not bear out the theory erected

I ii Allen on Sexual Selection and the Nesting oj Birds.

[April

upon a misapprehension of the facts in the case, but is suscept¬
ible of a far more rational explanation. As already noted, Mr.
Dixon frankly admits that in the case of dull-colored birds which
build covered nests or which nest in holes, “other advantages
may be gained irrespective of concealment,” and concealment in
such cases is considered as unnecessary. These advantages may
be in some cases shelter from rain, protection from the sun, or
sudden 'changes of temperature, or greater security from enemies,
or concealment of the eggs, which are generally, under such cir¬
cumstances of nidification, white, or at least conspicuous in
coloration. Here, it seems to me, comes in the only function of
concealment — namely, that of the eggs rather than the sitting
female.

In my former paper on this subject I referred to this latter
point in the following words: “In conclusion, I desire to call
attention to an interesting coincidence between the manner of
nesting among birds and the color of the eggs, and one so striking
that it is almost surprising that some ingenious theorist has not
seized upon it as a basis for a ‘theory of birds’ nests,’ either inde¬
pendently or as a modification of that proposed by Mr. Wallace.
It curiously happens that nearly all the birds that nest in holes,
either in the ground or in trees, lay white eggs, embracing, fqr
instance, all the Woodpeckers, Kingfishers. Bee-eaters, Rollers.
Hornbills, Barbets. Puff-Birds, Trogons. Toucans, Parrots. Par¬
oquets, and Swifts, while only occasionally are the eggs white in
species which build an open nest. In only two or three groups
of land birds, co-ordinate with those just named, that build an
open nest, are the eggs white, namely, the Owls, Humming-
Birds, and Pigeons. On the other hand, in only two or three
small groups of species that nidificate in holes are the eggs
speckled or in any way colored. There is, in fact, a closer rela¬
tionship, or rather a more uniform correlation, between the color
of the eggs and the manner of nesting than between the color of
the female parent and the concealment or exposure of the nest.
There are, however, here apparently too many exceptions to
bring this coincidence into the relation of cause and effect."*
Further examination of the matter, however, shows that the
coincidence of white eggs and a covered or concealed nest is
much more general than the above quotation indicates, the ex-

* Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, III, p. 32.

1885.] Allen on Sexual Selection and the Nesting o f Birds. \ f ^

ceptions to the rule being very rare ; for to the above groups
must be added the hundreds of species of Passerine birds which
build a domed nest, as the Malurine birds, the Weaver Birds,
the Munias, the Willow-warblers, the Sunbirds, the Pittas, the
Tailor Birds, the great Synallaxinine series, and many others.
In all these cases the eggs as a rule are pure white, and when
deviating from this are simply pale bluish white, or white with
a few minute specks, or lustrous white speckled with reddish, in
in such a way as in nowise to render the eggs less conspicuous
than if pure white. Air. Dixon, in his paper now under notice,
has called attention to the same facts, and commenting on this
coincidence savs, “This law is almost universal.*

If we pass to water birds, we find many of the Petrels nesting
in holes and laying white eggs ; and that the Ducks and Grebes
lay white or nearly white eggs, and, though building an open
nest, cover them on leaving them ; and. it may be added, the same
is true of many Pheasants and Partridges.

There are, on the other hand, birds which lay white eggs in an
open nest, but the number Is few in comparison with those which
lay white eggs in nests affording concealment, or colored eggs in
open nests. Again, some eggs laid in open nests are intensely
white in ground-color, with markings which tend to make them
more conspicuous rather than contribute to concealment. Such
are the eggs of most of the great group of Tyrant Flycatchers ot
America. Of species laying white eggs in open nests, the
Pigeons and the Hummingbirds are prominent examples, embrac¬
ing as they do a multitude of species. To this list may be added
a few ground-nesting Hawks and Owls which lay white, or at
least whitish, eggs, and the Herons, Storks, Pelicans, and Cor¬
morants. In respect to these exceptions, it may be said that the
Tyrant Flycatchers are especially watchful of their nests and
courageous in their defense, and succeed in driving away even
predacious birds greatly exceeding them in size. The Pigeons
and some Goatsuckers, as Air. Dixon suggests, build a very

* He adds, however, as a part of the same sentence, “and, curiously enough, white
eggs are correlated to a great extent with the brilliant plumage of the bird ; for we
have already seen how so many of these showy birds breed in covered nests.” This
latter fact, however, loses much of its significance when we remember that nearly as
many other birds of equally brilliant plumage lay colored eggs in open nests, and also
that nearly as many dull-colored birds as bright-colored ones lay white eggs in nests
which afford them concealment.

I Allen on Sexual Selection and the Nesting of Birds.

[April

slight and inconspicuous nest, and, as a rule in dense cover. He
also adds, very pertinently, respecting the Herons, Cormorants,
Pelicans, and Storks, that in these cases it is quite evident “that
the birds by there own prowess alone shield their eggs from clan¬
ger ; besides, most of these birds are gregarious, and are well
able to beat off any enemy that is likely to approach, if not singly,
by uniting for the purpose, so that it is of no special advantage
for them to conceal their eggs.”

In respect to spotted eggs, laid in covered nests, in which the
color is as much ‘protective’ in character as in the case of their
allies which lay in open nests, they usually belong, it may be
stated, to groups which as a rule breed in open nests, as the
Magpie, for example, among the Corvidas.

As a rule, spotted eggs are laid in open nests, and are in most
cases ‘protective’ in coloration, as is the case generally with
ground-nesting birds, in which the tints of the eggs often striking¬
ly harmonize with their surroundings. In the case of tree-nesting
species, the color of the eggs is less ‘protective’ ; but the position
of the nest is in a measure an element of safety, at least in respect
to non-scansorial ememies, like many of the smaller mammals,
which prey more or less upon the eggs or nestlings of ground¬
nesting birds.

It is therefore evident that the color of the eggs has an intimate
relation to the manner of nesting, white eggs as a rule being-
laid in covered nests or concealed nesting-sites. But a distinc¬
tion should be made in respect, to different kinds of covered nests,
in reference to the matter of security against enemies. The bulky
nests of the Synallaxince, composed of coarse, interlocked, often
thorny sticks and twigs, or the globular mud nests, the walls
of which become of a brick-like hardness, of the species of
Furnarius , may well be classed, on the ground of protection
against enemies, with nests built in excavations in trees or in the
earth, while the loosely constructed domed nest can scarcely
serve otherwise than for concealment of the eggs, or young, or
the sitting bird. The large size of such nests, however, must
sometimes render them a too conspicuous object to give any real
advantage, but in other cases, and generally when placed on the
ground, the nest itself is artfully concealed. In regard to nesting
in holes, in trees or the earth, the object gained is obviously pro¬
tection in the broader sense rather than concealment of the female

1SS5.]

Allen on Sexual Selection and the Nesting of Birds.

137

during incubation, on account of her bright colors. It seems
therefore needless and wholly gratuitous to resort to any theory
of sexual selection to account for the diverse methods of nest¬
building among birds. Really, however, it is not the sitting
bird, in the case of open nests built in trees, whether she be bright
or dull-colored, or the contents of the nests, whether eggs or
nestlings, that lead to its discovery so much as the si/e and con¬
spicuousness of the nest itself. Neither is the sitting bird herself
so much in danger as her charge, be it either eggs or nestlings.
The chief enemies of tree-nesting birds are squirrels, monkeys,
other aboreal mammals, and nest-robbing birds, to all of
which the nestling birds, particularly if very young, are as
welcome as the eggs, and in general they are much less conspic¬
uous objects than are either the eggs or the sitting female.

Now a word on another point. Mr. Wallace, and after him
Mr. Dixon and others, in discusing the question How do young
birds learn to build their first nest? claim that ‘instinct’ has noth¬
ing to do with the matter, — that the}' learn by observation and
are guided by memory ! Says Mr. Wallace: ‘‘It has, however,
been objected that observation, imitation, or memory, can have
nothing to do with a bird’s architectural powers, because the
young birds which in England are born in May or June, will pro¬
ceed in the following April or May to build a nests as perfect and
as beautiful as that in which it was hatched, although it could
never have seen one built. But surely the young birds before
they left the nest had ample opportunities of observing its form ,
its size , its position, the materials of which it was constructed,
and the manner in which those materials were arranged. Memory
would retain these observations till the following spring, when the
materials would come in their way during their daily search for
food, and it seems highly probable that the older birds would
begin building first, and that those born the preceding summer
would follow their example, learning from them how the founda¬
tions of the nest were laid and the materials put together. Again
we have no right to assume that young birds generally pair
together,” etc. Mr. Dixon restates the case in much the same
way. Alluding to ‘blind instinct’ as a factor in the case, he says :
“To credit the bird with such instinct, which because it seems
so self-evident is taken to be matter of fact, is to admit that it

I Allen on Sexual Selection and the Nesting of Birds. [April

posesses intellectual powers infinitely superior to those of man ;
whilst the evidence that can be gathered on the subject all goes
to show that its intellectual powers are of precisely the same kind
as man’s, but some of them, of course, are infinitely inferior in
degree, whilst others are unquestionably superior.” He assumes
that imitation , memory , and hereditary habit, ‘play the minor
parts.’ “To credit birds,” he says, “with such marvellous power
as blind and infallible instinct in building their nests would be to
place them far beyond man himself in intelligence, and allot to
them a faculty which is superhuman .... A bird’s intellectual
powers advance towards maturity much more quickly than in the
human species. A young bird three or four days old is capable
of considerable powers of memory and observation, and during
the time that elapses in which it is in the nest it has ample
opportunity of gaining an insight into the architecture peculiar
to its species. It sees the position of the nest, it notes the mate¬
rials, and when it requires one for itself, is it so very extraor¬
dinary that, profiting by such experience, it builds one on the
same plan? Again, birds often return to the place of their birth
the following season, and possibly see the old home many times
ere they want one for themselves. This, aided by the strong hered¬
itary impulse to build a nest similar to the one in which they were
born, inherited from their parents, aids them in their task.” This
reasoning, I am free to confess, strikes me, to say the least, as
extraordinary ! A degree of mental power, at least of memory
and of imitation, is ascribed to young birds which is not only
•superhuman,’ but of which there is neither proof, nor even
possibility of proof. Mr. Dixon has the ‘three or four days old’
nestling taking note of and memorizing its surroundings before,
in the case of the higher Oscines, it has the power to even
open its eyes! Yet with all this ascribed precosity and keen¬
ness of observation, and this wonderful power of memory and
imitation in young birds, Mr. Dixon finds it neccessary to
call in the aid of “a strong hereditary impulse to build a nest
similiar to the one in which they were born,” which is more than
a half-way admission of all that is implied in the modern inter¬
pretation of instinct, or the ‘blind instinct’ of the non-scientific
writer. It we interprete instinct as ‘inherited habit,’ what better
explanation do we need of the ability of young birds to build a
nest like that of their parents or of their species? In view of
the slight evidence available as to how much a nestling bird can

i885.]

Beckham on Birds observed at Pueblo, Colorado.

T39

take cognizance of its surroundings, and make mental note of them
for purposes of imitation at a remote future, does not the assump¬
tion of such extraordinary powers of imitation and memory bor¬
der upon absurdity? To extend the theory, which it is perfect¬
ly legitimate to do, to other classes of animals, does the tadpole,
or the embryo fish (in the case of the nest-building species) also
remember the exact position, structure and materials of its mater¬
nal nest? Does the young turtle remember throughout the long
years of its adolescence the precise nature of the spot from which
it emerged, so as to select a similar place for its own eggs? Or
does the larva of an insect remember, through its various stages
of metamorphosis, the exact arrangement of the egg from which
it was hatched in relation to the eggs of its brother larvae so dis¬
tinctly as to be able to deposit its own eggs in a similar situation
and similar order of arrangement? Why, indeed, the idea that
birds are guided by ‘instinct,’ taking the term as interpreted by
modern science, is so repugnant to a certain class of minds, or
why they will persist in denying that cmy evidence in its favor
exists , is to me at least incomprehensible. In short, I agree
exactly with Mr. Seebohm in his footnote appended to Mr.
Dixon’s essay, in which he says: “I regard the word Instinct
as the popular term for the mysterious impulses which scientific
men call Hereditary Habit ; and I think that it plays a great part,
an overwhelmingly great part, not only in Bird-nest building, but
in every other action of every animal, man included .... If
Hereditary Habit have the lion’s share in the production of a
birds’ nest, we must allow that Memory, Imitation, and a rudi¬
mentary form of Reason also play their subordinate parts.” In
these few words, it seems to me, we have the sum of the whole
matter, and a rational answer to the question of how young birds
build their first nest.

NOTES ON SOME OF THE BIRDS OF PUEBLO,
COLORADO.

BY CHARLES WICKLIFFE BECKHAM.

The following observations were made principally in the
immediate neighborhood of Pueblo, Colorado, during the season
of 1 883 .

140

Beckham on Birds observed at Pueblo , Colorado.

[April

Pueblo is one hundred and twenty miles south of Denver, at
the junction of the Fontaine qui Bouille and the Arkansas River,
forty miles west of the point where the latter emerges from the
mountains. The surrounding country is a dreary waste of cac¬
tus, sage-brush, and soap-weed, but along the river and the
creek, the vegetation is comparatively luxuriant. Naturally nine-
tenths of the birds are to be found in these more favored localities.
Owing to other engagements but little time could be given to col¬
lecting, and the list is therefore necessarily incomplete.

The writer is indebted to Mr. Ridgway for material assistance
in preparing these brief notes.

1. Hylocichla ustulata swainsoni (Cab.). First observed on May 13
and by the 20th they had become very common.

2. Merula migratoria propinqua Ridgw. Abundant.

3. Oreoscoptes montanus (Towns.). Not common. Preferring, with
obviously bad taste, the cactus and sage-brush of the plains to the luxu¬
riant vegetation along the water-courses. Its song is very soft and low,
as if it were disinclined to ‘waste its sweetness on the desert air.’

4. Mimus polyglottus (L-). Rather common on the outskirts of the
town. The same versatile mimic here as everywhere else.

5. Galeoscoptes carolinensis (L.). Not common and rather shy.

6. Harporhynchus rufus (A.). An abundant bird along the streams.

7. Cinclus mexicanus Sw. One seen in a canon in the Greenhorn
(Sierra Mojada) Mountains, thirty miles southwest of Pueblo.

8. Sialia sialis (A.). A female, the only one recognized, was shot on
April 25.

9. Sialia mexicana Sw. Rather common up to the first of May. Fre¬
quently seen out on the prairie, as well as along the streams.

10. Sialia arctica. Sw. More abundant than the preceding. Breeding.

11. Myiadestes townsendi (And.). First observed April 22, and they
afterwards became rather common up to June 1. Much on the ground,
and generally somewhat shy. Heard no note at all from them at this time,
but during the last week in September they were very abundant at Mani-
tou, forty-five miles northwest of Pueblo, in Williams Canon and the
Garden of the Gods, where their delightfully sweet songs were often the
only sounds to be heard in those rocky solitudes.

12. Parus montanus Gamb. A small party of four or five were ob¬
served April 6 in Greenhorn Canon, thirty miles southwest of Pueblo.

13. Thryomanes bewicki leucogaster Bd. The only one seen, a male,
was shot out of an old stunted cottonwood, containing several abandoned
Magpie nests, about which the bird dodged for fully fifteen minutes before
giving me a chance to shoot. This record, I believe, considerably extends
the known range of the form.

14. Troglodytes aedon V. Common on the outskirts of town, but
none were seen in the town itself.

>SS5.]

Beckham on Birds observed at Pueblo , Colorado.

H1

15. Dendrceca aestiva ( Gm .). First observed May 4, after which it
became one of the commonest species.

16. Dendrceca auduboni ( Towns .). First observed May 4. Rather
common for several weeks; much on the ground in company with the
Grass Finch.

17. Geothlypis macgillivrayi ( And .). Rather common during the

third week in May.

iS. Geothlypis trichas occidentalis Brewst. Not uncommon. First
seen May 6.

19. Icteria virens longicauda (Lawr.). Common in the thickets
along the river. Much less shy than the eastern form.

20. Setophaga ruticilla (L.). A female, shot May 27, was the only
one seen.

21. Vireosylvia gilva (V.). Not common.

22. Lanivireo solitarius plumbeus ( Cs .). Three or four were taken
during the month of May.

23. Hirundo erythrogastra Bodd. Common along the river and the
Fountain.

24. Tachycineta thalassina (5w.). Observed but once, June 10, when
a dozen or more were seen.

25. Stelgidopteryx serripennis ( And .). Common along the streams.

26. Pyranga ludoviciana ( Wils .). No females were recognized, but
the males were rather common from May 15 to June 1. A mile or so up
the Fountain was a place where the offal from a neighboring slaughter¬
house was dumped, and the Tanagers, in company with Bullock’s Oriole
and the Arkansas Flycatcher, could always be found there in considerable
force, feeding on the swarms of insects attracted by the odoriferous
deposit.

27. Carpodacus frontalis (Say). Abundant everywhere.

28. Astragalinus tristis (L.). Common, in same flocks with the Pine
Finch.

29. Astragalinus psaltria (Arty)- Common.

30. Chrysomitris pinus ( Wils.). Common.

31. Pocecetes gramineus confinis Bd. Very abundant.

32. Chondestes grammica strigata (Say). Probably the most abun¬
dant species to be found here.

33. Zonotrichia leucophrys (Forst.). Not uncommon in May.

34. Zonotrichia gambeli intermedia Ridg-iv. Very abundant. A lazy,
sleepy sort of a bird, using a good deal in the trees.

35. Spizella domestica arizonae (Cs.). Not uncommon.

36. Spizella pallida (Aw.). Very abundant. Almost exclusively ter¬
restrial. Note a wheezy rattle, hardly rising to the dignity of a song.

37- Junco oregonus (Towns.). Apparently not very common. Only
observed in March and early in April.

38. Junco caniceps ( Woodh.). Rather common in April. A female
shot on June 1.

39. Melospiza fasciata fallax Bd. Apparently not very common.

142

Beckham on Birds observed at Pueblo , Colorado.

[April

40. Melospiza lincolni ( And .). Common in undergrowth in company
with other Sparrows.

41. Pipilo maculatus arcticus (Szu.). Rather common in the foot¬
hills thirty miles southwest, but only a few observed in the immediate
vicinity of Pueblo.

42. Pipilo chlorurus ( Tozvns.). Abundant.

43. Zamelodia melanocephala (Szv.). First seen May 4, after which
the males became very abundant; no females at all were recognized. A
nest containing four eggs was taken on June 1, and the male shot just after
leaving it. Their song, almost always delivered from the topmost branch
of a tree, is very full and sonorous, and very similar to that of the Robin.

44. Guiraca caerulea (L.). A female, shot on June 10, and a male
seen were the only two observed.

45. Passerina amcena (Say'). Common, but none were seen until
May 15.

46. Molothrus ater ( Bodd .). A male, seen on May 27, was the only
one recognized.

47. Xanthocephalus icterocephalus (Bp.). A large flock was several
times seen a mile and a half up the river.

4S. Agelseus phceniceus (L.). Abundant. A colony of them breeding
within the ‘city limits.’ A very comprehensive term as applied to west¬
ern ‘cities.’

49. Sturnella neglecta And. Abundant. When I first heard the note
I had no idea from what sort of a bird it proceeded.

50. Icterus bullocki (.Sic;.). Very abundant. Before the leaves ap¬
peared, their compactly woven nests (old ones, of course) were very con¬
spicuous objects on the cottonwoods, bordering the Fountain.

51. Scolecophagus cyanocephalus ( Wagl. ) . Common. Found
breeding.

52. Pica rustica hudsonica (Scop.). Very abundant. The Magpie
has a very bad name out here, but like the Devil, is not. perhaps, ‘as black
as he is painted.’ Hundreds of them breed in the cottonwood a mile or
two down the river, and their immense globular nests, made exclusively
of sticks, are everywhere to be seen. They begin laying, I think, about
April 15, and a month later the young are able to fly. Seven or eight
eggs appear to be the usual number to a clutch.

53. Cyanocitta stelleri macrolopha (Bd.). A party of seven or eight
were seen on Sept. 24 in the immediate vicinity of town. They were
perfectly silent and acted generally as if they had been doing something
that they ought not to have done, and were anxious to get back to the
foothills. In the Greenhorn Mountains, and at Manitou, I found them very
abundant. The ranchemen in the former locality accuse them of robbing
hen’s nests, and foraging on the garners where grain is stored.

54. Eremophila alpestris leucolaema Cs. Very common. The spec¬
imens taken are provisionally referred to this form, although, according
to Mr. Henshaw, there are two distinct races whose range includes Pueblo.

55. Tyrannus carolinensis (B.). Common.

Beckham on Birds observed at Pueblo, Colorado.

H3

iss5.]

56. Tyrannus verticalis Say. Very abundant from May 6 to Septem¬
ber 24.

57. Contopus richardsoni (Szv.). Common in open places.

58. Empidonax hammondi (Jfantus). Common.

59. Phalsenoptilus nuttalli ( And .). But one seen, May 24.

60. Chordeiles popetue henryi (Cass.). Common during the first ten
days of June.

61. Picus pubescens gairdneri ( And .). Not common, apparently, as
but two were seen. One of them, a female, shot May 26, had but one leg;
the loss of tjie other was doubtless due to some accident.

62. Melanerpes erythrocephalus (L.). First observed on May 15. A
week later they were common both in the town as well as in the country,
in fact, everywhere except on the prairie.

63. Melanerpes torquatus ( Wils.). A male, shot May 13, was the only
one seen. Very wary; followed him at least half a mile before I could
get a shot.

64. Colaptes auratus mexicanus (Arc.). Abundant.

65. Geococcyx californianus (Less.). Alderman Morse of Pueblo
informs me that he has found the Chaparrel Cock twenty miles down the
river.

66. Asio accipitrinus (Pall.). A male, the only one observed, was
shot near the river on April 1.

67. Bubo virginianus subarcticus (Hoy). Saw several in captivity,
captured near Pueblo.

68. Speotyto cunicularia hypogaea (Bp.). Common in the prairie
dog colonies near town. I have wasted a great deal of energy, patience,
and time, vainly trying to get a shot at this very knowing bird. They
always managed to keep a minimum distance of six feet or so between
themselves and the ultimate range of my gun.

69. Tinnunculus sparverius (L.). Abundant. Not at all warv.

70. Haliaetus leucocephalus (L.). Several were seen at Manitou in
September. None noted at Pueblo.

71. Cathartes aura (A.). Observed two or three times near Pueblo.

72. Zenaidura carolinensis (L.). Excessively common.

73. Ardea lierodias L. Amounted specimen in Corder’s drug store,
Pueblo, is said to have been shot near the town.

74. Oxyechus vociferus (L.). The Killdeers were quite common along
the river and the Fountain, where they were breeding.

75. Podasocys montanus (Tozvns.). Not uncommon out on the dry
and sandy ‘prairie.’

76. Ereunetes pusillus (L.). But once observed, May 17, when a male
was shot out of a small flock on the river.

77. Totanus flavipes (Gm.). But one specimen, shot May 8.

78. Tringoides macularius (L.). I have never found the ubiquitous
‘Peet-weet’ anywhere as abundant and noisy as here.

79. Niimenius hudsonicus Lath. Mounted specimens of this and the
next, in Corder’s drug-store, are said to have been taken near Pueblo.

T44

BlCKXELL on the Singing of Birch.

[April

So Recurvirostra americana Gin.

51. Rallus virginianus L. But once observed — May 20 — in a marsh
near town.

52. Grus canadensis (Z.). One recently shot was seen in market in
South Pueblo.

53. Anas boschas L. Abundant in April and September on the
river.

54. Chaulelasmus streperus (Z.). One was shot out of a flock of five
on May 15.

55. Querquedula discors (Z.). Common in May and September on
the river.

86. Querquedula cyanoptera (FI). Not uncommon in May on the
river.

87. Nettion carolinensis (Gw.). Common on the river in April and
September.

SS. Erismatura rubida ( Wils.). A male, the only one seen, was shot
on a pond May 11.

S9. Lophodytes cucullatus (Z.). Alderman Morse of Pueblo informs
me that he shot one on the river here several years ago.

90. Mergus merganser americanus ( Cass .). Common in April on the
river.

91. Pelecanus erythrorhynchus Gm. Mr. Bagley of Rye, Pueblo Co.,
Col., has a bill of one in his possession which he shot on a large artificial
lake near Pueblo in 1SS0.

A STUDY OF THE SINGING OF OUR BIRDS.

BY EUGENE P. BICKNELI..

{Continued from Vol. /, p. JJ2. )

Spizella monticola. Tree Sparrow.

This hardy Sparrow, though provided through our winters
with an unfailing supply of seeds from the catkins of swamp alders
and the dried flower-clusters of golden-rods and other withered
weeds which reach above the snow,* seems nevertheless

* The number of wild plants and trees that keep their seed through the winter is
greater than the casual observer would be likely to believe. During a recent winter
I gave some attention to this subject, noting down all the trees and plants found with
seed. No systematic or extended search was made, yet a few midwinter walks gave
me a list of about one hundred and fifty names. Some of these were of scarce plants,
or those the fruit of which was hardly adapted for a bird’s food, but many were of
common and widely-spread species, which were well suited to form winter staples for
our granivorous birds.

iSS5- J Bicknell on the Singing of Birds. 14^

early to become impatient for spring. It is always ready
with song for the first mild, sunshiny days after the middle of
February, and I have often heard its initial notes on or about the
2 2d of the month. Sometimes, however, it does not begin to
sing until March, and in 1S77, when this month was decidedly
inclement, the first day of song was March 21. My latest record
for song is April 13, hut in some seasons it is not heard later
than the end of March.

In the fall, singing is unusual, hut I have several times heard
songs in November, once so late as the 17th.

Isolated dates for singing are January n, and December 12,
18S0; on the latter occasion the song was feeble and imperfect,
hut on the former it was complete, and several times repeated.

Besides its customary chip , the Tree Sparrow has a low
double note, which is uttered mainly while the birds are feeding.
This simple and slightly musical sound from many birds busily
feeding together produces a low conversational chirping, so
pleasantly modulated as to seem like an unconscious expression
of contented companionship.

Spizella domestica. Chipping Sparrow.

The familiar song of this domestic species we hear in almost
every kind of weather, from the bird’s arrival in early April on
into the summer, usually with no evident falling off until towards
the end of July. Then singing becomes less general with the
species, and it mav cease in the first week of August, though
more often, perhaps, prolonged into the second week. My
dates for final songs are from the ^th to the 15th, with a single
record of the 1 Sth .

Almost two months may now elapse before the song of the
Chipping Sparrow is heard again ; then singing is transiently
resumed. This supplementary song-period occupies a few days
only. I have never known it to last a full week in any one year,
however abundant tbe birds might be. The greatest range in the
dates of several years is from September 24 to October 10. The
first songs of this latter period are sometimes imperfect.

Spizella pusilla. Field Sparrow.

This Sparrow also arrives in song, except, as with other birds,
in the case of individuals of premature advent. Singing con-

146

Bicknell on the Singing of Birds.

[April

tinues with some yearly regularity until the middle of August, at
which time, or even a little before, it may cease ; or the time of
cessation may be delayed a week or ten days. Latest dates for
singing are August 29 and 31. I have noticed no indication of
singing in the autumn.

In several instances I have known the songs of early spring
arrivals to be so aberrant as scarcely to be recognizable, and have
noted similar but lesser variation in the songs of later comers.
There is also considerable individual variation in the song, the
normal song being sometimes prolonged into elaborate varia¬
tions. Mr. J. A. Allen has written of this species, as ob¬
served in Florida (Bull. Mus. Comp. Zobl., Vol. II, No. 3,
p. 279), that “The songs of the males were so different from
those of the northern bird that the species was almost unrecog¬
nizable by me from its notes.” As illustrating further geo¬
graphical variation in voice of this species, I may quote from a
letter from Mr. Fred. T. Jencks of Providence, that “The Field
Sparrow in Illinois usually twice repeats the song he gives in
the East.”

Junco hiemalis. Slate-colored Junco.

Early March is most often the time when we first hear the
song of this Sparrow ; but, according to the character of the
season, the beginning of singing may vary within two weeks in
either direction from the average time. After the early days of
April, singing is not commonly heard, and in some years it
ceases before the end of March. April 17 is my latest record,
although the species often remains into May. The Junco
has two very different songs : a simple trill, somewhat similar
to that of the Chipping Sparrow ; and a faint whispering warble,
usually much broken but not without sweetness, and sometimes
continuing intermittently for many minutes. It seems to slip very
readily from a simple chirping, and is always the song with
which the species begins the season. Later, the first mentioned
becomes the more general if not the only song, as I found it to be
in the Catskill Mountains in summer, when the birds were
breeding.

The .Snowbird does not often sing in the autumn, but I
have heard both of its songs in October and November; and it

iSS;.]

Bicknell on the Singing of Birds.

r47

seems always ready with a few feeble song-notes for any day
that comes out sunshiny and mild in sudden change from harder
weather.

Melospiza fasciata. Song Sparrow.

This familiar Sparrow sings with greater constancy through
the seasons, and with less regard to adverse weather, than any
other of our song-birds. All through the hottest summer
weather it is songful, though the oppressive days of late August
seem sorely to try its spirit ; but it recovers its cheerfulness with
advancing autumn, and is one of the few birds which, in that
season, repeats its full chorus of the spring. In everv month of
winter, too, I have heard its song. Not that it sings uninterrupt¬
edly throughout the year; for there is an intermission of singing
between November and February. But the general rule of
silence for these two months is not infrequently transgressed.
Its song is one of the first which the waking season brings ;
though it is usually a little antedated by that of the Bluebird.
Like the latter, the Song Sparrows are often in advance of the
season, and early in the spring I have found them singing cheer¬
ily when the temperature was but little above zero (F.). and
even when snow was falling thickly.

The earliest songs of which I have record date January 2^ and
27. Ordinarily first songs are not until the middle of Feb¬
ruary, though it is not unusual to hear them after the first
week of the month. In severe seasons they may be deferred
until its latter days ; but 1 have never known silence to be kept
longer, however inclement the weather. But universal singing
with this species does not always proceed directly from the first
song ; here the weather has much influence. Thus, in the year
1S79, the first song was on February 7, but up to the end of the
month singing was intermittent and timorous only, and the
confident spring song was not voiced until March 5. But when
singing has become general, only the most adverse weather can
reduce the joyous birds to silence. When the first songs are
not until late in February, the impulse to sing is likely to
become pretty general in a single week. The earliest songs are
sometimes nothing more than feeble warblings without definite
beginning or ending, but with favorable weather they quickly
pass into the full-voiced aria of spring.

Bicknell on the Singing of Birds.

[April

I48

Singing continues through the summer. In some years,
chiefly in seasons of drought, it falters under the heats of late
July; yet, even at these times, the steadfast little chanters never
seem to be wholly discouraged. Through a great part of August
they continue in voice ; but later singing slackens, and towards
the end of the month complete silence is averted only by occa¬
sional weak songs.

In August, a change comes over the songs of many of the
birds. Their songs lapse into a low, desultory warbling, even
more indeterminate than their first attempts in late winter, as if
they had lost their early interest or lacked the power to sustain
the full pitch of their notes. But it is probable that in the
summer time a state of complete silence is never quite reached,
though it is much more nearly approached in some years
than in others. During these times of uncertain singing the
low warble is the more usual song, and sometimes wholly
replaces the louder one ; but the latter may occur at any season.
Sometimes, chiefly in the autumn, the undertoned song is remark¬
ably prolonged, the notes being thrown together with much
modulation, but without definite arrangement. In this manner
singing may be continued without pause for more than a minute.

From the latter part of September to the middle of October
the full song is resumed and, associated with the inferior song,
is continued into November. On fine bright October and early
November days, the song is sometimes as frequent and given
with as much ardor as in the spring. After the first week of
November singing is not longer to be depended upon, but fine
weather mav call it forth up to the end of the month.

Among the various notes of the Song Sparrow are two' very
different chirps , one being particularly characteristic of the
species, and a peculiar low chippering. The latter seems to be
uttered only in the mating season. In advanced seasons I have
heard it at the end of February.

Earlier in this paper I alluded to the wide individual variation
in the song of this Sparrow. While scarcely any two of the
birds sing just alike, occasionally songs are heard which it is
hard to believe are from this species until optical evidence forces
conviction. I recall a particular instance of this kind which
came under my observation at Sing Sing, N. Y., while in the
company of Dr. A. K. Fisher. We were attracted by a song

i SSs . ]

Bicknell on the. Singing of Birds.

r49

which was perplexing to us both. It clearly suggested the song
of the little Field Sparrow ( Spizella pit si Ha) , but the locality
was not one which that bird would be likely to frequent. With
much interest we approached the singer, half expecting to note
the occurrence of a rare species. The author of our excitement
was a Song Sparrow, evidently wholly unconscious that it was
not singing after the manner of its fellows.

Melospiza palustris. Swamp Sparrow.

Although a simple, unpretentious trill in April, from some
wet meadow, bog, or reedy marsh, always first tells me of the
presence of the Swamp Sparrow, it cannot be said that the bird
arrives in song ; for the nature of the places it inhabits, with its
retiring disposition, might well keep the secret of its presence
until it chooses to make itself known. It is probable, however,
that, like most birds, it comes to us in song. Dates of first songs
extend from April 4 to 24, but most often fall after the middle of
the month.*

Early April songs are exceptional, and not improbably are
from birds which have remained over winter ; as in several
seaspns after such early songs it has been a week or two before
the species was heard again.

The song of the Swamp Sparrow comes up from the swamps
and marshes until early August, then it becomes less frequent.
Usually it ceases about the middle of the month, sometimes a
little before, but not unfrequently it continues later, and
I have heard songs even so late as early September. About
a month of silence now ensues ; then the species comes
again into voice. My record gives dates for the recommence¬
ment of singing from September 11 (?) and 18, to 28. The
time of final cessation is carried into October — 15th and 17th
are latest dates ; but often the song is not heard after the first
part of the month. In this supplementary season of song, sing¬
ing is by no means general, and is usually confined to the early
morning hours. But the birds seem more ambitious in their
vocalism than earlier in the year. In the spring and summer
the song is a simple monotone ; in the autumn this is often varied,
and extended with accessory notes. A few preliminary chips ,
merging into a fine trill, introduce the run of notes which con-

x5 °

Bicknell on t)ie Singing of Birds.

[April

stitutes the usual song, which now terminates with a few slower
somewhat liquid tones. .This seems to be the fullest attainment
of the bird, and is often only partially or imperfectly ren¬
dered.

Passerella iliaca. Fox-colored Sparrow.

This fine Sparrow, “the noblest Roman of them all,” sings
for us both in the spring and in the autumn. My records are
comprised between the following dates: February 29 and April
13 in the spring; and October 2S and November 17 in the fall.
At neither season are they in song when they first come, unless
possibly in a spring when the arrival is late ; if they come excep¬
tionally early, singing may be considerably postponed.

In the fall they are sometimes in voice soon after making their
appearance ; but it is usual for them to be present some time
before their mellow notes add their charm to the late autumn.
Singing often lasts as late as the second week of November, but
rarely later, even though small flocks of the birds remain till the
end of the month.

Like many other birds this Sparrow seems indisposed to sing
unless present in some numbers, and in seasons when it is un¬
common, whether spring or fall, its song may not be heard.

Pipilo erythrophthalmus. Chewink.

The Towee Bunting, though it joins the bird community
promptly at the first good chance after the middle of April,
is sometimes a little tardy in joining the choir ; and, if it meets
with discouraging weather, is satisfied for a time with simply
announcing itself by name. Later its short and energetic song
becomes a striking feature of the bird chorus about the hedgerows,
and bushy borders of woods, fields and swamps.

Singing becomes decadent towards the' end of July, or early in
August, and closes at any time from the first to the middle of the
month — August 4-1S, 20, 22. There is no well-defined second
song-period, but I have heard its song several times in September,
and once in October (October 7, 18S1), when it was several times
repeated.

In late summer, after singing has ceased, the chewink notes
become weak and infrequent, and may be wholly intermitted for

>8SS.]

Bicrnell on the Singing of Birds.

I5I

a time, but they are resumed in their usual vehemence before the
species departs.

Cardinalis virginianus. Cardinal Grosbeak.

This bird is of irregular occurrence, but I have heard it in full
song in every month from April to August inclusive. I have also
seen it in every month from October to February, but through
this time its only utterance was a fine sharp chip or click.

At this northernmost limit of its habitat its voice is certainly not
less loud and forcible than in the South. Before I was familiar
with its notes I was startled from sleep early one July morning
by a violent whistling. It sounded so nervously hurried and
intentionally loud that, in my sudden awakening, I thought it an
alarm intended to arouse me. A moment later could have been
seen at the window a figure en deshabille , and on a near grape¬
vine trellis a Cardinal Grosbeak in the role of a fiery-coated
alarmist.

Zamelodia ludoviciana. Rose-breasted Grosbeak.

The few Rose-breasted Grosbeaks which summer in the sec
tion of country covered by my observations sing well into the
dog-days. I have heard them till the middle of August.

In the autumn the adult male seems to be uncommon, and I
have never heard its song at that season ; but on September 23,
1S79, I shot a young male with crimsoning breast, which was in
full song.

Passerina cyanea. Indigo-bird.

The Indigo-bird sings faithfully through the midsummer;
but the silencing influence that begins to overtake the birds at
this time, reaches it about the end of July, and it is soon quieted.
The last days of singing are between the end of July and mid-
August; my records giving August 1^ and 16 as dates of latest
songs.

I have ever found this bird uncommon in the fall, and my scant
data respecting its singing in that season are comprehended
between the last two weeks of September.

Bicknell on the Singing of Birds.

[April

15 2

The song-flight of the Indigo-bird I have but once witnessed
— on September 23, 1S79.

Regarding thesingingof the Indigo-bird, Mr. Fred. T. Jencks,
of Providence, writes me that he is able to distinguish by their
songs the younger from the fully adult birds at a distance of at
least one hundred and fifty yards. The songs of younger birds
are more simple and less musical than those of adults. 1 am
myself familiar with differences in the songs of Indigo-birds such
as Mr. Jencks describes, but never traced them to their cause.

Dolichonyx oryzivorus. Bobolink.

During its half-year visit the Bobolink sings only in May, June
and part of July. Through the remainder of its stay, it has only
a single short note. This is of a softly metallic tone, and in
late summer and early fall is showered down over the country,
and sometimes over the city, and at night, by flocks of the birds
passing on their southward way. It is also a characteristic bird-
note of the late summer, about wide weedy meadows, where tall
Compositce and other rankly growing plants uphold a rich
harvest of seeds.

The song of the Bobolink is one of the first to drop out of the
bird-chorus. I have not often heard it in July, and never later
than the middle of the month ; though where the bird is more
common in the breeding season than with me singing doubtless
continues later.

Molothrus pecoris. Cowbird.

The song-utterance of this species, although giving a slight
reminder of its near relationship to the Blackbirds, is neverthe¬
less strikingly unique. It has an indefinite beginning, which
is continued into a high attenuated note, ending with a sound
curiously like that of bubbling water. This irresistibly suggests
a bubble-like bursting forth of sound after a long audible inhala¬
tion. It seems to be a sort of appendage to the ordinary song-
notes, and is, perhaps, achieved only by vigorous individuals,* or
under the stimulus of courtship. Its production appears to be a
matter of some difficulty, being attended by singular bodily con¬
tortions and a spreading and stiffening of the wings and tail-

ISS5.J

Bicknell on the Singing of Birds.

T53

The ardent male usually arranges 'to have these antics witnessed
by two or more of the plainer sex, as we are forced to speak of
the females of most birds, and we cannot doubt their efficacy in
captivating the objects of his ambitious passion. But as the
breeding season wears on, and the novelty of being many-wived
has, perhaps, come to be a matter of some concern with this
polygamist, its enthusiasm diminishes, and many songs fail at the
terminal note of ebullition. Songs of this character are referred
to beyond as half-songs.

Cowbirds are somewhat uncertain and capricious in the use
of their voices, and show much variability in different years in
the continuousness of song. As a general thing singing is in¬
frequent in June, although extending through this month and
into July. At this time the half-song is almost exclusively in
use, but the bubble notes may be produced as long as the bird
remains in voice. Dates of latest songs of the first period range
from July 6 to 23.

There seems to be no regularity about singing in the fall ; but
I have heard imperfect notes and half-songs at different times
within a month after the middle of September. Sometimes, in
the autumn, when Cowbirds are assembled in small flocks, they
become garrulous, when their commingled utterance of low notes
produces a sound as of subdued warbling.

On October 8, 18S2, I observed the male of a pair of Cow ¬
birds striving, and with some success, to produce before its mate
its full spring song, not forgetting the associated bodily contor¬
tions. Such behavior, in an autumn bird, was at least highly
unseasonable, if not suggestive of illegitimate intentions.

The singular bodily action which accompanies the vocal
expression of the Cowbird conveys the suggestion that the air-
sacs of the body are brought into play in the production of song.
Tne ducking of its head, the spasmodic motion of its tail, the
half-opening of its wings, the swelling of its body, which
collapses with the culminating notes ; all this, seems to point to
the utilization of the air-sacs — to their inflation and the muscular
expulsion of the contained air — in the execution of its singular
vocal performance. Indeed, from the peculiar bodily action of
many birds while in song, it is reasonable to suppose that the
air-sacs are often important adjuncts of the lungs and vocal
organs. Such bodily motions during singing, and the special

I Turner on Birds of the Nearer Islands, Alaska.

[April

muscular acts which, in many birds, are synchronous with the
utterance of certain notes, may thus be motions which are nec¬
essary to the special operation of the air-sacs.

And if this be true it affords an explanation of the fact that
the song of many birds is often more varied and prolonged in
flight than when they are at rest, and that the highest vocal
expression of some birds, as the Oven-bird, the Maryland
Yellow-throat, and the Yellow-breasted Chat, for examples, is
achieved only when the birds are on the wing.

The surprising length of time for which singing is often sus¬
tained argues greater resources of air supply than the mere
capacity of the lungs, and here again we may have recourse to
a special operation of the pneumatic system.

We have already seen that birds in general are most voiceful
when having least fat ; if the growth of fat on the body reduces
the capacity of any of the air-sacs a reason for this is evident.

( To be continued.)

NOTES ON THE BIRDS OF THE NEARER
ISLANDS, ALASKA.

BY LUCIEN M. TURNER.

The localities here included embrace the islands of Attoo,
Agattoo, and Semechi, with their outlying islets. The geo¬
graphical position of the group lies between 185° 30' and 187° 30'
W. of Greenwich. The parallel of 520 N. passes near their
center. The group forms the westernmost portion of the Aleu¬
tian chain of islands, and, taken collectively, is known as the
Bleezhnee or Nearer Islands, being so designated by the earlier
explorers because they lie nearest to the Asiatic coast.

Semechi is the smallest of the three, and lies about twenty-three
miles to the southeast of Attoo. It is quite low on the southern
side, where are found innumerable ponds and lakes, some of the
latter being of considerable area. The low-grounds are covered
with vegetation of various kinds, and the shallower ponds, in some
instances, yield vegetable food in abundance for the great numbers

iSSs.j

Turner on Birds of the Nearer Islands , Alaska.

155

of Ducks and Geese which breed there. On the northern side of
the island the shore is precipitous, rising at several localities
several hundred feet, and abounds in niches, ledges, and crevices
where breed vast numbers of Puffins, Auks, Murres, and Guille-
mots, which find an abundance of food in the neighboring sea.

Agattoo Island forms the southwest portion of the group, and
is of considerable size, being but slightly less than Attoo, and
much larger than Semechi. The shores of this island are more
elevated and abrupt, having many indentations, at the head of
which small streams issue from the larger lakes. The general
character of the surface is undulating, though much broken, being
everywhere intersected by a network of ravines and valleys, sep¬
arating hills and mountains, some of which latter are over 1600
feet in height. These valleys and the lower grounds contain
many lakes, in which is found an abundance of fresh-water vege¬
tation . High grasses and other plants crown the cliffs and occupy
the tops of rocks, affording suitable nesting places for various
Auks and Puffins. Thousands of Geese are also hatched here.
Here too the {snowy Owl and two species of Hawks breed, the
young of the water birds affording them abundant food. The only
mammals occurring on either Semechi or Agattoo are marine
species — the sea-otter, sea-lion, some three species of hair-seals.
An occasional fur-seal may also be seen in the vicinity.

Attoo is the largest of the group, and has an east and west exten¬
sion of nearly thirty-five miles, and a breadth of nearly fourteen
miles. The shore is remarkably indented, often for several miles,
forming bays and coves. The shores are mostly abrupt, with but
little beach, excepting in certain places on portions of the north¬
ern side and eastern end of the island, where several wide-mouthed
valleys gradually rise toward the hillsides, which in most instanc¬
es are very steep. Attoo is much more mountainous than either
of the other islands of the group. The mountains are high, ris¬
ing in a few instances above 2500 feet, and are accessible only bv
most fatiguing ascents, the approaches to the summits being steep
and difficult. The mountain range extends length-wise through
the island, with several spurs of irregular height shooting oft' at
various angles from the main range. The valleys, some of which
are quite broad, are traversed by streams, two of which, issuing
from large lakes, are of great size. The sides of the hills and the
valleys are plentifully clothed with vegetation, and many berries

Turner on Birds of the Nearer Islands , Alaska.

[April

!56

are to be found. In the fall of the year these are the favorite
feeding-grounds of thousands of Geese, a few of which are hatched
on Semechi but the greater part on Agattoo. The Geese, feeding
on the ripening berries in late August, September, and October,
rapidly fatten after their moult and become so heavy that I have
known them to burst their skins in falling when shot on the wing.
The high bluffs afford the Cormorants a safe breeding-place ;
the grassy ledges near the water form convenient nesting sites for
Eiders; and in the recesses of the rocks Auks and Puffins abound.
Here blue foxes ( Vulpes lagopus) are found in numbers. The
natives have very wisely restricted the foxes to this large island,
otherwise they would not be able to procure the birds — Puffins
and Guillemots — from whose skins they make a long garment for
protection against the cold of winter. These garments were used
nearly exclusively during the Russian regime , and previous to the
discovery of the islands they were the only garment worn by
either sex. About forty skins are required for a single garment.

These islands possess a warmer climate than the eastern
portion of the Aleutian Chain, the winter temperature never
falling as low as zero. The lowest degree of cold recorded by
me was 10.50 F., and this in the coldest season the natives could
remember. The summer is often bright and warm ; the max¬
imum temperature reaching 7 6° F. Much cloudy weather oc¬
curs at times, but it is generally fair from July to October. Rain
falls every month in the year, although March is known as the
snow month. Fogs often continue for several days at a time,
but seldom overhang the land ; Semechi and Agattoo, however,
are more foggy than Attoo. Rain often falls heavily, but only
for brief intervals. Storms are often excessively severe, and
durino- the winter are of frequent occurrence, the winds from the
southwest, and southeast being often very violent, causing a
terrible sea to dash against the shores.

The following list of birds consists of species actually collected,
or else identified beyond possibility of error, with the addition,
for the sake of completeness, . of a few species not observed
by the writer, but obtained or observed by Prof. W. H. Dali,
and recorded in his valuable ‘Notes on the Avifauna of the
Aleutian Islands, especially those West of Unalashka’ (San
Francisco, March 14, 1874).

Turner on Birds of the Nearer Islands, Alaska.

X57

*88 S-]

The list is small, but will doubtless be much increased when
the locality is more thoroughly gone over, as the engrossing
nature of other duties prevented me from giving as much time
to the birds as was desirable. My stay on this group was from
June 30, 1SS0, to May 19, 1SS1.

19.* Cinclus mexicanus Swains. A single individual, seen in August.
66. f Troglodytes alascensis Baird. Abundant. Resident.

? Motacilla ocularis Sxvin/i. A single individual, seen May 14, 1881,
was referred to this species.

70. Budytes flavus ( Linn .) Gray. Rare. Late summer visitor. Not
known to breed.

71. f Anthus pennsilvanicus (Lath.) Thienem. Not common. Sum¬
mer visitor. Two pairs known to breed. No specimen secured.

174-1 Leucosticte griseinucha ( Brandt ) Bp. Common. Resident.

186. f Plectrophenax nivalis (Linn.) Stejn. Common. Resident.

187. t Calcarius lapponicus (Linn.) Stejn. Common. Summer visi¬
tor. Breeds.

193. f Passerculus sandwichensis ( Gtnel .) Baird. Summer visitor.
Breeds. Not common.

232.1 Melospiza cinerea ( Gmel .) Ridgxv. Abundant. Resident.

28o.f Corvus corax carnivorus (Bartr.) Ridgxv. Abundant. Resident.

Specimens not secured.

396.1 Asio accipitrinus (Pall.) Nexvton. Not common. Resident.

406. f Nyctea nyctea (Linn.) Licht. Not common. Resident.

414a. f Falco peregrinus pealei Ridgxv. Not rare. Resident.

430. Circus hudsonius (Linn.) Vieill. Rare. Summer visitor only.
449. Aquila chrysaetus canadensis (Linn.) Ridgxv. Rare. An occa¬
sional visitor only.

451. Haliseetus leucocephalus (Linn.) Savig. Single individual seen.
fLagopus rupestris var. Plentiful. Resident.

50S. Haematopus bachmani And. Rare visitor at Attoo; occurs oftener
at Semechi and Agattoo.

509. Arenaria interpres (Linn.) Vieill. Rare. Only seen in summer.
5i5«. Charadrius dominicus fulvus ( Gmel.) Ridgxv. Rare. Fall visi¬
tor only. No specimen secured.

./Egialites sp. Rare. Four individuals seen in September.

531. f Tringa maculata Vieill. Common. Summer visitor.

553. Heteractitis incanus (Gmel.) Stejn. Rare. Summer visitor.

564.1 Phalaropus lobatus (Linn.) Stejn. Abundant. Summer visitor.
584. Grus canadensis (Linn.) Temm. Very rare. Fall straggler.

588. Olor columbianus (Ord) Stejn. Winter visitor. Not seen every

year. No specimen secured.

* The number preceding the species refers to the species having that number in
Ridgway’s ‘Nomenclature of North American Birds in U. S. National Museum,’ 1881.
Species marked f indicate those breeding.

I C 8 Turner on Birds of the Nearer Islands , Alaska. [April

593a. Anser albifrons gambeli ( Ilartl . ) Cones. Casual visitor, accord¬
ing to Dali.

594«.f Branta canadensis hutchinsi (5w. & Rich') Ridgw. — Abun¬
dant. Summer visitor.

598. Philacte canagica ( Sevast .) Bann. Winter visitor. Abundant.

601. Anas boschas Linn. Not common. Fall and spring visitor.

607. Anas americana Gmel. Rare. Summer visitor. Not known to
breed.

612. f Anas carolinensis Gmel. Common in summer. No specimen
secured.

614. f Fulix marila (Linn.) Baird. Common. Resident.

6:6.f Fulix collaris (Donov.) Baird. Not common. Resident.

Clangula sp. Rare. Seen only in winter.

621. Clangula albeola (Linn.) Steph. Winter visitor only.

62 2. f Histrionicus histrionicus (Linn.) Boie. Very abundant. Resi¬
dent.

623.1 Harelda hyemalis (Linn.) Brekm. Very abundant in winter.
Sparingly breeds.

625.1 Eniconetta stelleri (Pall.) Gray. Abundant in winter. Breeds
sparingly.

626. f Arctonetta fischeri (Brandt) Blak. Common. Resident. Breeds.

628. f Somateria v-nigra Gray. Common. Resident. Breeds.

630.1 CEdemia americana Szv. Rich. Rare in summer. Plentiful
in winter. Breeds sparingly.

633.1 CEdemia perspicillata (Cass.) Baird. Common. Resident.
Breeds sparingly.

637. f Merganser serrator (Linn.) Schaff. Common. Resident. Breeds.

643 b.\ PhalacrocoYax dilophus cincinnatus (Brandt) Ridgw. Abun¬
dant. Resident. Breeds.

646.1 Phalacrocorax pelagicus Pall. Numerous. Resident. Breeds.

658a. Rissa tridactyla pollicaris Stejn. Not abundant. Not known to

breed.

659.1 Rissa brevirostris Brandt. Abundant. Breeds. Not observed
in winter.

662. f Larus glaucescens Licht. Abundant. Breeds.

687-f Sterna paradissea Briinn. Plentiful. Breeding on Semechi.

698.1 Stercorarius parasiticus (Linn.) Schiiff. Common. Breeds on
Agattoo.

699. Stercorarius longicaudus Vieill. Rare at Attoo. Two individ¬
uals seen.

701. Diomedea albatrus (Temm.) Pall. Rather common in March and
April only.

705a. Fulmarus glacialis glupischa Stejn. Rare. Occurs mostly at
Semechi.

723. f Cymochorea leucorrhoa (Vieill.) Cones. Breeds abundantly, ac¬
cording to Dali.

726.1 Oceanodroma furcata (Gin.) Reich. Breeds. Specimens from
Dali in U. S. Museum.

>SSS.J

Scott on the Nesting Habits of the Hooded Oriole.

X59

Colymbus sp. — Winter. An individual seen at Attoo.

739- 1 Urinator pacificus {Lavjr.) Stejn. Common. Breeding.

74°- f Urinator lumme ( Briinn. ) Stejn. Abundant. Resident. Breeds.
744-f Fratercula corniculata ( Naum .) Gray. Extremely abundant.
Breeds. Not resident.

745. f Lunda cirrhata Pall. Extremely abundant. Breeds. Not res¬
ident.

747. t Cyclorrhynchus psittacula {Pall.) Stejn. Plentiful on Agattoo.
Breeds. Not resident.

748.1 Simorhynchus cristatellus {Pall.) Merrem. Plentiful. Breeds.
Not resident.

749-f Simorhynchus pygmaeus ( Gmel .) Brandt. Abundant. Breeds.
Not resident.

75o.f Simorhynchus pusillus {Pall.) Schlcg. Abundant. Breeds
on Agattoo. Not resident.

753-t Synthliboramphus antiquus {Gmel.) Brandt. Abundant. Breeds.
Sparingly resident.

Brachyramphus sp. Seen in late fall and early winter only.

761!. Cepphus columba Pall. Common. Breeds. Not resident.

763ft. f Uria lomvia arra {Pall.) Ridgiv. Abundant. Resident.

Smithsonian Institution.

Washington, D. C.

Nov. 24. 1884.

ON THE BREEDING HABITS OF SOME ARIZONA

BIRDS.

BY W. E. D. SCOTT.

Second Paper Icterus cucullatus.

The individual taste of birds in the matter of their nests is so
well exemplified by the great differentiation in the nests of the
Hooded Oriole ( Icterus cucullatus ), which is a very common
breeding bird in the canon described in the formef paper of this
series, that I propose to give a detailed description of ten nests
taken here during the past summer, and incidentally to call at¬
tention to other nests of the same species taken in regions close
at hand.

The birds arrive here about the middle of April, and are to be
found until the last of September, and a few even well into

1 60 Scott on the Nesting Habits of the Hooded Oriole.

I April

October. Such, at least, was my experience during the season of
1SS4. They are not great songsters, but are very conspicuous,
both by their plumage and by their peculiar call or i*attle, which
is very similar to that of the Baltimore Oriole, only it is more
prolonged. Two broods are raised, and not infrequently three,
during their stay here, and a new home is built for each brood.
The old birds are great workers when building their nests, and
the rapidity with which so elaborate a structure is completed is
astonishing. Three or four days at most generally suffice to
complete the structure. No detailed description of the eggs will
be essential in this connection, they have been so often care¬
fully described, and only when unusual shall I dwell upon them.
Three or four is the usual number laid, though after the first
set four is unusual.

The ten nests to be presently described were all taken from
three kinds of trees, cottonwood, sycamore, and a kind of ash ;
and, considering that the location of all were not a mile apart,
it would seem that taste or fancy had much to do with producing
in the same locality, where the materials used by all of the
builders are abundant and easily obtained, structures varying so
widely in general appearance, in the materials of which they are
built, and in their method of building, as well as in mode of
attachment to the tree.

Some of the nests, it will be seen, are as truly pensile as those
of Icterus galbula; others are more like those of Ictertis
spurius; while one at least rests on a stout twig and is hardly
to be regarded as a hanging nest at all.

The following data are taken from the nests before me and
from notes made when the nests were collected.

No. 1. Nest of May 2S. In a cottonwood, forty-five feet from
the ground. Contained a full set of three eggs, which were fresh
and of the usual coloration. They measure .92 X -6o, .92 x
.63, and .S5 X .62, respectively. The nest is a rather bulky
structure, and is built externally of coarse gi'een grasses, rather
looselv woven, but so knitted and tied together as to form a very
strong wall. The general appearance of the surface is smooth,
though the contour of the whole is unsymmetrical. There is
a distinct lining, which is of fine dried grasses very compactly
laid together, but not woven, in parallel circles, one above the
other, reaching to the rim of the nest. Just in the bottom there
is one large feather of a Hawk and a little down.

iSSs.J Scott on the Nesting Habits of the Hooded Oriole. 1 6 I

The nest is attached to three main twigs at the extremity of
a branch, and one of these twigs is again divided into three
smaller twigs. One of the main twigs has many leaves, and is
fastened to the wall of the nest for five inches, and some of the
leaves are woven into the structure. A second twig is attached
at a point about an inch and a half from the first to the wall of the
nest for four inches, and has three leaves, all of which are fastened
to the nest. The twig spoken of as being divided into three
branches has a very strong band and reeving of grasses joining it
to the nest just where it forks, and one branch is attached to the
side of the nest for four inches, one for two, and one for one inch.
Outside the greatest depth is six inches, while inside the greatest
depth is three inches and a half, so that the bottom of the nest
is very thick ; in fact the walls are thick throughout, being fully
half an inch at the rim of the nest where they are thinnest. The
diameter of the inside of the nest at the top, where it is largest, is
four inches, and the shape inside is that of a shallow cup.

No. 2. A nest taken the same day, and in the same kind of
tree, about forty feet distant from that just described, is almost
identical with it in structure. It is attached on its sides to four
twigs, the attachments varying from three to five inches. It
was about twelve feet from the ground and contained three fresh
eggs.

No. 3. Nest of May 29. Ash tree. Thirty feet from ground.
Three eggs slightly incubated. Typical. Rather a bulky, purse¬
shaped structure hut with a very wide opening. The walls are
not thick, except at the bottom of the nest, and are composed of
dry yucca fibre rather loosely woven. The lining is of the same
material, only finer and softer. The nest is fastened to two twigs
and the clusters of leaves belonging to them. One twig is
attached to the side of the nest for four inches, the other only
slightly to the rim. The exterior depth is six and the interior
depth four inches, and the diameter of the opening is three
inches.

No. 4. Nest of the 17th of June; in an ash tree, about
twenty-five feet from the ground, and contained four eggs. It is
a true pensile nest and is built of yucca fibre and grasses exter¬
nally, the whole very loosely put together and but slightly woven.
There is a very slight lining of a few horse hairs and a little
cotton-waste. The walls are thick and the opening small. The

162

Scott on the Nesting Habits of the Hooded Oriole.

[April

general shape is that of a purse or pouch. The exterior depth is
seven and the interior depth five inches. The opening, which is
covered by leaves hanging over it, is oval, with a greater
diameter of two and a half and a lesser diameter of two inches.
The eggs are typical. There are a number of bits of long
grasses and yucca fibers pendant from the walls outside, not
having been woven into the structure. -

No. 5. Nest of June 18. In a sycamore tree, twenty feet from
the ground. Four typical eggs. ' Fresh. Closely resembles the
ordinary structure of Icterus galbula , but is rather shallower
and the opening larger. Is attached to the tree only at three
points on the rim of the nest, and truly pensile. Built of same
material inside and out, i. e.. fine dried grasses. The walls are
about the same thickness throughout— about a quarter of an inch.
It is very compactly woven and is symmetrical. The depth out¬
side is three inches and inside two and three-quarter inches, and
the opening has a diameter of three inches.

No. 6. Nest' of June 20. Had four fresh eggs, which are
smaller and less sharply pointed than typical eggs, and have the
markings confined to the cluster of coloring at the larger end.
They measure .84 X .63, .80 X .65, .86 X .63, and .83 X .65.
The whole structure is very like that built ordinarily by Icterus
spurius. Fine green gi'asses closely woven form the walls,
and there is a lining of very fine silky dry grasses and some
plant down like that from thistles. It is small and compact,
having an exterior depth of three and a half and an interior
depth of three inches. Opening round, and two and a half
inches in diameter. There are no attachments to twigs but at
the rim.

No. 7. Nest of June 25. In a sycamore, twelve feet from the
ground. Outside, coarse green grasses put together much as
in No. 1 (nest of May 28). It is attached from top to bottom
on its sides to two twigs, the distance being four inches, and
grasses are tied and woven to one of these where it extends below
the structure, forming a ball an inch in diameter on which the
nest partly rests. There is a third twig also slightly fastened to
the nest, and three large leaves growing from the twigs are
sewed to the rim of the nest for all but about an inch and a half of
its circumference, forming a roof or covering, and leaving only
the small space spoken of for entrance. The measurements of

lSSj.]

Scott oh the Nesting Habits of the Hooded Oriole. l6^

the structure are : exterior depth four and interior depth two
and a half inches. The shape of the interior is oval, the greater
diameter being three and a half and the lesser diameter two and
a quarter inches. The whole is rather bulky and unsym metrical,
and, though smoothly lined inside with fine dry grasses and
cotton string, the walls outside are rough and uneven.

No. 8. Nest of July 20. Built in a sycamore, fifteen feet from
the ground, and contained four eggs slightly incubated, and one
fresh egg of Molothorus ater obscurus , which was fresh, and
measures .75 X .61. This is a true pensile nest, the shape being
that of a deep purse. It is built of the same materials through¬
out — very fine dried grasses — and is almost concealed by several
large leaves, depending from twigs close by, being ‘sewed’ to
its walls outside. The walls are not at all thick, and the nest,
though deep, is- not bulky. The external depth is six and the
internal depth five and a half inches. The greatest external
diameter is three and a quarter inches, and the diameter of the
opening, which is. round, is two and a half inches.

No. 9. Nest of July 1. Built in a sycamore, forty-five feet
from the ground. - Had an incomplete set of eggs, the female
having been killed before all were laid. It is a very bulky and
elaborate structure, and a general view of it gives the impression
of a nest sixteen or seventeen inches in depth by seven inches in
diameter externally. The outside is composed of dried grasses
and the blades of a small kind of yucca, also dry. There are
many of these only partially woven into the structure by their
smaller ends, the rest of the blade, with its broad base, being
left hanging and dangling. These blades are about sixteen inches
long, are from one-half to three-quarters of an inch broad at the
base, and gradually taper to a sharp point. Only half of the
length is woven into the nest. It is truly pensile and the in¬
terior is of about the average size, the walls being loosely woven
and very thick. The lining is of fine dried grasses and a little
cotton. Outside the nest proper is eight and a half inches deep,
but appears, from the dangling yucca blades, twice that depth.
The greatest external diameter of the nest proper is six inches,
though from the yucca blades this, too, appears larger. At one
point from the rim a sort of rope of grasses is woven to attach
it to a twig rather more than five inches above. The interior
diameter is three and a quarter inches at the opening of the nest,

1 64 Scott on the Nesting Habits of the. Hooded Oriole.

[April

where it is largest, and the interior depth is three and a half
inches.

No. 10. Second nest of July 20. Built in a sycamore, twenty-
five feet from the ground. Three fresh eggs, which are
unusual in being short and very much rounded. One is unfor¬
tunately broken; the others measure .yS X .62, and .S4X.63,
respectively. A branch running out from the tree, so as to be
almost parallel with the surface of the ground, has, near its
extremity, three twigs that point downward. The middle one
of these is about five inches from either of the others. There is
little or no attempt to draw these together, and as the nest is
attached to all three twigs the structure is a peculiar one. The
nest proper is between two of these twigs, and about four inches
below the branch. The middle twig, on which tire structure
mainly depends, crosses the nest at an angle, and being slightly
curved reaches under and across the bottom of the nest, sup¬
porting it, and protrudes beyond. For all the distance where
the nest touches it, it is firmly tied and sewed fast, and where it
is again free from the structure there is a ball of tightly woven
grasses like that described in the nest of May 28. One of the
outside twigs, running parallel to the one just spoken of, is
fastened to the wall of the nest for four inches. As these twigs
are almost on opposite sides of the nest, it is so far very sym¬
metrical, and, being composed externally of green grasses, it
reminds one strongly of the nest of Icterus spurius. But the
builders, apparently not content with the fastenings, now built
a sort of rope or stay of grasses which, reaching slightly upward
and to the third of the twigs mentioned, is fastened to some
leaves and firmly to the twig itself. This brace is rather more
than five inches long and about an inch thick, though sli ghtiy
flattened. The inside of the nest is beautifully lined with woven
yucca fiber and soft dried grasses. Outside it is nearly four
inches deep, and inside but two and a half inches deep. The
opening is oval, one diameter being two and a half and the other
three and a half inches. A large leaf depending from one of the
twigs is sewed tightly to the rim so nearly all the way round,
and forming so complete a roof or covering, that difficulty was
experienced in taking the eggs from the nest.

This completes the description of all of the nests, ten in
in number, taken in the canon proper ; a word as to some

i8Ss- J Ridgway on Buteo harlani and B. cooperi. 1 65

other nests of this species, found at but a short distance away,
will complete the record of nests observed. At a point on a
cactus desert, about a mile from where most of the nests enu¬
merated were taken, I found a nest of this species built on the
trunk or stem of a yucca about eight feet from the ground. It
contained young birds almost ready to leave the nest. The
trunks of many of the yuccas are covered with dead leaves
hanging downward, and this nest, which is a cup-like structure,
built of green grasses closely woven, is placed on the outside of
the dried leaves and is only attached to one of them. It is rather
more than three inches deep, and is attached to a single leaf
for this distance. No leaves cover it or conceal it, and the
general appearance is that of a cup resting against the trunk of
a tree with no apparent attachment to it.

In the mesquite regions about Tucson the nests are frequently
built in the mistletoe that grows plentifully on that tree. These
nests are generally symmetrical, shallow cups in shape, and are
almost always semi-pensile.

ON BUTEO HARLANI (AUD.) AND B. COOPERI

CASS.

BY ROBERT RIDGWAY.

Since the publication in *The Auk,’ for July, 1884 (pp.
253, 254), of the article suggesting the possible identity of these
two birds, the National Museum has purchased from Mr. G. H.
Ragsdale, of Gainesville, Texas, a specimen which proves con¬
clusively that B. harlani has, like B . borealis and B . sivainsoni ,
a light-colored phase, but at the same time, unfortunately, does
not dispose of the question of B. cooperi. The recently acquired
specimen, which is undoubtedly B. harlani , is even decidedly
lighter in color than B. cooperi , the tail being almost wholly
white, as are also the upper coverts, while the scapulars and
wing-coverts have a much greater amount of light spotting.
Notwithstanding its very light colors, however, the two partic¬
ularly diagnostic characters of B. cooperi , mentioned in the
article above referred to, viz., the unusual length of the naked
portion of the tarsus, in front, and the plumbeous or almost glau-

RlDGWAY on Buteo harlani and B. cooperi.

[April

1 66

cons color of the outer surface of the primaries, are wanting,
and the type of the last-named bird, therefore, remains unique in
respect to at least the last mentioned of these two characters.

The following measurements of B. cooperi and two light col¬
ored examples of B . harlani will show the differences in the
measurements of the tarsi : —

Species.

Wing.

Tail.

Culmen.

Tarsus.

Bare part of
tarsus in front.

Middle toe.

B. cooperi *. —

15-75

9. IO

I.05

3-1.5

2.25

I.70

B. harlani f....

16.25

10.00

I. IO

2.85

i-75

I-75

B. harlani% . . . .

16.50

9-50

I. IO

3-25

1.80

* Type. No. S525, U. S. Nat. Mus., Santa Clara, Cal.

t No. 99,969, Gainesville, Texas.

t Coll. C. E. Aiken, Colorado Springs. This specimen has been previously referred to
by me as B. cooperi.

For reasons which are explained in the paper referred to. I am
unable to give a description of the Colorado specimen ; but my
recollection is that it differed materially from the type of B.
cooperi in the color of the primaries, and that there was some
difference in the color of the tail ; in other words, that as to the
former character it was decidedly more like the Texas speci¬
men. The latter differs from the type of B. cooperi in the follow¬
ing particulars : —

B. cooperi. Outer surface of primaries hoary plumbeous, with a glau¬
cous cast, the shafts dusky, in strong contrast. Upper surface of tail with
rufous and grayish prevailing (the former in excess of the latter), all the
feathers irregularly and confusedly dashed longitudinally with dusky;
about .60 of an inc:_ from the tip (measured on middle rectrices) the tail
crossed by a broad but broken band of dusky, this succeeded by rufous,
the tip white; dark markings across abdomen narrowly lanceolate.
Under surface of tail showing distinct but much broken subterminal
dusky band.

B. harlani. Outer surface of primaries dull brownish slate, finely
mottled, more or less, with lighter and darker, the shafts brownish white
(more dusky terminally). Upper surface of tail white, the edges of the
feathers confusedly mottled with brownish gray, the color somewhat in¬
tensified in the region of the usual subterminal band; dark markings
across abdomen broadly guttate. Under surface of tail uniform white.

From the material which I have thus far been able to examine,
I am, on account of the above-mentioned facts, not quite prepared
to relinquish the claims of B. cooperi as a distinct species,
although still of the opinion that additional specimens would
probably break down the characters on which it at present stands.

RlDGWAY on the California Vulture.

«885.J

167

REMARKS ON THE CALIFORNIAN VULTURE
( PSE UDOGR IE HUS CA L IFORNIA NUS) .

BY ROBERT RlDGWAY.

Among some remarks by me respecting the distinctive char¬
acters of the genus Pseudogryphus , published in the ‘Nuttall
Bulletin’ for April, 1SS0, p. So, occurs the following statement:
“In the enumeration of the diagnostic characters of this genus
in ‘History of North American Birds’ (Vol. Ill, pp. 337, 33S),

. . . . a very important one was overlooked, viz., the possession
of fourteen rectrices, in which ‘ Vultur ’ calif ornianus appar¬
ently differs from all other SarcorhamphidcE." Subsequently,
Mr. J. H. Gurney wrote me asking whether all specimens in
the National Museum collection possessed fourteen rectrices, and
stating that he had not been able to find more than twelve in
those preserved in the Norwich Museum. This prompted a
reexamination into the matter, with results tending to annul, in
great measure, the statement quoted, since it is proven that the
possession of fourteen rectrices by this species is, if not excep¬
tional, at least not the rule. The writer is unable to remember
the basis of his statement that P. calif ornianus possessed this
number of tail-feathers, but it was probably based on the adult
specimen described in ‘History of North American Birds,’ (Vol.
Ill, p. 339), now no longer in the National Museum collection,
having been a badly prepared, unpoisoned skin, which was sub¬
sequently destroyed by insects. The only two examples now in
the National Museum, both young birds, each possess but twelve
rectrices, as do also two fine adults in Mr. Henshaw’s collection.
A specimen in the American Museum of Natural History, in
New York City, however, possesses thirteen tail-feathers, one
being wanting, so there must have been originally fourteen,
which is the number represented by Audubon in his plate of this
species and, according to Mr. Gurney (Cat. Diurn. Accipitres,
18S4, p. 3, foot-note), being “a peculiarity first noticed by Au¬
dubon,” though I am unable to find where he makes mention of
it, since in his description (B. Am., oct. ed., I, p. 14) he gives
the number as twelve. Swainson and Richardson (Fauna
Boreali-Americana, II, p. 3) in their description of this species,

i6S

Ridgway on the California Vulture.

[April

based on “male and female specimens shot by Mr. Douglas, in
lat. 45 i° N., and now in the Museum of the Zoological Society,”
state that “the tail is even, and consists of fourteen feathers”; so
there can be no doubt that the number of tail-feathers in this
species is variable, and therefore not available as a generic char¬
acter.

In my article referred to above, it is stated that this species is
“fully the peer of the Condor in size, the wing and tail averag¬
ing even decidedly greater. It is not, however, quite so strongly
built, the beak and feet being proportionately weaker.” Com¬
parative measurements were there given of fully adult males of
the two species, showing that by a similar method of deduction,
the alar expanse should be about 9 feet 2 inches in 61. gryphus ,
and 9 feet 8 inches in P. calif or?iianus. I was not aware at
the time that the latter figures were exactly those of an adult
obtained by Douglas, as recorded by Swainson and Richardson
(1. c.), nor had I read Professor Orton’s paper in the ‘Annals
and. Magazine of Natural History,’ Vol. VIII, 1S71, pp. 185-
192, entitled ‘On the Condors of the Equatorial Andes,’ in
which the exaggerations of writers in respect to the size of the
Condor are the subject specially treated, and from which the
following is quoted : “A full-grown male from the most cele¬
brated locality in the Andes, now in Vassar College, has a
stretch of nine feet. Humboldt never found one to measure
over nine feet ; and the largest specimen seen by Darwin was
eight and a half feet from tip to tip. An old male in the
Zoological Gardens of London measures eleven feet. Von
Tschudi says he found one with a spread of fourteen feet ten
inches; but he invalidates his testimony by the subsequent state¬
ment that the full-grown condor measures from twelve to thirteen
feet.”

The two adult Californian Vultures in Mr. Henshaw’s collec¬
tion, both measured and weighed by Mr. Henshaw before skin¬
ning, were males; one spread eight feet nine inches and weighed
twenty pounds, while the other spread nine feet one inch and
weighed twenty-three pounds. Mr. Henshaw, while in the
locality where his specimens were shot, was informed by perfectly
reliable persons of two killed the previous year which spread
eleven feet, by careful measurement.

Mr. Henshaw’s specimens are neither of them very old birds,
having the bill still tinged with horn-color, and are decidedly

ISS5-J

Ridgway on Sarcorhamphus cequatorialis Sharpe.

169

smaller than some that have been examined, as the following
measurements, taken from the dried skins, will show. The
fresh colors of the soft parts, the alar extent, and weight, noted
by Mr. Henshaw before the specimens were skinned, are also
given : —

Larger specimen-. Wing, 32.00 inches; tail, 16.00; culmen, 1.50, depth
of bill, 1.25, width, .95; length of head, from point of bill to occiput,
6.00; tarsus, 4.70; middle toe, 4.10, with claw, 5.45. Weight, 23 lbs. ;
spread of wings, 9 feet, 1 inch. “Head and neck light yellow, fading
to pinkish on lower neck; iris reddish brown ; feet dull bluish white.”

Smaller specimen-. Wing, 3125 inches; tail, 15.50; culmen, 1.50, depth
of bill, 1.20, width, .95; length of head, 6.20; tarsus, 4.40; middle toe,
4.00, with claw, 5.40. Weight, 20 lbs. ; spread of wings, 8 feet, 9 inches.
“Head and neck light 01-ange ; iris red; feet pinkish flesh color.

Since the above was put in type, four specimens in the flesh
have been received at the National Museum. The weight, after
their reception was not taken, on account of the specimens having
been eviscerated ; but they were carefully measured, with the
following result : —

No. 103,064, adult, U.’S. Nat. Mus. — Total length, 44 inches; extent
of wings, 110.70 inches.

No. 103,065, juv. (first year). — Total length, 44.25 inches; extent of
wings, 98.50 inches.

No. 103,066, juv. (first year). — Total length, 46.50 inches; extent of
wings, 10S.25 inches.

No. 103,067, juv. (first year). — Total length, 43.50 inches; extent of
wings, 106 inches.

NOTE ON SARCORHAMPHUS MS Q UA TOR I A L IS

SHARPE.

BY ROBERT RIDGWAY.

.In Volume I of the ‘Catalogue of Birds in the British
Museum’ Mr. R. Bowdler Sharpe describes, under the name
Sarcorhamphus cequatorialis (p. 21), a supposed new7 species
of Condor, to which the following characters were ascribed :
“Smaller than A. gryphus ; entirely brown in plumage; bill
blackish.” The habitat w7as given as Ecuador (Quito) and, wfltb

RiDGWAY on Sarcorhamphus cequatorialis Sharpe.

[April

I70

a query, Colombia. The supposed new species was based in
part on a specimen living (in 1873) in the Zoological Gardens at
Amsterdam which was “apparently fully adult, with a perfectly
formed erect wattle, but brown in colour all over,” and partly on
some statements made by Professor Orton in the ‘Annals of
Natural History’ for 1871, pages 1S6, 187.

In a paper published in the ‘Bulletin of the Nuttall Ornith¬
ological Club,' April, 1SS0, pp. 77-84, I called attention (on p.
81) to a Condor then living in the Central Park Menagerie, New
York City, captured alive, when at least three months old, on
Mount Cauquences, Chili, received at the menagerie July 23, i375,
and which in December, 1S7S, or more than three years later,
corresponded entirely with the Sarcorhamphus ceqttatorialis of
Sharpe.

In the ‘Proceedings’ of the Zoological .Society of London for
1883, page 349, Mr. Sclater mentions and figures (pi. xxxv) “a
Condor from Peru, which had been presented to the Society by
Mr. John J. North, on the 13th of June, 1 S77 » and which was
still living in the Society’s Gardens.” It is further stated that
“after six years it was in nearly the same uniform brown plumage
as that in which it had been originally received.” Mr. Sclater,
it was announced, “had now come to the conclusion that this
must be a specimen of the ‘ Condor pardd , or Brown Condor,
spoken of by Mr. J. Orton, and subsequently named Sarcorham¬
phus cequatoriaUs by Sharpe in his ‘Catalogue of the Birds of
the British Museum’ (p. 21.).”

The excellent figure given represents a bird exactly like that
in the Central Park Menagerie, when seen by me in December,
1S7S.

The Central Park specimen having recently died and been se¬
cured by the National Museum, the following account of its pro¬
gressive changes in plumage may be of interest as deciding the
status of S. ccquatorialis : —

July 23, 1875. — Specimen received at the Central Park Menagerie, said
to be at least three months old when captured. Plumage uniform snuff-
brown, the head and neck similar, but darker, the bill blackish.

April 1, 1S76. — Memorandum by Mr. Geo. N. Lawrence: “Condor,
said to be 9 months [/.<?., 12 months] old, bill black; cere and naked sides
of head grayish black ; head sparsely covered with short downy feathers
of a smoky black; plumage in general dark snuff-brown.”

i8S5-] Ridgway on Sarcorhamphus zequatorialis Sharpe. I^I

August 1877. — Memorandum by Mr. Lawrence: “No change, except
the development of the ruff, which is colored like the back.”

December, 187s. — No appreciable change in plumage.

February 10, 18S0. — Under this date, Mr. W. A. Conklin, Superinten¬
dent of the Central Park Menagerie, wrote me as follows: — “The
plumage remains still unchanged, except that the ruff about the neck is
somewhat fuller, and has a little sprinkle of white through the down ....
It has not increased since then [the date of its arrival at the Menagerie]
either in size or weight. The bill is black at the base, the apical half
ivory-white. Head bare ; no wattles; iris dark brown.”

February 23, 1880. — Memorandum by Mr. Lawrence: “The ruff is now
more full, but no appearance of becoming white; underneath [the sur¬
face ?] the feathers [of the ruff ?] are whitish.”

November 11, 1884. — The specimen to which the above remarks and
memoranda appertain received in the flesh from Mr. Conklin, it having
died a day or two previously. The plumage is now in all respects that oj
the adult common Condor ( Sarcorhamphus gry phus), the general color
being black, with white ruff, and grayish white or pale gray wing-mark¬
ings. No ‘comb,’ but throat with a slight ‘dewlap,’ and lower part of
foreneck with a small pendulous wattle. Iris dark hazel; neck dirty
yellowish white, slightly tinged with dull purplish flesh-color, the head
more purplish; bill white, black at base, and dusky on culmen ; feet black¬
ish. Length, 45.50 inches ; extent of wings, 103.25 inches ; weight 17 lbs.,
the specimen in excellent condition. By dissection the bird proved to be
a female.

After carefully weighing all the testimony, it therefore seems
very doubtful whether more than one species of Condor exists in
South America. It is cpiite likely, however, that this species
{Sarcorhamphus gryphus) varies in size or other characters in
different parts of its range, and that therefore two or more
geographical races or subspecies exist ; but in all probability
there does not exist in any museum sufficient material to deter¬
mine this question.

At an}- rate, it would appear to be established beyond doubt
that Sarcorhamphus gryphus is uniform brown when young,
and that it wears this plumage until at least seven years old. It
would seem, also, that the ‘comb,’ or erect wattle, peculiar to
the male, is developed before the bird assumes the adult plumage,
as is attested by the living specimen in the Amsterdam Zoological
Garden, referred to by Mr. Sharpe.

l72

Scott, Winter Notes from Southern Arizona.

[April

WINTER MOUNTAIN NOTES FROM SOUTHERN
ARIZONA.

BY W. E. D. SCOTT.

The following record was made during a four days’ visit to the
highest point of Los Sierras de Santa Catalina, Pima County,
Arizona, the time being from November 26 to 29, inclusive,
1884. The region is a dense pine and spruce forest, with here
and there a sprinkling of poplars and sycamores, and a few ever¬
green oaks. The readers of ‘The Auk’ would doubtless have a
more definite idea of the exact point, could they have looked
down with me on Fort Lowell, which seemed a fairy encamp¬
ment directly below the solitary hut where I bivouacked. It
was real winter at this altitude — a little over 10,000 feet — with
from two to six inches of snow on the ground, and ice in the
brooks where the current was not too rapid ; and the region
presented a very marked contrast to that about Fort Lowell,
and just the other side of Tucson, where the cottonwood trees
waved in plain view as green as in June. The four days were
of such clear sunshine and blue sky as to make one forget the
winter on the ground, and only at night was the cold intense.
Bird life was not represented by very many species, but the
individual representation of some kept the woo .is a very lively
solitude.

By far the greater number of birds were Nuthatches, and the
Slender-billed Nuthatch ( Sitta carolinensis aculeata) was ubiq¬
uitous, though now and then fairly overshadowed by numerous
companies of the Pygmv Nuthatch ( Sitta pygmceci). Once I
heard a very familiar Titmouse note but did not see the maker ;
and this was the only hint of a Tit noticed during my visit.

Associated with flocks of the Mexican Bluebird ( Sialia mex-
icana ), which was, by the way, the only kind of Bluebird
observed, was always to be found one and sometimes two represen¬
tatives of the Olive Warbler ( Pettcedramus olivaceus) . The
Bluebirds were generally feeding on some insects in the tall pines,
in flocks of from six to ten individuals. The Olive Warblers were
on the best of terms with their blue friends, and as the Bluebirds
were shy and restless they made it difficult to obtain or observe

>SSS.]

Scott, Winter Notes from Southern Arizona.

173

very closely their smaller allies. I did not in these pine woods
see the two species apart, and became at length so well aware
of the intimacy that existed between them, that I would fire at
any small bird passing high overhead in company with Blue¬
birds. They were chance shots, certainly, but the only two
small birds obtained flying in this way with the Bluebirds were
Olive Warblers. Presently I learned, too, that the Warblers had
a call-note so like that of their associates as to be almost iden¬
tical. It seemed to me only a clearer whistle, of more silvery tone.
During my stay I obtained six representatives of the Warbler —
two adult males, two adult females, and two females of the
year. Five of these birds were taken on November 26, before
the Bluebirds had become very wary, and on the 28th the other
was taken, as I have described, from a party of Bluebirds flying
over. As near as can be estimated I was able to secure rather
less than half of the Warblers I saw, for there seemed to be not
more than fourteen noted, altogether.

Generally they preferred the largest branches of thp pines
when they alighted, though I took one not more than three feet
from the ground in a small bush. Their movements while feed¬
ing or searching for food are very deliberate, though I noticed
now and again certain motions when at the extremity of a bough
that reminded me of a Kinglet or Titmouse. No song was
noted save the call described. I think there can be little if any
doubt that they are residents all the year, and certainly native
residents of the pine woods of this region, for aside from the fact
of their presence as recorded when winter had fairly set in, Mr.
F. Stephens took a single male in February, 1SS0, in this same
range of mountains, and at a point not very distant, though at a
lower altitude, he tells me. (For further record of this indi¬
vidual, see Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, Vol. VII, No. 3, July, 1S82,
p. 136.)

A number of Ruby-crowned Kinglets {Regultis calendula )
were seen, and two adults, males, obtained, show a peculiar
grayish cast about the green of the head and back that is much
more apparent than in any eastern examples of this species that
I have ever seen or taken.

The Fringillidae that were observed, and which are given in
the order of their comparative abundance, the most common
heading the list, were Cassin’s Finch ( Carpodacus cassini ),

x74

Scott, Winter Notes from Southern Arizona.

[April

Junco cinereus caniceps, Junco cinereus , Pipilo maculatus
megalonyx , and four individuals of the Evening Grosbeak ( lies -
perophona vespertina) . Unfortunately none of these last were
secured, but the identification in life of. so peculiar a species,
and close at hand, is not difficult. They were feeding on small
cones in a spruce tree, and were not at all shy, but my gun missing
fire disturbed them and I was unable to find them again. The
Oregon Snowbird (Junco Oregon us) , though abundant at a
lower altitude, and observed in great numbers the day I as¬
cended the mountain, and again on returning from the trip, was
not met with in the pine woods, nor were any Crossbills ob¬
served.

Steller’s Jay ( Cyanocitta stelleri macrolopha) , and the
Raven ( Corvus corax carnivorus) were the only Corvidae
noted. Neither were common, though the former was seen
every day, but the latter only twice during my stay.

The Woodpeckers were represented by five species : Harris’s
Woodpecker ( Picus villosus harrisi ), the Brown-headed
Woodpecker ( Sphyropicus t/iyroidcs) , the Nuchal Wood¬
pecker ( S. varius nuchalis) , the California Woodpecker ( Me-
lanerpcs forniicivorus bairdi) , and the Red-shafted Flicker
( Colaptes mexicanus). The California was perhaps most
common, though Harris’s and the Brown-headed were nearly
as abundant, and the others rare. The Brown-headed Wood¬
pecker was represented almost entirely by females, of which I
perhaps saw twenty or more, and not a quarter as many males.
It is not improbable that this is about the winter habitat of the
females of this species, and that most of the males winter still
farther to the northward. Four species will conclude the list of
birds absolutely noted at this point, though doubtless many were
overlooked, or would be found during a more protracted visit.
A single Sharp-shinned Hawk ( Accipter fuscus ) was taken, and
two Red-tailed Hawks ( Buteo borealis) were seen. The Band¬
tailed Pigeon ( Columba fasciata) was not uncommon in small
flocks and singly, and, judging from the tracks in the snow, Wild
Turkeys were abundant, though only two females were seen,
and none were taken.

S8S.] Shufeldt on the Beak of the Short-tailed Albatross. I 75

VARIATIONS IN THE FORM OF THE BEAK,
THAT TAKE PLACE DURING ITS GROWTH,

IN THE SHORT-TAILED ALBATROSS

( DIOMEDE A BRA C If YURA ) .

BY DR. R. W. SHUFELDT, U. S. ARMY.

Several years ago when Dr. Bean of the Smithsonian Insti¬
tution was collecting in various parts of Alaska, he succeeded
in securing four heads in the flesh of the Short-tailed Albatross.
These were brought back to Washington in alcohol, along with
the rest of the excellent material that was gathered during these
explorations in our far-off possessions. Last October, before I
left Washington for my present field of research in New Mexico,
Dr. Bean very kindly presented me with the entire series of the
above-mentioned heads, to be used as I saw fit in some of my
anatomical studies of the group.

Before parting with them, however, he invited my attention to
the marked differences that existed in the form, as well as the
relations of the horny parts that covered the osseous beak.

The four heads in question undoubtedly belonged to individ- ■
tuffs of very different ages, ranging from a ‘bird of the year’ to
an apparently full-grown adult.

The specimen from which the beak in figure i was drawn,
has the plumage of the head a yellowish white all over, while

Figure i. Left lateral view of the beak of Diomedea brachyura, adult. The letters
direct attention to the various horny pieces that cover it. From nature, by John L. Ridg-
way and reduced one-half.

176 Shufeldt on the Beak of the Short-tailed Albatross. [April

the head of the one from which figure 2 was taken has this color
dashed here and there with pale brown.

In specimen No. 3 this brown becomes much deeper and is
the prevailing color of the head, to the gular space and about
the base of the superior mandible, in which localities it is of a
dirty white. The last specimen has the plumage of the entire
head a deep sooty brown, being somewhat paler in the parts
where the dirty-white occurs in specimen No. 3. Of these four
heads I take the specimen marked No. 1 in the figures to be the
oldest, if not, as I have already said, a full-grown bird, while the
others become younger and younger, as indicated by their num¬
bers, No. 4 being the youngest of all.

The figures of these beaks were all drawn from the specimens
bv Mr. John L. Ridgway, a brother of the ornithologist. They
are carefully and accurately done, as is all the work of this artist.

In figure 1 I have added the letters from a to g in order that
we might have something to designate the parts by in referring

Figure 2. Left lateral aspect of the beak in Diomedea brachyura, a younger speci¬
men than the one figured in Fig. i. Reduced one-half from nature.

to them. The letters given in figure 1 refer to like pieces of the
sheath in the other figures.

In the beak of an Albatross collected at the Cape of Good
Hope, Africa, and presented to me many years ago, I find the
little horny dome, covering the nostril and marked c in figure 1,
to be a separate piece, and I presume the parts referred to by the
other letters are likewise. It hardly seems possible, however,
that any of these parts are ever moulted during the breeding sea-

iSSs.] Shufeldt on the Beak of the Short-tailed Albatross. 177

son, a condition known to occur among the Alcidas, as has been
so well described through the admirable researches of L. Bureau,
Stejneger, and others.

Figure 3. Left lateral view of the beak of Diomedea brachynra. A still younger
specimen than No. 2. Reduced one-half from nature.

If we examine the beak of the adult Albatross shown in figure
1, it is at once noticeable that its general form differs very mate¬
rially from the younger birds. This difference as a whole consists
in a somewhat greater depth for the length of the beak as com¬
pared with the less matured individuals. The arch of the ante¬
rior extremity of the culmen formed by the piece marked a is
considerably more convex in the adult than it is in figure 2, for
instance, and the relation of this piece to the surrounding pieces,
b , of, and g, is by no means exactly the same.

Figube 4. Left lateral aspect of the beak of Diomedea brachyura, the younger of the
four shown in the figures. Reduced one-half from nature.

i78

Stejneger, Analecta Ornithologica.

[April

The piece marked d becomes relatively larger as the bird ma¬
tures, while the piece e seems to vary both in form and length
in the various specimens before me. We likewise notice that
the forms assumed by the anterior extremities of the pieces f and
g must vary with the differences already referred to, that take
place in a, d , and e.

In the drawings here presented, which are such correct repre¬
sentations of the objects they depict, no doubt the reader will dis¬
cover other interesting differences than those I have given above.

ANALECTA ORNITHOLOGICA.

Fifth Series.

BY LEONHARD STEJNEGER.

XXV. Why Chordeiles virginianus and not Ck. popetue?

In order to answer this question I will first have to quote the
description of the author who first established the binominal
Caprimulgus virginianus. Gmelin gives the following account
of the species (S. N.. I, 1788, p. 102S) :

“Virginianus. 3. C. fuscus, transversim griseo-fusco et hinc inde cinereo-
varius, subtus ex rubescente albus transversim stria-
tus, menti macula trigona alba, area oculorum et
cervice aurantiis maculis varia.

Caprimulgus minor americanus. Syst. nat. XII. 1 . p.
346. 1. (3. Kalm it. 3. p. 93.

Caprimulgus virginianus. Briss. av. 2. p. 477. «. 3.

Whip-poor-will. Catesb. Car. 3. t. 16. Edvj. av. 2. t.
63. Buff. hist. nat. des ois. 6. p. 534.

Longwinged Goatsucker. Arct. Zool. 2. p. 436. n. 337.
t. iS.

Virginia Goatsucker. Lath. Syn. II. 2. p. 595. n. 6...

Genae ex cinereo fuscae; remiges utrae , 5 primae circa
medium , rectrices extimae prope apicem macula alba
notatae; pedes incarnati.”

This description, considered alone, will be seen to fit the
Nighthawk (Ridgw., Nomencl., No. 357) very well. Particu-

1SS5.]

r79

Stejneger, Analecta Ornithologica.

larly decisive is the reference to the white wing- and tail-spots.
It will also be remarked that bristles at the mouth are not men¬
tioned at all. So far it is all right, and as this description is the
basis of the oldest binominal, I think we might content ourselves
with this result. It lias been urged, however, that the references
belong to the Whip-poor-will (R., No. 354), that Gmelin’s spe¬
cies is a composite one, and, therefore, untenable. Let us then
examine a little closer into the references given.

We will commence with the third of Gmelin’s enumeration,
“Whip-poor-will, Catesb. Car. 3. t. 16,” because it is the oldest
and the one which has caused the whole trouble.

Plate 16 of the Appendix of Catesby’s ‘Natural History of Caro¬
lina. Florida and the Bahama Islands’ represents a Goatsucker
which he calls ‘ Caprimulgus minor Americanus.' The figure
is one of the poorer pictures of that celebrated work, but may
be said to represent the Nighthawk. on account of the white
wing-spot, which is very recognizable. Above and below the
bill are some long and fantastically arranged bristles, which has
led to the belief that the Antrostomus vociferus was meant, the
more so since Catesby in the text calls the. bird ‘Whip-poor-will.’
The latter mistake is very excusable, for I have been told that
the people in the localities in which both species occur generally
confound them, and believe that the Nighthawk utters the sound
which has given ‘Whip-poor-will’ its name. Concerning the
bristles, we are justified in presuming that they are due to an
intended improvement on the part of the artist. Catesby mav
have seen specimens of the A. vociferus with the strong bristles,
and, confounding the two species, introduced the bristles into
his drawing thinking that they were accidentally absent from the
specimen he figured, for, inasmuch as the plate is inscribed
“d/. Catesby ad viv. delin .,” it is not at all probable that the
white wing-spot is a freak of his fancy. There is another
point of importance in that drawing, namely, the length of the
pointed wings, which reach considerably beyond the end of the
tail, proportions particularly characteristic of the Nighthawk.
We are, therefore, justified in saying that the figure in question
is a rather poor representation of the so-called ‘Nighthawk.’

The next reference in time is Edwards’s Plate 63. That this
figui'e represents the Nighthawk is beyond doubt, it being a very
good picture of that bird. It may be remarked that he also calls

Stejneger, Analecta Ornithologica.

[April

i So

the bird “Caprimulgus minor Americanus. Whip-poor-will,”
thus proving that the identical inscription on Catesby’s plate
is no objection to our identification made above.

Then follows Linnasus’s “Caprimulgus europaeus P.” This is
originally (175S) based solely upon Catesby’s and Edwards’s
figures; in the 12th edition he added the quotation of Kalm’s
‘Iter.’ His reasons for making ‘Caprimulgus minor americanus’
a variety of the European Goatsucker he expresses in the fol¬
lowing words: “Varietatem p. judico ex macula alba alarum &
rectricum , ut in mare avis europeae.” Gmelin’s citation of Lin¬
nasus’s S. N., 1 2th edition, therefore, clearly belongs to the
Nighthawk.

Brisson’s “ Caprimulgus virginianus,” which is next in order,
is based exclusively upon the two figures of Catesby and Edwards.
With his usual acuteness, however, he at once saw that the pic¬
ture made by the latter was the more accurate one of the two, and
consequently he based his description mainly upon that, as he
expressly remarks about the former, “une figure pas assez exacte,”
while of the latter he says, “une figure exacte.” His description,
therefore, unquestionably belongs to the Nighthawk, notwithstand¬
ing the fact that Catesby’s drawing induced him to mention the
long bristles.

Buffon’s account (1. c.) is based upon the above-mentioned
authors, and belongs where they belong. Moreover, he mentions
especially “les cinq premieres [pennes des ailes] marqu6es d’une
tache blanche vers le milieu,” and remarks: “M. Linnaeus en fait
une variete dans l’esp^ce Europeenne ; mais il eu diff^re par la
longueur de ses ailes.”

“The longwinged Goatsucker” of Pennant (Arct. Zool. II,
p. 436, No. 337) which has “ primaries black, marked near the
middle with a white bar,” and of which the “ wings, when
closed, extend beyond the end of the tail,” is easily identified by
these characters alone as the Nighthawk. The accompanying
figure does not belong there, and has evidently been, by some
mistake, wrongfully inscribed.

The first one, since Catesby and Edwards, who seems to have
had specimens before him, was Latham, referring, as he does, to
the British Museum and the Leverian Museum. He describes
his birds thus ( l.c .) :

“ 6. Virginia G[oatsucker]. . . . dull brown, transversely variega-

[fuscus, transversim

iS8S.]

Stejneger, Analecta Ornitkologica.

181

ted and blended with rufous brown, with here and there a mixture
griseo-fusco ct hinc inde

of ash-colour and a little portion of gray on the wings : above the eyes
cinereo-varins area oculorum

on each side, and behind the neck, a few orange spots: under the eyes
et cervice aurantiis maculis varia; getiae ex
cinereous brown : on the chin a white triangular spot .... beneath
cinereo fuscae; mevti macula trigona alba subtus

reddish white, crossed with dusky streaks: quills dusky; the five first
ex rubescente albtis transversim striatus ; r'emiges atrae, j primae
marked about the middle with a spot of white, occupying both webs,
circa medium

except on the first, in which it is seen only on the inner : tail not unlike
the quills; the two outer feathers marked with a spot of white near the
rectrices extimae prope apicem macula alba notatae-
end : legs flesh-colour.”
pedes incarnati .]

This description allows of only one interpretation : it refers
solely to the Nighthawk. From this Gmelin got his diagnosis
and description, as the interlineation of his Latin translation in
the text above conclusively proves, and we may add that his
account of the habits, etc., is likewise only a translation of that
given by Latham. Gmelin’ s name, consequently, is based exclu¬
sively upon specimens of the Nighthawk.

It may now be regarded as fairly proven that Caprimulgzis
virginianus Gmel. (1788) is the earliest and most correct name
of the bird subsequently (1807) called C. popetzie by Vieillot.
I have enlarged considerably upon this question, not because I
“ take a special delight in bringing forward ” these changes
(cf. Ibis, 1884, p. 453), but because I want these deplorable
changes of our ornithological nomenclature stopped ; because
I do not want to draw straws as to what name I am going to
apply to the birds I treat of; because I find the ‘ Auctorum plu-
rimorum ’ principle utterly unreliable, as is well shown by the
present example. Besides, I thought it useful to have the
question indicated in the heading of the present article settled
beyond even a shadow of doubt. That this is necessary will
be understood from a cursory summary of the changes the
systematic name of the Nighthawk has suffered under the hands
of our most prominent ornithologists. It was called virginia-
nus by Swainson and Richardson, Nutall, and Audubon ; Bona¬
parte turned from popetue to virginianus ; Baird, Ridgway,

182

Stejneger, Analecta Ornithologica.

[April

Allen, and others have applied popetzie consistently. Coues in
the first editions of his ‘Key’ and the ‘Check-list,’ as also in
the ‘Birds of the North West,’ uses virginianus , but in the
second editions of the two former he adopted popetzie.

The North American species and races should stand thus :

R. 357. Chordeiles virginianus ( Gnz.) Sw.* Nighthawk.

357a. Ghordeiles virginianus henryi (Cass.) Coues.

Western Nightiiawk.

357 b. Chordeiles virginianus minor (Cab.) Coues.

Cuban Nighthawk.

XXVI. On the Generic Names of the Phalaropes.

The genus Phalaropus was originally established by Brisson,
and made by him to contain both the narrow billed species and
the broad billed one. Like all of the earlier writers he omitted
to indicate a type, simply for the reason that the usefulness or
the necessity of such a thing was not understood at that time.
In many cases it may be possible to say with some degree of
probability which species the author would have given as type in
the modern sense, if it had been the custom of his age to indi¬
cate it, but the confused nomenclature resulting from such pro¬
ceedings is the best proof of the insufficiency of the method, and
a clear rule to the effect that the first author dividing the genus
has the power of designating the type of the restricted parts of
it, has been found to be satisfactory in every respect.

Turning now to the particular case, intimated above, we find that
Vieillot, and not Cuvier, as generally supposed, was the first to
subdivide Brisson’s genus Phalaropus. In his ‘Analyse d’une
nouvelle Ornithologie elementaire’ (Paris, 1S16), Vieillot under¬
took the division in the following terms (p. 62) :

“ 245. Crymophile, Crymophilus. Tringa , Linn. Gm. Phalaropus ,
Lath.

Bee un peu trigone a la base, sillonne en dessus, droit, a la point dilatde,
arrondie et flechie ....

Esp. Phalarope a festons denteles, Buff.

246. Phalarope, Phalaropus , Bliss. Lath. Tringa , Lin. Gm.

Bee droit, arrondi, gr&le, pointu, un peu incline vers le bout. . . .

Esp. Phalarope cendre, Buff.”

Chordeiles virginianus Swains. Faun. Bor. Am. II, p. 496 (1831).

ISSS.]

Stejneger, Analecta O rnithologica.

I83

It was not before the following year ( 1 S 1 7) that Cuvier subdi¬
vided the same genus in a similar manner, retaining, however, the
name Phalaropus for the group already named Crymophilus by
Vieillot, and giving the name Lobipes to the latter’s Phalaropus .
The North American species should stand thus :

R. 563. Crymophilus* fulicarius {Linn.). Red Phal-
arope.

564. Phalaropus lobatus {Li?in.). Northern Phal-

arope.

565. Phalaropus tricolor ( Vieill .). Wilson’s Phal-

arope.

XXVII. Scops Preoccupied !

The following note has for its object to call attention to the fact
that the generic term Scops , frequently applied to the Little
Screech Owl and its allies, is preoccupied in ornithology.

In 1760 Brisson named the African Umbrette Scopus , a name
which Brtinnich, the well-known author of ‘Ornithologia bore¬
alis,’ twelve years afterwards emended into Scops. In 1772 he
published a small octavo volume, called ‘Zoologite Funda-
menta,’f a kind of Synopsis of the Animal Kingdom, consisting
of synoptical tables in the Latin and Danish languages, particu¬
larly prepared as a manual to be used by the students at his
lectures. All the genera of birds known and recognized at that
time are incorporated and characterized ; a few new ones are
established and some old ones renamed. To this book we owe
the first recognition of the Great Auk as a separate genus, and
the name it properly should bear, viz., Plautus. On p. 74 we
find the Umbrette characterized as Scops, and that it is not a
misprint or lapsus calami is evident from the same spelling of
the word occurring on p. 70.

The first synonym of Scops Savigny is Ephialtes Keys, and
Bias. (1S40), which, however, is also preoccupied, having been
employed by Schrank in 1S02 for a hymenopterous insect.

* KpvjjLos = ice, <j>iX.eu = I love.

t M. Th. Briinnichii | Zoologise | fundamenta | Praelectionibus Academicis | Ac-
comodata. | — Grunde | i | Dyrelaeren. | — Hafniae et Lipsiae MDCCLXXII. | Apud
Frider. Christ. Pelt. | — Litteris Godichianis. (1 vol. oct. 254 pp. Birds from
p. 50 to p. 93.)

184

Stejneger, Analecta Ornithologica.

[April

Next comes Megascops of Kaup, concerning the type of
which authors seem to be at variance. The case, however, is
plain enough. In Tsis’ for 1S48, p. 769, Kaup enumerates five
species under the subgenus Megascops , the first one being '•Sc.
indica Gmel.,’ while Ac. asio is only mentioned as No. 4. But
on p. 765, where he mentions the term for the first time, he
writes “ Alegascops {Scops asio , etc.),” by the species in paren¬
thesis explaining the subgeneric appellation, which may there¬
fore safely be said to have asio for type. Besides, the two
species mentioned are undoubtedly congeneric, so that the name
is applicable whichever may be regarded as the type.

The North-American species will stand thus :

R. 402. — Megascops* asio {Linn.).

402 a. — Megascops asio floridanus {Ridgw.).

402 b. — Megascops asio maccalli {Cass.).

402 c. — Megascops asio maxwelliae {Ridgw.) .

402^.— Megascops asio kennicotti {Elliot).

— Megascops asio bendirei {Brewst.) .

403. — Megascops trichopsis ( Wagl.).

404. — Megascops flammeolus {Licht.).

XXVIII. On Gyrfalcons.

In Scandinavia only two Gyrfalcons are known to occur, the
common so-called ‘Brown Gyrfalcon,’ or the typical Falco gyr-
falco , and the form with whitish black-streaked head, usually
attributed to Iceland and South Greenland {cf. Collett, N. Mag.
Natur. XXVI, 1SS1, p. 329). Both of these were known to
Linnaeus, who described the former as F. gyrfalco , the latter
as F. rusticolus. The first of these names is not any longer a
matter of dispute. The latter ought not be, for his diagnosis:
“Falco cera palpebris pedibusque luteis, corpore cinereo al-
boque undulato, collari albo. Habitat in Svecia” is clear
enough, and better than his diagnosis of F. gyrfalco. He
seems not, however, to have recognized the white G}rrfalcon,
which was well known to Briinnich. The latter describes, under
the specific name of islandus , three different birds, which he
considers “sine dubio varietates quas soli Danire Regi vendere

* Deriv. Gr. p.tyas = great ; a-Ku>vJ/ = a kind of Owl.

i8SS.j

Stejneger, Analecta Ornithologica. I 8 Cj

tenentur Islandi.” The two first, his No. 7 and No. 8, are evi¬
dently only stages of the White Gyrfalcon ; No. 9 is an equally
undoubted description of the bird which we think Linnaeus
called rusticolus. It will thus be seen that Brtinnich’s species
F. islandns is a compound one, embracing both the white and
the dark species of Greenland and Iceland. The author who
next treated of these birds from autopsy was Otto Fabricius,
who in his celebrated ‘Fauna Groenlandica,’ published in 1780,
applied the name Falco islandus to the white species — “Falco
albus maculis cordatis nigricantibus, rectricibus albis nigro-
fasciatis” — to which he expressly refers Briinnich’s No. 8 as the
young, and No. 7 as the old, while No. 9, the dark one. he with¬
out hesitation quotes as a synonym of his F. rusticolus. Fab-
ricus, therefore, restricted the name islattdtts to the white
species. To us who accept Brunnich’s names the species must
stand as

Falco islandus Brunnich as restricted by Fabricius ,

while English authors — starting from the 12th edition — will
have to call it

Falco islandus Fabricius , 1780.

It is a matter of regret that Gmelin when editing the Systema
Naturalis eight years later overlooked Fabricius’s* ‘Fauna
Groenlandica,’ thus committing the blunder of applying Brun¬
nich’s islandus to No. 9, the dark one, while he treated No. 7
and No. 8, respectively, as var. p albtis and var. y maculatus ,
names occurring four pages earlier than his Falco candicans and
F. candicans J3 islandicus , which this arch-compiler named from
Brisson, not for a moment suspecting that he on an earlier page
had given them other names ! It would have been of very
little consequence what Gmelin did if later authors had not per¬
petuated his blunder, though we may add at once that not all
have done so. It is, perhaps, not possible to get up a pluri-
morurn auctorum list, but the White Gyrfalcon ( Falco candi-
cans plur. auct.) may still be quoted as Falco islandus

t Seebohm, in his Hist. Brit. B. Eggs, quotes ‘Faber’ instead of Fabricius. Faber
and Fabricius were two different persons !

Stejneger, Analecta Ornithologica.

[ April

1 86

Briinnich, 1764,01' Fabricius, 1780 (nec Gmelin, 17S8, nee auct.
plur.), Latham, 1787 and 1790, Bechstein, Meyer* and Wolf,
Temminck, Audubon, Swainson and Richardson, Gould, Holboll,
etc. The reinstatement of the proper name may cause some
inconvenience in the beginning, and somebody may ask : Must
we always be correct? I will answer that we must be correct
in this case as in others (cf. Sylvia salicaria , Sylvia rufa ,
Sterna hirundo, and Stercorarius parasiticus ), and that the
correct name in time will be as well understood as Pendulinus
(intellige Xanthormis), Scops gin , Otus accipitrinus, Lanius
auriculatus or pomerantts , or, as I should say, Eurieoctotius
senator , Accentor collar is, Phylloscopus , collybita , Anthus
trivial is, Gall in ago ccelestis , Tringa striata , Pot anus canes-
ccns , Ardea ralloides , Buhveria colombina (intellige B. bul-
werii) , Dioinedea albatrus (intellige D. brachyura plur. auct.),
Balearica ch ryso pel a rgus , CEdicnemus illyricus , etc., etc.
There are two principles by which the question of the names
can be settled, the principle of priority or the auctorum-pluri-
morum-principle. As to these I will make Howard Saunder’s
words mine, only substituting the name Falco islandus for
that of Lanins pomeranus : “The earliest unimpeachable de¬
scription of the White Falcon is that of Falco islandus , Briin-
nich or Fabricius; and by the existing rules we must accept
it, and get used to it as soon as possible. Those who refuse
to do this, and adopt names merely because they have been
sanctioned by the number or the authoritative weight of em¬
ployers, will certainly go further and probably fare worse.”
I will add, however, that the principle of priority must be
carried out regardless of consequences and qot in the usual
slipshod manner, or else it is worse than the antagonistic
system ; it must also be carried out without delay, that “ we may
get used to the new names as soon as possible,” or else these
changes will £0 on slowlv but in all future. So much for those
who profess to believe that I “take a special delight in bring¬
ing forward wholesale changes of familiar names.”

Having examined the large material (about 75 specimens) of

* Meyer seems to have been the first one to suspect the true relationship between
gyrfalco and islandus, for in his “Vog. Liv- und Esthl.’’ (1815) p. 20, he says: “In den
Taschenbuch der deutschen Vogelkunde habe ich Falco Gyrfalco als eine Abart des
F. islandus aufgefiihrt, allein ich bin doch jetzt geneigt, ihn eher fur eine eigene Art zu
halten.”

t88s-] Stejneger, Analecta Ornithalogica. 1 87

Gyrfalcons in the U. S. National Museum, in company with Mr.
R. Ridgway, we came to the following conclusions:

1. There are two distinct species of Gyrfalcons, the ‘white,’
and the ‘brown.’

2. The latter is divisible into three geographical races, the
typical (Scandinavian) form, the Iceland-Greenland form, and
the Labrador form.

3. VVe are, at present, unable to appreciate the distinction of
the so-called F. holboelli and F. sacer Forst.

I therefore propose that the North American forms be recog¬
nized as

R. 412. Falco islandus Brunn . White Gyrfalcon.

412a. Falco rusticolus Linn. Gray Gyrfalcon.

412^. Falco rusticolus gyrfalco ( Linn .). Gyrfalcon.

412c. Falco rusticolus obsoletus (Gtn.). Labrador
Gyrfalcon.

The following synonyms of No. 412 and 412 a may be found
useful by those wishing to go further into details :

412. Falco islandus Brunn. White Gyrfalcon.

1764. — Falco islandus Brunnich, Orn. Bor. p. 2, ns. 7 & 8. — Fabricius,
Fauna Groenl. p. 58 (1780). — Latham, Synops. Suppl. I, p. 282,
(1787). — Bechstein, Orn. Taschenb. p. 40 (1803).

1783. — Falco gyrfalco Boddaert, Tabl. PI-Enl. p. 26)(nec Linn.).

1786. — Falco rusticolus Mohr, Islandsk Naturh. p. 19 (part.).

1788. — Falco islandus , P albus Gmelin, Syst. Nat. I, P- 271.

1788. — Falco islandus y maculatus Gmelin, Syst. Nat. I, p. 271.

1788. — Falco candicans Gmelin, Syst. Nat. I, p. 275.

1790. — Falco islandicns Latham, Ind. Orn. I, p. 32. — Mey. & Wolf,
Tasch. V. Deutschl. I, p. 65 ^1810). Temm., Man. d’Orn. 2
ed. p. 17 (1820). — Sw. & Rich. Fauna Bor. Am. II, p. 27
(1831). — Audub. B. Am. (pi. ccclxvi) (1836). — Gould, B. of Eur.
I (pi. 19) (1837). — Audub B. Am. 8vo ed. I, p. 81 (1839). —
Holboell, Faun. Gronl. (p. 18) (1854).

1806. — Falco groenlattdicus Turton, Gen. Syst. Nat. I (p. 147) (nec
Daudin, 1S00). — Hancock, Ann. N. H. II. p. 249 (1839).
iSs-t.- — Falco islandicns candicans Holboell, Zeitschr. Ges. Naturw. Ill
(p. 426).

i860. — Falco gyrfalco var. candicans Schrenck, Reis. Amurl. I, p. 228.
1874. — Hierofalco holboelli Sharpe, Cat. B. Brit. Mus. I, pi xiii, right-
hand figure.

1 88

Loomis, Notes on Birds of Chester County , .S'. C.

[April

412 a. Falco rusticolus Linn. Gray Gyrfai.con.

1758. — Falco rusticolus Linn. S. N. 10 ed. I, p. 88. — Id. , S. N. 12 ed.

p. 125 (1766). — Fabricius, Fauna Groenl. p. 55 (1780). — Mohr,
Islandsk Naturh. p. 19 (part.) (1786). — Gmelin, Syst. Nat. I, p.
268 (1788). — Latham, Ind. Orn. I, p. 28 (1790).

1764. — Falco islandus Brunnich, Orn. Bor. p. 2, No. 9. — Gmelin,
Syst. Nat. I, p. 271.

1776. — Falco islandus fuscus Muller, Prod. Zool. Dan. (p. 73 and
pag. viii, fide Fabr.).

1780. — Falco fuscus Fabricius, Fauna Groenl. p 56.

1783. — Falco gyrfalco Boddaert, Tabl. PI. Enl. p. 13 (nec Linn.).

1788. — Falco candicans p islandicus Gmelin, Syst. Nat. I, p. 275.

1800. — Falco islandicus Daudin, Tr. d’Orn. XI, p. 100 (nec Latham).

1800. — Falco groenlandicus Daudin, Tr. d’Orn. II, p. 107 (nec Hanc.). —
Brehm, Isis, 1826, p. 990.

1854. — Falco arcticus Holboell, Zeitschr. Ges. Naturw. Ill (p. 426)
(nec. F. communis p. arcticus Gmel. 1788).

1862. — Falco gyrfalco groenlandicus Schlegel, Mus. P. B. Falc. p. 13.

1862. — Falco gyrfalco islandicus Schlegel, Mus. P. B. Falc. p. 14.

1873. — Falco holboclli Sharpe, P. Z. S. 1S73, p. 415.

}S*EB0HM' Brit B- Eggs’ *■ p ,6-

1884. — Hierofalco islandus a holboelli Gurney, Diurn. B. Prey. p. ill.

Smithsonian Institution,

Washington , D. C., Feb. 12 , 1885.

SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES ON THE ORNITHOLOGY
OF CHESTER COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA.

BY LEVERETT M. LOOMIS.

The writer, in continuing his notes on the birds of Chester
County, South Carolina, would express his great indebtedness to
the late Dr. T. M. Brewer, not only for the careful revision of his
former work, but for many very valuable suggestions in his
studies of the ornithology of this region.

Since the publication of the k Partial List,’ * thirty-eight
species and two subspecies have been added to those already

* Bull. Nutt. Ornith. Club, Vol. IV, No. 4, pp. 209-218, Oct. 1879.

•8SS-]

Loomis, Notes on Birds of Chester County , S. C.

189

ascertained to occur in this locality. These, together with fur¬
ther data as to the abundance and period of residence of others
previously recorded, are incorporated in the subjoined notes.*
The nomenclature and arrangement followed is that of Dr.
Coues’s ‘Key to North American Birds’ (second edition) and the
same author’s ‘ Check List and Lexicon.’

22. Eremophila alpestris. Horned Lark. — The following tabulation
exhibits the comparative abundance of this species during six winters :

1S76-77 (severe). Very abundant.

1877- 78 (mild). Rather common.

1878- 79 (medium). One small flock.

1879- 80 (medium). Occasional.

1880- Si (severe). Very abundant.

1S81-82 (mild). None observed.

During the unusually inclement weather of January, 1884, I was con"
stantly on the lookout for it, but only one small flock was noted, and that
after the snow had disappeared. Its absence, in a season apparently so
favorable for its appearance, is doubtless to be accounted for by the fact
that the protracted cold wave came from the northwest. During the
stay here, the grain fields, cotton lands, the last year’s stubble, and other
sparsely grassed tracts are chosen resorts.

50. Iridoprocne bicolor. White-bellied Swallow. — Occurs quite
commonly during, the migrations. Most numerous in the vicinity of
mill-ponds and other extended bodies of water.

65. Melospiza palustris. Swamp Song Sparrow. — A common win¬
ter resident, especially abundant during its passage. Tenants the under¬
growth bordering streams, ponds, and swampy meadows.

76. Dolichonyx oryzivorus. Bobolink. — Migrant only; in spring abun¬
dant in large flocks foraging in the ripening oat-fields; in fall common,
singly or in small groups ; the grain fields, overgrown with rag-weeds
(. Ambrosia artemisicefolia), and the bottom lands are resorted to. Arrives
about the first of May and remains a couple of weeks. Earliest autumnal
record, August 26; latest, October 15.

S3. Quiscalus purpureus. Purple Grackle. — Winter ; irregular ; very
abundant about the middle of February, when the species is migrating
northward. Often associated in great droves with Red-wings, Cowbirds,
and Rusty Grackles. A few breed.

108. Asio accipitrinus. Short-eared Owl ; Marsh Owl. — Rather
common late in autumn and during winter. Frequents old broom-sedge
fields. Have failed to determine its presence during the breeding season.

109. Strix nebulosa. Barred Owl. — Common resident.

127. Totanus flavipes. Lesser Telltale; Yellow-shanks. — Mi¬
gratory; not very conftnon.

Nos. 22-135 relate to the former ‘Partial List’ ; Nos. 141-180 are additional.

190

Loomis, Notes on Birds of Chester County , S. C.

[April

131. Ardea herodias. Great Blue Heron; ‘Big Blue Crane.’ — A
constant resident, but most abundant through the summer.

135. Porzana Carolina. Carolina Rail. ‘ Ortolan.’ — Observed only
during the migration. Have found it quite common in swampy meadows.
Not easily flushed ; the mowers sometimes cut the grass over one before
it can be made to take wing.

141. Turdus ustulatus aliciae. Gray-cheeked Thrush. — Transient
visitant. Apparently not common.

142. Telmatodytes palustris. Long-billed Marsh Wren. — Chiefly
spring and autumn. Rather common. A denizen of the bottoms.

143. Cistothorus stellaris. Short-billed Marsh Wren. — An indi¬
vidual was shot, September 18, 1880, in a little depression along the side
of a railroad embankment. This spot, about half an acre, becomes boggy
during wet weather, and is grown over with marsh grass and scrubby
willows.

144. Helminthophaga peregrina. Tennessee Warbler. — Only one
instance of its capture, September 25. 1879.

145. Dendrceca palmarum hypochrysea. Yellow-bellied Red-poll
Warbler. — Both subspecies (; palmarum et hypochrysea ) are found through
the winter, but neither is very common. During the migration the species
is abundant — variet y palmarum predominating. Inhabits cotton fields,
weedy lands, and old fence rows.

146. Myiodioctes mitratus. Hooded Flycatching Warbler. — A
single specimen taken September 25, 1879.

147. Passer domesticus. The Sparrow; Philip Sparrow ; .‘Eng¬
lish Sparrow.’ — This aggressive little foreigner has become firmly
established in the town of Chester, especially in the business portions.
The colony doubtless descended from the half dozen brought here from
New York, during the summer of 1873, by the late Dr. A. P. Wylie, and
set at liberty in his grounds.

148. Centrophanes lapponicus. Lapland Longspur. — A single strag¬
gler, Jan. 1, 1881, evidently driven southward bv the unusual severity of
the season. (Previously recorded in Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, Vol.
VII, p. 54.)

149. Centrophanes pictus. Painted Longspur. — One example,
December 1, 1880. (For further record, see Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club,
Vol. VI, pp. 1 1 5, 116.)

150. Coturniculus henslowi. Henslow’s Grasshopper Sparrow. —
A tolerably common migrant, appearing early in spring and lingering late
in autumn. In localities where I find passerinus in summer and lecontii
in winter, I look confidently for henslowi during the migration. It is by
far the least distrustful of any of the birds of my acquaintance. If by
chance it happens to be in an open space where the grass affords no con¬
cealment, it will permit the intruder to advance within a very few feet
before running away — only taking flight when forced to do so.

1 5 1 . Coturniculus lecontii. LeConte’s Grasshopper Sparrow; Le
Conte’s Bunting. — A common winter inhabitant, in certain localities, of

i885.J

Loomis, Notes on Birds of Chester County , 5. C.

191

neglected ‘old fields.’ This Sparrow displays a very marked preference for
dry ground. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the ‘black-jack’ fields
of broom-sedge, which become somewhat boggy after protracted rains. At
such times the level tracts are deserted for the gentle declivities, or, if
these are wanting, for some more congenial locality, while in ordinary
showers they escape from the dense grass, saturated with water, to the
thinner growth of the lighter soils. When under the shelter of the thick
sedge, few birds are more difficult to get on wing, as they allow them¬
selves to be nearly trod upon before removing. On one occasion a bird
rose so near me it became entangled in my shooting coat. Again, under
cover, they are still more difficult to start; although the spot be carefully
noted and the ground thoroughly tramped over. In my earlier experi¬
ences I was often completely puzzled, but later observation revealed uni¬
formity in their movements. Their most common way of escape is to lie
still until you have passed, then suddenly jumping up from behind, dart oft'
to one side. An assistant, by watching this manoeuvre, greatly facilitates
their capture. In one instance a second ally, a keen-nosed setter, was
found useful, doing effective service when all efforts had proved unavail¬
ing. Again, as the chance may be, they will steal away in the thick sedge,
or fly oft" through the open weeds. Briers and tall swamp grass are ever
resorted to for protection. To gain the latter they will fly directly by the
collector, if he happens to cut off the retreat, and when once under this
friendly shelter, no amount of thrashing will bring them out. Sometimes
they take to bushes and saplings, beginning at the lower limbs and hop¬
ping upward. One specimen was shot about ten feet above the ground-
When not concealed, but in short grass, they are very tame, allowing one
to approach within a few feet, and then running off a little way and stop¬
ping to look back. Their flight is low, and usually feeble and unpro¬
tracted, but under repeated molestations it becomes rapid and prolonged.
In one instance a bush some six feet in height was cleared.

During their sojourn here they become very fat. The stomachs of birds
examined through the winter contained several kinds of small seeds and
fine gravel.

In certain specimens before me, secured during November, December,
and January, narrow streaks extend in a band, about half an inch in width,
across the jugulum. These markings are also continued toward the bill,
forming noticeable maxillary lines.

The measurements of fifty-four examples, taken in the flesh, are as
follows : —

Length.

Extent.

Wing.

Tail.

mm.

in.

mm.

in.

mm.

in.

mm.

in.

Maximum .

!39-7

5-50

1S0.S

7.12

523

2.06

57-1

2.25

Minimum .

I3°-S

5-i5

175-2

6.90

49.0

i-93

52-3

2.06

Average .

127.0

5.00

16s. I

6.62

47-4

1.87

47-4

1.87

1 9 “

Loomis, Notes on Birds of Chester County . .S. C.

[April

In five instances the wing and tail were found equal, but in no case did
the length of the wing exceed that of the tail. (For original South Caro*
]ina record, see Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, Vol. VII, Jan., 1S82, pp. 54, 55.)

152. Spiza americana. Black-tiiroated Bunting. — In certain par¬
tially cleared grain fields around the town of Chester, this bird is a com¬
mon summer resident.

158. Zamelodia ludoviciana. Rose-breasted Song Grosbeak. —
During the migration. Not very common. Found only on high ground’
especially heavily-timbered ‘ridges.’

154. Xanthocephalus icterocephalus. Yellow-headed Blackbird. —
An adult male of this western species was captured at Chester C. H.,
April 18, 1884. (Previously noted in ‘The Auk,’ Vol. I, p. 293.)

155. Aluco flammeus pratincola. Barn Owl; ’White Owl.’ —
Rather c'ommon during the summer season. Said to be a permanent
resident.

156. Asio wilsonianus. American Long-eared Owl.— Winter. Mod¬
erately common. Not known to breed.

257. Circus cyaneus hudsonius. American Marsh Hawk, or
Harrier; Blue Hawk; ‘Old Field Hawk’; ‘Rabbit Hawk.’ — Very
common in the winter, but has wholly escaped observation during the
breeding season.

158. Elanoides forficatus. Swallow-tailed Kite; ‘Fork-tailed
Hawk.’ — Summer. Rare. Said to have been much more abundant before
the extensive deforestation of the country.

159. Haliaetus leucocephalus. White-headed Sea Eagle; ‘Bald
Eagle’; ‘Bird of Washington.’ — Occasionally seen during the vernal
migration.

160. Pandion haliastus. Fish Hawk; Osprey. — Principally along
the Broad and Catawba Rivers. One example from the water-shed, near
Chester C. H.

161. Lobipes hyperboreus. Northern Phalarope ; Red-necked
Phalarope. — One specimen, May 17, 1880, from a mill-pond near the
town of Chester. (See Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, Vol. V, p. 24 2.)

162. Actodromas minutilla. Least Sandpiper. — Occurs during both
migrations, but does not appear to be at all common.

163. Totanus melanoleucus. Greater Tell-tale. — Have met with
this species but once. April 21, 1880, a single individual was shot, from
a flock of seven, on the margin of a little mill-pond.

1C4. Herodias egretta. Great White Egret; White Heron; ‘Big
White Crane.’ — Summer. Not very common, chiefly confined to the
rivers. I have only one specimen in m3’ cabinet from the dividing-ridge;
a female, j’oung-of-the-j’ear, obtained July 12, iSSi, in the suburbs of the
town of Chester.

165. Nyctiardea grisea nsevia. Black-crowned Night Heron; Qua*
Bird ; Squawk. — An immature female of this Heron was secured August
28, 1S81, on a creek near the town.

166. Rallus virginianus. Virginia Rail. — Known only as a migrant-
Frequents swampy meadows overgrown with tall grass.

i SSs - ] Brewster on the Rock Ptarmigan of Newfoundland. 1 93

167. Gallinula galeata. Common Gallinule ; Florida Gallinule;
Red-bii.led Mud-hen. — An adult male bird was taken, on the grassy
banks of a small mill-pond, May 19, 1884.

168. Cygnus columbianus. Common American Swan; Whistling
Swan. — Winter visitant. Not common.

169. Bernicla canadensis. Canada Goose; Common Wild Goose. —
Winter. Common. Mainly restricted to the Broad and Catawba.

170. Dafila acuta. Pin-tail Duck; Sprig-tail.— Only in a single
instance, March 12, 1883, have I met with this species.

171. Querquedula carolinensis. American Green-winged Teal. —
Winter visitor. Tolerably common.

172. Spatula clypeata. Shoveller Duck; Broad-bill. — Winter,
but particularly spring and fall. Not uncommon.

173. Aix sponsa. Wood Duck; Summer Duck; ‘The Bride.’ —
Permanent resident. Breeds. Individuals have been seen during June in
a little carp pond in the town. Several crowded tenement houses near by
make the situation a very exposed one.

174. Fuligula affinis. Lesser Scaup Duck; Little Black-head. —
Of regular occurrence in winter; but not abundant.

175. Fuligula collaris. Ring-neck Duck. Winter sojourner. Rather
numerous. Specimen taken May 7.

176. Fuligula ferina americana. Red-head ; American Pochard.—
One case, March 1, 18S3.

177. Clangula albeola. Buffle-head; Butter-ball; Spirit-Duck;
Dipper. — Frequently taken during winter.

178. Mergus cucullatus. Hooded Merganser. — Winter resident.
Plentiful. I am not aware that any remain during the breeding season in
this immediate locality.

179. Rhynchops nigra. Black Skimmer. — A female bird-of-the-year
of this maritime species was taken. Sept. 10, 1S82, in the town of Chester.
During the morning, and on the previous day, there had been a heavy
easterly gale, which evidently had driven it in from the coast; the nearest
point, as the birds fly, Long Bay, Georgetown County, being about one
hundred and fifty miles distant.

1S0. Podicipes cornutus. Horned Grebe. — Noted merely on one oc¬
casion, March 4, 1880, when a specimen was secured.

THE ROCK PTARMIGAN OF NEWFOUNDLAND.

BY WILLIAM BREWSTER.

In the summer of 1883 Mr. George O. Welch, of Lynn,
Mass., collected a number of Rock Ptarmigan on Newfoundland.
The series showed little variation, aside from that dependant on

Brewster on the Rock Ptarmigan of Newfoundland.

[April

age and season, and supposing them to be merely our common
L. rupestris , with the summer plumage of which I was then
unfamiliar, I bought only a single pair for my collection. It
turns out, however, that they are not only distinct from rupestris ,
but very different from any other known form. As there is good
evidence that their habitat is strictly isolated, intergradation with
any of their allies is so improbable that I have thought it best to
describe the bird as a full species, which I name after the col¬
lector of my types.

Lagopus welchi, nov. spec.

Sp. char. — $ adult , summer plumage (No. 8246, Coll. W. B. New¬
foundland, June 25, 18S3. George O. Welch). Throat, wings (except
inner secondaries), legs, and central portions of the body below from
the breast to the crissum, white; jugulum, prsepectus and sides dark
brownish-gray; entire upper parts still darker gray, many of the feathers
having black centres; all the feathers of the dark areas of the body, both
above and below, tipped with white and crossed by numerous fine, wavy,
more or less broken lines of white, grayish-white, and grayish-ochraceous ;
feathers of the head, neck, and sides more broadly tipped and barred,
giving these parts a lighter appearance; tail uniform deep grayish-
plumbeous with narrow spaces of concealed white at the bases of all the
feathers and a rather broad white tipping on the central pair; upper
tail-coverts like the back; under coverts plumbeous tipped with white;
a broad, conspicuous, black loral stripe ; bill and claws black. Wing*
7.48; tail, 4.95; tarsus, 1.40; culmen from base, .97; culmen from
nostril, .40.

Adult 5 (No. S248, Coll. W. B. Newfoundland, May 19, 1S83. George
O. Welch). Similar, but lacking the black loral stripe, and of generally
lighter color; the transverse lines broader, whiter, and in places yellower,
those of the breast and under tail-coverts being clear but pale orange-
yellow. The shafts of the primaries, also, are brown instead of white,
as in the $. Wing. 6.98; tail, 4.15; tarsus, 1,50; culmen from base,
.85; culmen from nostril, .42.

Habitat : — Newfoundland.

The colors in the male of this Ptarmigan are confused and
blended to such a degree that a detailed description, however
carefully drawn, fails to do them justice. The general effect is
that of a dark, grayish-plumbeous bird (colored not unlike the
Oregon form of the Dusky Grouse), plentifully besprinkled with
tine dots of 'pepper-and-salt color.' Dr. Stejneger, who has
very kindly compared both specimens with the extensive ma¬
terial in the National Museum, writes me as follows regarding
them :

Brewster on the Rock Ptarmigan of Newfoundland.

*95

>8SS.]

‘‘Of all the specimens in the National Museum no American
ones show even an approximation toward these. The nearest
approach is the fejnale of the Greenland and Cumberland Gulf
form, reinhardtii , but the gray is even less tinged with yel¬
lowish than in the latter. Nearer in color come our specimens
of the European mutus and its forms, but not even the Scandi¬
navian specimens have so much gray in their early plumage, the
Newfoundland bird being darker; besides, the amount of white
at the base of the external rectrices is also very small. This
character is of rather small account because of its variability
(according to age?), but I have found that on an average it may
be regarded as of some value in large series. From both Euro¬
pean forms — showing that it belongs to the rupestris type — the
Newfoundland bird may be easily distinguished in the pre-
aastival plumage by the dense barring on the praepectus. With
the Pacific Island forms it hardly needs comparison. It lacks
the pure vermiculation of both athkensis and nelsoni in the corre¬
sponding plumage, while the latter and ridgzvayi are the direct
opposites of the Newfoundland birds as far as general color is
concerned, they being the two extremes on the color-scale,
ridgzvayi being deep umber-brown — nearly black — without
traces of gray.

‘T therefore conclude that your Newfoundland rupestris is
distinct, and, judging from the material, comparatively very
strongly so. Should the characters prove as stable as they have
in ridgzvayi , of which I have just received additional material,
it should undoubtedly stand as a species, and I think it is safest
to establish the form as a binomial until further material should
prove intergradation.

“The tendency to dark primaries, even in May, is an inter¬
esting parallel to alleni ! ”

According to Mr. Welch these Ptarmigan are numerous in
Newfoundland, where they are strictly confined to the bleak
sides and summits of rocky hills and mountains in the interior.
Unlike the Willow Grouse of that island, which in winter
wander long distances, and frequently cross the Gulf to Labra¬
dor, the Rock Ptarmigan are very local, and for the most part
spend their lives on or near the hills where they are reared.

ig6 Brewster on Birds from Arizona and Mexico.

[April

ADDITIONAL NOTES ON SOME BIRDS COLLECTED
IN ARIZONA AND THE ADJOINING PROVINCE
OF SONORA, MEXICO, BY MR. F. STEPHENS
IN 1SS4; WITH A DESCRIPTION OF A
NEW SPECIES OF ORTYX.

BY WILLIAM BREWSTER.

In the last number of ‘The Auk’* I announced several addi¬
tions to our bird-fauna made by Mr. Stevens in Arizona during
the collecting season of 1884. The following notes embrace what
I have to add on the subject. Late in the summer Mr. Stephens
crossed the boundary into Mexico, traversing the Province of
Sonora in a south-westerly direction to Portf Lobos, on the
Gulf of California. As he has kindly promised a detailed account
of this trip for publication in ‘ The Auk,’ I shall mention here
only a few of its more important results, especially such as have
a bearing on our fauna, either by extending the known range of
Arizona birds southward, or that of Mexican birds northward.

Harporhynchus curvirostris palmeri Ridgzo. Palmer’s Thrasher. —
An adult male in worn breeding plumage, taken at Altar, Sonora, Mexico,
Aug 14, seems to be perfectly typical of this form, which, if I am not mis¬
taken, has not been previously found south of the United States.

Haporhynchus lecontii Bonap. Leconte’s Thrasher. — The occur¬
rence of this species well within the boundary of Mexico is attested by
four specimens taken about fifteen miles inland from Port Lobos. These
birds are in a plumage unlike any that I have previously seen. The upper
parts are deep ashy-, almost bluish-, drab, scarcely, if at all, tinged with
brown or yellow. The wings are nearly concolor with the back, the tail
much darker, in fact plumbeous-brown. The throat is white, in decided
contrast with the breast and sides, which are nearly as dark as the back
and of somewhat the same color, but tinged with ochrey. The abdom¬
inal region is brownish-white; the crissum, under tail-coverts, and flanks
are strongly rusty.

Three of these specimens were shot Aug. 19; the fourth Aug. 21. Mr.
Stephens is firm in the belief that they represent a form sub-specifically
distinct from that of Arizona and California. This, however, seems to
me improbable, from the fact that they all have more or less extensive
patches of pallid, sand-colored feathers, which match perfectly those of
the summer plumage of H. lecontii (either adults or young in first plu¬
mage). As these pallid feathers are clearly the remnants of a plumage

* Vol. II, No. 1, Jan. 1885, pp. 84, 85,

t So spelled on the labels of his specimens. Possibly Point, or Cape, Lobos!

■SS5.]

Brewster on Birds from Arizona and Mexico.

1 97

which must have been moulted only a short time before the birds in
question were killed, it would seem most reasonable to assume that the
latter are simply Leconte's Thrashers in fresh autumnal dress, a- con¬
dition which does not seem to have been previously examined.

I take this opportunity of describing another hitherto unknown plu¬
mage of lecontii.

Juv., first plumage (J No. 894, F. S., Aqua Caliente, California’
March 28, 1884. Coll. F. Stephens). Of the same general pallid sandy-
brown as the adult, but with the ochraceous of the anal region and crissum
paler, the upper tail-coverts brownish-rusty, the wing-feathers (but not
their coverts) delicate pearl-gray tipped with light brown, the tail dark
plumbeous-brown, and the dusky loral patch and malar stripe rather more
conspicuous than in the old bird. There is no indication of other dark
spots or streaks anywhere either above or beneath. This bird was
evidently just from the nest when taken, as its wings and tail are not fully
grown.

Although Mr. Ridgway has expressed* his inability to verify certain
supposed peculiarities in the bill of this species, to which I once called
attention,! I have found them nearly constant in the dozen or more speci¬
mens that have since passed through my hands.

Certhia familiaris mexicana ( Gloger ) Ridgw. Mexican Creeper.
— Two Creepers, an adult male and female, taken in the Santa Rita Mts.,
July 5, are nearly, if not quite, typical examples of this strongly character¬
ized subspecies, which was added to our fauna by Mr. Stevens in 1881.

Dendroeca nigrescens ( Toxvns .) Baird. Black-throated Gray War¬
bler. — Juv.. first plumage ( $ No. 2072, Santa Rita Mts., July 1). Above
brownish-ashy, somewhat plumbeous on the crown ; below ashy-white,
the throat dark ashy, the breast and sides sprinkled with fine, obscure
spots of dull black. The white stripes on the sides of the head are well-
defined but the lores are solidly black, lacking the yellow' spot seen in the
adult male.

Vireo huttoni stephensi Brews. Stephens’s Vireo. — Juv., first plu¬
mage (No. 2161, Santa Rita Mts., July 9). Above brownish-ashy tinged
with olive on the back, the wing- and tail-feathers edged with greenish,
the wing-coverts tipped with ochraceous ; below ashy-white washed faintly
with yellowish posteriorly.

Vireo pusillus Coues. Least Vireo. — Juv., autumnal plumage ($
No. 2501, Camp Lowell, Aug. 11). Very similar to the adult, but paler
and greener above, with a decided greenish edging on the wing- and tail-
feathers; the under parts rather purer white.

Pyranga hepatica Szvains. Liver-colored Tanager. — Juv., first
plumage ($ No. 2163, Santa Rita Mts., July 9). Above dull yellowish-
green, brightest on the crown and tail, each feather with a broad shaft-
stripe of dark brown ; below sulphur yellow, more or less tinged with

* Proc. (J. S. Nat. Mus., Vol. V, p. 45.
t Bull. N. O. C., Vol. VI, No. 2, April, 1881, p. 67.

IC)8 Brewster on Birds from Arizona and Mexico. [April

green, the feathers everywhere — except on the crissum and under tail-
coverts, which are immaculate — streaked centrally with dull black.

Pyranga aestiva cooperi Ridgxv. Cooper’s Tanager. — Juv.. first
plumage ( $ No. 2500, Camp Lowell, Aug. 11). Above dull brownish-
ochrey ; below brownish or ashy white; the feathers of the crown and
back streaked centrally with dark brown, those of the breast aud abdo¬
men with dull black. This specimen is a little past the true first plu¬
mage, patches of the autumnal feathering having already appeared in
places.

The adult male of this subspecies, as shown by a specimen taken Sept.

1 at Tucson, does not have a distinctive autumnal plumage, the red at
that season being quite pure and, indeed, apparently even deeper and
rosier than in spring. In this respect the bird resembles its near rel¬
ative P. cestiva and differs from P. rubra, the adult male of which in
autumn assumes a green livery scarcely distinguishable from that of the
female.

Passerculus rostratus (Cass.) Baird. Large-billed Sparrow. — Two
females were taken Aug. 20 on the shore of the Gulf of California at
Port Lobos, Sonora, Mexico. Mr. Ridgway, who has kindly examined
them, confirms my opinion that they are typical rostratus.

Centronyx bairdi (Aud.) Baird. Baird's Sparrow. — Two adult
males, in worn and very ragged breeding plumage, were taken respectively
Aug. 29 and 30, in Southern Arizona, eight miles north of the boun¬
dary line, and ten miles northeast of Sasabe, Sonora, Mexico. The
dates of capture and condition of these specimens would seem to imply
that the species breeds in Arizona.

Passerina versicolor (Bonap .) Gray. Varied Bunting. — A female,
apparently adult, but in perfectly fresh, unworn plumage, was taken
July 14 at Crittenden, near the Santa Rita Mts. I can find no previous
record of the occurrence of this species in Arizona.

Junco cinereus (Swains.) Cab. Mexican Junco. — Juv., first plutnage
(5 No. 2102, Santa Rita Mts., July 5). Top and sides of head dusky-
ash ; under parts ashy-white ; chestnut of back spreading over the wing-
coverts and inner secondaries as in the adult; entire plumage of head
and body — except the abdomen and crissum, which are immaculate —
thickly spotted and streaked with dull black; lores black.

Sturnella magna mexicana (Scl.) Rigdtv. Mexican Meadow Lark. —
Two Meadow Larks, a male and female, taken respectively July 22 and 24
at Crittenden, Arizona, prove rather unexpectedly to be typical mexicana.
As this form — closely related to magna of the East — seems never to have
been detected before to the westward of Texas within the United States,
its occurence in Arizona, in the heart of the neglecta country, is not less
interesting than unexpected.

Myiarchus mexicanus magister Ridgw. Arizona Crested Fly¬
catcher. — Juv., first plumage ($ No. 2434, Camp Lowell, Aug. 5).
Generally similar to the adult, but with the crown tinged with reddish,
the back duller brown, the throat paler ash, the outer edges of all the wing-

''S8S-J

Brewster on Birds from Arizona and Mexico.

199

coverts, primaries, and secondaries (except the inner two), strongly rusty,
and the outer, as well as inner edges of all the tail-feathers edged with
rusty.

Myiarchus lawrencei olivaceus Ridgw. Olivaceus Crested Fly¬
catcher. — Juv., first plumage (§ No. 2235, Santa Rita Mts., July 15).
Differing from the adult chiefly in having all the tail-feathers conspicu¬
ously margined with rusty on both outer and inner webs, all the wing-
feathers, including both rows of coverts, tipped and edged with rusty, the
ash of the throat paler, and the yellow of the under parts much duller,

Caeligena clemenciae Lesson. Blue-throated CASiquE. — The speci¬
men announced in the last issue of ‘The Auk’ (Vol. II, No. 1, January 1885,
p. 85) as having been taken by Mr. Stephens at Camp Lowell was really
shot by Mr. F. Ball (Mr. Stephens’s assistant) in the Santa Catarina Mts.,
a neighboring, but of course widely different locality. The bird bore a
label with “Camp Lowell” printed on the face in large letters and I over¬
looked the inscription of the exact place of capture, which was rather in¬
distinctly written in among some other manuscript data.

Eugenes fulgens (Swains.) Gould. Refulgent Hummingbird.— A
female, apparently adult, was taken in the Santa Rita Mts., July 5.

Picus stricklandi Mailt. Strickland’s Woodpecker. — Juv., first
plutnage (J1 No. 2001, Santa Rita Mts., June 27). Entire crown scarlet;
forehead smoky brown; occiput dull plumbeous; remainder of upper
parts, including wings, clear olive-brown ; underparts very densely spotted
on a yellowish-white ground. Otherwise like the adult. A female
(No. 2096, Santa Rita Mts., July 4) is precisely similar to the last, with
the red crown patch fully as extended and deep in tint. Another female,
rather younger, has the red of the crown restricted to the extreme tips
of the feathers, as well as duller, yellower, and altogether less con¬
spicuous.

Colinus ridgwayi nov spec. Masked Quail.

adult. Whole head, neck, and throat black, except the centre of the
crown posteriorly and the occipital and nuchal regions, which are varied
with black, white, and cinnamon, the black predominating; under parts
warm brownish cinnamon, immaculate except on the flanks, where a few
of the feathers are spotted marginally with white and dull black, and on
the under tail-coverts, the central feathers of which are broadly tipped with
brownish-white and crossed with v-shaped bars of black ; inner seconda¬
ries, wing-coverts, scapulars, and fore part of back . of nearly the same
color as the under parts but paler and pinker, the feathers everywhere
barred and mottled with whitish and dark brown or dull black ; upper tail-
coverts, rump, and back posteriorly grayish-drab, obscurely barred and
mottled with dark brown and whitish; primaries drab, mottled with
whitish on their outer webs; tail feathers bluish-ash, finely vermiculated
with pale brown and whitish, most strongly on the central pair. Bill
black; legs and feet horn color. Length, 9.70; extent, 14.50; wing. 4.45;
tail, 2.75 ; tarsus, 1.20; bill, .30 deep by .34 long from nostril. Type, No.
2599, Coll. F. Stephens.

200

Murdoch on Birds of Point Barrow, Alaska.

[April

This species seems to most nearly resemble C. coyolcos , but differs in
the restriction of the black to the head, neck and throat, in the absence of
white frontal and superciliary stripes, and in its decidedly larger size.

The type specimen was taken by Mr. Stephens, Aug. ri, about eighteen
miles southwest of Sasabe, Sonora, Mexico, and hence very near the
boundary. Mr. Stephens on the same trip saw a precisely similar bird a
few miles north of the line, and within Arizona and he writes me that he
has recently examined two specimens which were actually taken in Ari¬
zona, thus adding the species to our fauna.

NOTES ON SOME SPECIES OF BIRDS ATTRIBUTED
TO POINT BARROW, ALASKA.

BY JOHN MURDOCH.

Mr. E. W. Nelson, in his paper on ‘ The Birds of Bering
Sea and the Arctic Ocean,’* mentions several species of birds as
occurring at Point Barr6w, which were not afterwards observed
there by our party.

His opinions are based upon observations made during a hasty
visit of a day or two, when on board of the Revenue-cutter
Corwin in i SS i , and upon generalizations from the abundance of
the species in more southern parts of the Territory. The results
of two years’ careful and continuous observation and collecting in
this locality lead me to consider Mr. Nelson in error on these
points, and it seems to me desirable that the correction of these
errors should be published before the statements have gained
currency from length of time and frequent quotation. The fol¬
lowing are the species in question :

ADgiothus linaria. Of this species, Mr. Nelson merely says, “ We
found it with the preceding at East Cape, Siberia, Point Barrow, and at
nearly every place we landed.” As he does not appear to have obtained
specimens, and as we did not obtain it in either season, his statement of
its occurrence must have been founded on the supposition that the two
species would always be found together. It is worthy of note that the
preceding species {AE. canescens exilif>es)which he speaks of as “ perhaps
the most abundant of all the land birds .... on the Alaskan shore ....
north to Point Barrow,” was decidedly rare at Point Barrow in the season
of 1882 and was not observed in 1883.

* Cruise of the Revenue Steamer Corwin in Alaska and the N. W. Arctic Ocean in
1881. Washington, 1883.

Merriam on the Wing-feathers of the Willow Grouse.

201

■S8S.J

Passerculus sandwichensis alaudinus. This species, referred to as
probably common at Point Barrow, does not occur there.

Asio accipitrinus. « Mr. Nelson says, “On the Alaskan coast of the
Arctic, it is found nearly if not quite to Point Barrow.” It was not found
at Point Barrow.

2Egialitis semipalmatus. This species was not seen, although Mr.
Nelson’s remarks would lead to the inference that he saw a pair there in
1S81.

Ereunetes pusillus. This bird, which is said to breed at Point Bar-
row, only occurs in the autumn migrations, when large flocks of the
young appear among the mudholes at Elson Bay, moving southwest along
the coast.

Numenius hudsonicus. Referred to as occurring “ north to the vicin¬
ity of Point Barrow.” We did not see it, and the only species of Curlew
observed (JV. borealis') was rare and irregular.

Dafila acuta. Referred to as nesting “ in the greatest abundance ....
to the farthest northern extreme of Alaska in the vicinity of Point Bar-
row.” We found the bird comparatively rare and none breed. The
natives say they are abundant inland on the rivers.

Nettion carolinensis. It does not reach Point Barrow, as Mr. Nelson
thought might be the case.

Mergus serrator. Referred to as found “ along the Alaskan coast of
the Arctic to Point Barrow.” We neither saw nor obtained it.

The following species, supposed by Mr. Nelson not to reach Point Bar-
row, were obtained by our party.

Limosa lapponica novae-zelandiae. A few immature birds were obtained
in the autumn migrations.

Grus canadensis (= fraterculus Cass.). These birds were seen and two
taken in June, 1S83.

Lampronetta fischeri. This species occurs sparingly with the other
Eiders in the great spring flights, and a few remain on land and undoubt¬
edly breed, as a female was shot with an egg ready for laying in the
oviduct, and half-grown young were taken in August, 1S83.

Washington, D. C.

CHANGE OF COLOR IN THE WING-FEATHERS
OF THE WILLOW GROUSE.

BY C. HART MERRIAM, M. D.

At the last meeting of the American Ornithologists’ Union
Dr. Leonhard Stejneger exhibited the type specimen of lA new
subspecies of Willow Grouse from Newfoundland,’ which he
named Lagopus alba alleni. He characterized it as follows :

2 02

Merriam on the Wing-feathers of the Willoxv Grouse. [April

“Similar to Lagopus alba (Gin.) , but distinguished by having
the shafts of both primaries and secondaries black, and by having
the wing-feathers, even some of the coverts, marked and mottled
with blackish. Habitat: Newfoundland.”*

In the discussion which this announcement occasioned, Mr.
William Brewster expressed the opinion that the characters
pointed out might prove seasonal. To this Dr. Stejneger replied
that since the primaries were moulted but once a year their color
could not possibly be influenced by season, but must be perma¬
nent. f I then stated that I could not agree with Dr. Stejneger, for.
when in Newfoundland, I had examined several hundred specimens
of this Ptarmigan in the flesh, and was fully convinced that change
of color of individual feathers did take place, both independent of
and coincident with the moult. In this belief I was supported by
Mr. D. G. Elliot.

My views have recently been confirmed in the most gratifying
manner. Mr. Napoleon A. Comeau of Godbout, on the north
shore of the St. Lawrence near the Gulf, was present at the meet¬
ing of the Union and was much interested in this discussion. Since
his return (in fact, between the 6th and 14th of November, 1S84)
he has killed no less than three hundred Willow Grouse at God-
bout, and has had the kindness to send me one hundred and fifty
of their wings. The locality is a little more than four hundred
miles west of Newfoundland, and Ptarmigan generally appear
there early in December, a few occasionally remaining till May.

They sometimes come in enormous numbers, while at other
times they are not seen at all for several years. They arrived
nearly a month earlier than usual this winter : two were seen
November 2, and large flocks appeared on the 7th. The change
from summer to winter plumage was already nearly completed.

The large series of wings sent by Mr. Comeau demonstrates
beyond a question that individual feathers do change color. Most
of them are already pure white excepting the shafts of the six
outer primaries, which, as usual in winter specimens of Lagopus
albtts , are black. The quantity of black varies greatly in the
different wings. In those in which the change is most advanced
it is merely a narrow strip of pale sooty-brown extending along

* This description has since been published in ‘The Auk,’ Vol. I, No. 4, Oct., 1884,
p. 369.

t Dr. Stejneger has since informed me that he is prepared to admit that change of
color in the primaries can take place.

.SSS-]

Recent Literature.

203

the middle of the upper surfaces of the shafts of the six outer pri¬
maries, and is confined to the middle half of the exposed part of
each, so that the bas'al half, and a considerable apical portion,
together with all the rest of the wing, is pure white.

In the other extreme, the black covers the exposed portions of
the outer surfaces of the shafts of all the primaries (sometimes
being as intense on the 8th, 9th, and 10th, as on the 2d, 3d, and
4th) and also of the ‘false wing’ (alula). The under surfaces
show it, but in a much less degree. The black is not limited to
the shafts, and in some cases all the primaries, except the first,
are extensively blotched and marbled with sooty, the markings
being most distinct subapicallv. The coverts also are occa¬
sionally clouded.

Unfortunately, the wings were severed at the carpo-metacarpal
joints; consequently it is impossible to say whether the second¬
aries had black shafts or not. But the primaries present every
intermediate phase between their normal winter condition in
typical L. a/bus , and the extreme dark mottled form character¬
ized by Dr. Stejneger.

It is worthy of note that many of these wings are deeply tinged
with a delicate and very beautiful shade of rose-pink, which is
more pronounced than in a freshly killed Roseate Tern. The
color is very transient and has already begun to fade in speci¬
mens which have been exposed to the light but little more than
a week.

RECENT LITERATURE.

Gurney’s ‘List of the Diurnal Birds of Prey.’* — In a compact little
volume of less than 200 pages, we have the fulfilment of Mr. Gurney’s
promise to supplement his valuable critical notes, published in ‘The
Ibis’ for 1875-18S2, on Mr. Sharpe’s ‘Catalogue of the Accipitres or
Diurnal Birds of Prey in the collection of the British Museum, ’f by a
tabular index to the species, with references and annotations. The plan,

* A list | of the | Diurnal Birds of Prey, | with | references and annotations: j also
| a record of specimens | preserved in the I Norfolk and Norwich Museums. | Bv
| John Henry Gurney. | London: | John Van Voorst, 1 Paternoster Row, E. C. |
MDCCCLXXXIV. | Small 8vo., pp. i-xv, r-187.

f Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum. Volume I. London : Printed by
order of the Trustees, 1874. 8vo., pp. i-xiii, 1-480, pis. I-XIV.

204

Recent Literature.

[April

as orignally announced, has been modified so as to include all the species
known to the author, together with a series of ‘Appendices,’ fifteen in
number, each consisting of a special paper reviewing critically some
particular group or species. Regarding this additional matter we quote
from the preface (p. vi) : — “Since my notes on Mr. Sharpe’s volume were
published in the ‘Ibis,’ I have seen occasion to modify my views as
regards a few species, and have obtained additional information as to
some others, and these results I have added to my present list in the form
of footnotes, or. when too lengthy to be so introduced, in the shape of
Appendices.”

The work is based ostensibly upon the collection of Diurnal Raptores
in the Norwich Museum, and indeed furnishes a list of the specimens
contained in that establishment; but it is replete with interesting in¬
formation derived from other sources, among which the British Museum
and United States National Museum figure most prominently. The
unequalled richness of the material which Mr. Gurney has had at his
command may be appreciated when it is stated that of the 473 species
and subspecies given in the catalogue, and embracing all that are known,
no less than 3S5, represented by 2895 specimens, are contained in the
Norwich Museum.*

The ‘Appendices’ which pertain specially to North American Fal-
conidae are the following:

‘Appendix H. On the Genus Buteola.’ Pp. 146, 147.

‘Appendix N. On the Existence in North America of Hierofalco
gyrfalco , and its possible Hybridism with H. holbcelli .’ Pp. 161, 164.

Under the first heading are treated the Buteo brachyurus Vieill., and
B. fuliginosus Scl.,f which are considered to be light and dark (melan-
istic) phases of one species. Regarding the Gyrfalcons, Mr. Gurney says :

“The result of the comparisons which I have here recorded leads me
to agree with the conclusion previously arrived at by Mr. Sharpe and by
Mr. Dresser that H. gyrfalco is found in the northern parts, not only of
Europe and of Asia, but also of North America. The North American
range of this species, however, has not at present been very clearly as¬
certained, especially to the eastward, and a similar uncertainty exists as
to the western limits of//, holbcelli. as also to the localities, if such there
be, where both races occur and where hybridism may perhaps result from
such propinquity. As I have already mentioned in my Notes, the Nor¬
wich Museum possesses three immature Falcons from Hudson’s Bay, and
these I believe to be referable to H. gyrfalco; but as they are not in adult
dress, I do not feel absolutely certain of the correctness of this identifi¬
cation. The question of the geographical range of these Falcons is one
which I think affords an interesting subject for further investigation, and
which I trust will receive the attention it merits.”

As to other North American species of the family there are few de¬
partures from the nomenclature of Bulletin 21 of the United States

* Of Owls, the same museum possesses 171 species and 1009 specimens !

t Cf. Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, VI, Oct. 1881, pp. 207—214.

Recent Literature.

iSSs.l

205

National Museum (‘Nomenclature of North American Birds’), but the
following may be noted :

Astur atricapillus striatulus is not considered a “valid subspecies.”

The American Golden Eagle is not deemed separable from that of the
Palaearctic Region, and is therefore given simply as Aquila c/irysaetus.

Buteo borealis socorroensis is ranked as a species.

Astur ina nitida plagiata is given as A. plagiata.

Blames leucurus is considered as a subspecies of E. axillaris.

Falco albigularis is given as Hypotriorch is rupigularis, and Rhyncho-
falco fusco-coerulescens is also referred to Hypotriorckis.

Tinnunculus sparverius isabellinus is treated as a species, while
FEsalon rickardsoni is reduced to a subspecies of sE. columbarius.

Hierofalco mexicanus polyagrus is given as Falco tnexicanus, under
the subgeneric heading of Gennaia.

Hierofalco gyrfalco obsoletus is recognized as a distinct species, Falco
labradoris , while H. g. islandus and H. g. candicans are also considered
specifically distinct, under the names of Falco islandus and F. candicans ,
respectively.

It is worthy of remark, that in the case of subspecies Mr. Gurney does
not use trinomials, the distinction from the species, so far as typography
is concerned, consisting only in the heading ‘Subspecies,’ and the prefix
*«,’ or ‘■b' (according to the number of subspecies) to the name.

The classification adopted strikes us as being far more natural than
most of the more recent arrangements ; yet we regret to observe the as¬
sociation of such radically distinct forms, structurally considered, as the
following: Herpetotheres and Circaetus; Micrastur and Geranospizias
with Accipiter and allied genera ; Elanoides, RostrJiainus , Jctinia, etc.,
with Milvus , Haliastur, etc., and Harpagus with the true Falcones. A
perfectly natural classification of this most difficult group of birds is,
however, not possible with our present limited knowledge of their in-
t||rnal structure; and, as Mr. Gurney truly remarks, “it is obvious that
a serial arrangement can only record with precision the connection of
each genus and of each species with two of the forms which are thus
grouped around it, and is therefore so far imperfect that it must of
necessity disregard other natural connections, the existence of which
cannot.be satisfactorily indicated by any method of consecutive linear
arrangement.” — R. R.

Newton's ‘Ornithology.’* — The article on Ornithology in the new edi¬
tion of the ‘Encyclopaedia Britannica,’ like most of the'articles on Bi- ds
in that great work, is by Prof. Alfred Newton, and could scarcely have
been entrusted to better hands. The article — complementary to that en¬
titled ‘Birds’ in Volume III of the Encyclopaedia — is an elaborate historical
resume of the subject, critically tracing the progress of the science from

* Ornithology. By Alfred Newton, M.A., F.R.S., F.Z.S., F.L.S., Professor of Zool¬
ogy and Comparative Anatomy in the University of Cambridge. Reprinted from the ‘En¬
cyclopaedia Britannica’ [Ed. 9, Vol. XVII 1, pp. 1-50] by special permission. Dec., 1884.

206

Recent Literature.

[April

the days of Aristotle, Pliny, and yElian to the present time. All separate
works of any importance, whether general, faunal, or monographic, are
noticed at greater or less length, according to their merits or importance,
except that the faunal works noticed are limited, in consequence of their
being so numerous, “to those countries alone which form the homes of
English people, or are commonly visited by them in ordinary travel.”
We miss, therefore, all reference to such important works as Tschudi’s
‘Fauna Peruana,’ Burmeister’s ‘Thiere Brasiliens,’ Salvin and Godman’s
‘Biologia Centrali-Americana,’ etc. Furthermore, it was found necessary
to leave unmentioned all “treatises which have appeared in the publica¬
tions of learned societies, or in other scientific periodicals.” While a
bibliography of ornithology is here neither attempted, nor is to be prop¬
erly looked for in such a connection, all works which have had important
bearing upon the progress of the science are duly noted, and their influ¬
ence critically weighed. The various prominent systems of classification
are also set forth, and the “rise of the present more advanced school of
ornithologists” is traced in considerable detail. Its origin is attributed
to the ‘few scattered hints’ contained in Nitzsch’s ‘Pterographische Frag¬
mented published in 1806. But the attempt made by Merrem, in his ‘Tenta-
men Systematis naturalis Avium’ ( 1812), “must be regarded as the virtual
starting-point of the latest efforts in Systematic Ornithology.” In chron¬
ological order are discussed the labors of De Blainville (1815), Jacobson
(1S20), Nitzsch (1820-40), L’Herminier (1827), Berthold (1S31), Cuvier
and Geoffrey (1832), Gloger (1834). Macgillivray (1837), Blyth 1S3S),
Brandt (1S36-39), Muller (1845-47), Cabanis (1847), Parker (1S60 and
later), Lilljeborg (1866), Huxley (1S67), A. Milne-Edwards (1867-71),
Marsh (1S70), Sundevall (1S72-74), Garrod and Forbes (1873-83), Sclater
(18S0), and others less prominently identified with the subject. The
classification of birds is finally discussed from the author’s own standpoint,
but he presents no formal system, considering it evident that our knowl¬
edge of the class is too imperfect to enable systematists to construct a
phylogenetic scheme. Finally, after passing the ordinal groups in review,
he deals with the supposed high rank of the Turdidte, which he claims is
not “borne out by their alliances, nor by the size of their brain, nor by
character of plumage.” On the other hand, he claims, writh Macgillivray
and Parker, “that at the head of the Class Aves must stand the Family
Corvidce, of which family no one will dispute the superiority of the genus
Corines , nor in that genus the pre-eminence of Corvus corax — the widely-
ranging Raven of the Northern Hemisphere, the Bird perhaps bestknown
from the most ancient times, and, as it happens, that to which belongs
the earliest historical association with man.” — J. A. A.

Ridgway on the American Red Crossbills.* — In his ‘Review’ of the
American Red Crossbills ( Loxia curvirostra group) Mr. Ridgway is

* A Review of the American Crossbills (Loxia) of the L. curvirostra type. By
Robert Ridgway. Proc. Biolog. Soc. of Washington, II, 1883, pp. 84-107. (Separates
issued April 30, 1884.)

Recent Literature.

207

SS5-1

“inclined to consider all the Red Crossbills that I [he] has seen, from
whatever country, as races of Loxia curvirostra Linn.” He recognizes
three races of American Red Crossbills, one of which (A. curvirostra
bendirei ) is described as new. In size it is larger than L. c. americana
proper and smaller than L. c. mexicana , “between which it may be
considered as being about intermediate, so far as size is concerned.” Its
habitat is given as “Chiefly the western mountain regions of the United
States, from Colorado to Oregon and California; in winter not un¬
common in Eastern United States (Massachusetts, Maryland, etc.).” In
North America the Red Crossbills decrease in size from the north south¬
ward, from the small northern subsp. americana to the large, heavy-billed
subsp. mexicana of the southern border of the United States and Mexico.
The Japanese Red Crossbill, from the middle or main island of Japan* * * §
which has been referred to L. albiventris Swinhoe, is renamed L. c.
japonica , the name albiventris being preoccupied for a species of Munia.
There are also remarks on other races of Red Crossbills, particularly the
L. curvirostra and L. pityopsittacus of Europe. — J. A. A.

Ridgway on Various American Birds. — Mr. Ridgway states that while
Mr. Cassin was right in separating the smaller North American Snow
Geese from the larger, he erred in giving a new name ( albatus ) to the
smaller form, which is identical with the Anas nivalis of Forster, “and
may therefore be called Chen (or Anser) kyperboreus nivalis (Forst.).”*
Mr. Ridgway, in giving the results of a reexamination of the types of
Muscicapa fulvifrons and Coues’s Mitrephorus pallescens , recognizes
three species of the fulvifrons group of Flycatchers, as follows: (1) Em-
pidonax fulvifrons (Giraud), from east of the Rocky Mountains (2)
E. f. pallescens (Cones), from west of the Rocky Mountain; (Arizona,
New Mexico, and probably portions of Mexico) ; and (3) E. f. rubicundns
(Cab.), from Southern Mexico. f

He also claims that the earliest name of the Mexican House Finch
( Carpodacus hcemorrhous ) is Fringilla mexicana Muller and that the
species should be called Carpodacus mexicanus (Miill.), or, should inter¬
gradation with C. frontalis be proven, C. frontalis mexicanus (Miill. ) . t

As new subspecies are described§ (1) Earns atricapillus turneri (St.
Michael’s, Alaska), (2) Psaltriparus minimus californicus (California),
< 3) Colaptes mexicanus saturation (Northwest coast, Columbia 'River to
Sitka), (4) Myiarchus mexicanus magister (Western Mexico, north to

* Note on the Anas hyperboreus, Pall., and Anser albatus, Cass. Proc. Biolog. Soc
Washington, II, pp. 107, 108. (Separates issued April 30, 1884.)

f Remarks on the type specimens of Muscicapa fulvifrons, Giraud, and Mitrepho¬
rus pallescens, Coues. Ibid., pp. 108-110. (Separates issued April 30,1884.)

X Note regarding the Earliest Name for Carpodacus hsemorrhous (Wagler). Ibid.
pp. no, in. (Separates issued April 30, 1884.)

§ Descriptions of some New North American Birds. Ibid., pp. 89-95. (Separates of
this and the following issued April 10, 1884.)

2o8

Recent Literature.

[April

Southern Arizona), (5) Myiarchus laivrencei olivaceus (Western Mexico,
north to Southern Arizona) , (6) Pedioecetes phasianellus campestris (Plains
east of the Rocky Mountains), (7) Lophortyx californicus brunnescens (Pa¬
cific coast, from San Francisco Bay north to Washington Territory), and
(8) Phalacrocorax dilopkus albociliatus (Pacific Coast, from California to
Cape St. Lucas). The same paper contains important inedited remarks
by Dr. Sclater on Kaup's types of Tyrannula mexicana and T. cooperi,
and a identification by Mr. Ridgway of an error in ‘History of Birds of
North America’ (Vol. II, p. 333) in respect to Muscicapa lawrencii
Giraud.

Mr. Ridgway also describes* * * § a new American Kingfisher (Coyle
superciliosa stictoptera) from Yucatan, publishes a note on Psaltriparus
grindce,\ and another on the generic name Calodromas Scl. & Sal.J for
which he proposes to substitute Calopezus , Calodromas being preoccupied
for a genus of Coleoptera. — J. A. A.

Jordan’s ‘Manual of Vertebrates.’ — The fourth edition of this excellent
Manual§ (for notices of previous editions see Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, I,
pp. 93, 94, and III, pp. 145, 146) though from the same stereotype plates
as the second (1S7S) and third (1880) is again “brought fully up to date,
so far as it is possible to do so without alteration in the arrangement of
the genera or insertion of additional matter.” Many changes in nomen¬
clature, however, have been made by alterations in the stereotype plates,
and an appendix gives a few species additional to those contained in the
body of the work. — J. A. A.

Shufeldt on the Osteology of Numenius longirostris. || — Besides a
detailed account of the osteology of Numenius longirostris , illustrated
with two beautiful plates, the comparisons of the ostological characters of
this species with those of many other Limicoline birds add greatly to
the value of this excellent monograph. — J. A. A.

Rives on the Birds of Newport, R. I. — In this paper** Dr Rives
reviews in an informal manner the birds found in the vicinity of Newport,

* Description of a New American Kingfisher. Ibid., pp. 95,96.

t Note on Psaltriparus grindae Belding. Ibid., p. 96.

I Note on the Generic Name Calodromas. Ibid., p. 97.

§ Manual of the Vertebrates of the Northern United States, including the District
east of the Mississippi River, and north of North Carolina and Tennessee, exclusive
of Marine Species. By David Starr Jordan, Ph. D., M. D., Professor of Biology in Indi¬
ana University. Fourth edition, revised and enlarged. Chicago : Jansen, McClurg
& Company, 1884. 8vo., pp. 406.

|| Osteology of Numenius longirostris, with Notes upon the Skeletons of other Amer¬
ican Limicolae. By R. W. Shufeldt, Capt. Med. Corps U. S. Army [etc.]. Journ.
Anat. & Phys., Vol. XIX, Oct. 1884, pp. 51-82, pi. iv and v.

** The Birds of Newport. By William C. Rives, Jr., M.D. Proc. Newport Nat. Hist.
Spc., 1883-84. (July, 1884). pp. 28-41.

>SS5.]

Recent Literature.

209

mentioning briefly most of the species known to occur there. The paper
contains many notes of interest, particularly respecting the rarer winter
residents and various casual visitors. — J. A. A.

Bell on Birds observed between Norway House and Forts Churchill
and York. — This is an annotated list* of 55 species, of much interest from
the localities of observation. Though published in 1880, it has not previ¬
ously been noticed in either the ‘Bulletin N. O. C.’or ‘The Auk.’ — J. A. A

Minor Ornithological Publications. — The concluding numbers of ‘The
Canadian Sportsman and Naturalist’! (Vol. Ill, Nos. 11 and 12, Dec,,
18S3) contain the following (Nos. 773-775) :

773. Animals that have disappeared in Recent Times. Canadian
Sportsman and Naturalist , Vol. Ill, pp. 27S-280. — Refers to the Great
Auk, the Labrador Duck, the Moas, Notornis, etc.

774. American Ornithologists' Union. Bird Migration. By C. Hart
Merriam. Ibid. , pp. 2S1, 282. — Circular of the A. O. U. Committee on
Bird Migration for 1SS4.

775. Nesting of the Common Rail ( Porzana Carolina} Niell (= Vie i 11. ) .
By William L. Kells. Ibid., pp. 283, 284.

Stearns’s 4 Bulletin of Massachusetts Natural History,’ Vol. I, Nos. 1-4,
April-July (all thus far published !), contains the following (Nos. 776-782) :

776. Olden Time Notes on Natural History. Editorial. Bull. Massa¬
chusetts Nat. Hist., I, pp. 3-6. — Mostly an extract from Timothy Dwight’s
‘Travels in New England and New York,’ published in 1S21, containing
allusions to plants, mammals, and birds.

778. American Ornithologists' Union. Bird Migration. By C. Hart
Merriam. Ibid., pp. n-13. — Circular of the A. O. U. Committee on Bird
Migration for 1SS4.

779. A Fezu Bird Notes. Editorial. Ibid., No 2, p. 4. — Notes on the
arrival of birds in April at Amherst, and allusion to the finding of nests
of the Duck Hawk on Mount Tom and Sugar Loaf Mountain in Massa¬
chusetts.

780. [ First Capture of the Titlark (Ant hits ludovicianus') at Amherst,
Mass.] By W. A. Stearns. Ibid., p. 14.

781. Henslozo’s Bunting. Coturniculus henslowi ( Aud .) Bp. Editorial.
Ibid., Nos. 3-4, p. 2. — Refers to various previously recorded instances of
its occurrence in Massachusetts, and the capture of a specimen at Amherst,
June 7, 1884, where the bird is ‘almost common.’ Also record of the cap¬
ture at Amherst of the Red-headed Woodpecker.

782. Birds of Amherst. [By W. A. Stearns.] Ibid., pp. 6-23. — Re-

* List of Birds from the Region between Norway House and Forts Churchill and
York. [By Robert Bell.] Geological Survey of Canada. Report of Progress for
1878-79 (1880). IV, Appendix VI, pp. 676-706.

f For the index to the ornithological articles in the previous numbers of this journal
see Auk, pp. 185, 186, April, 1884.

2 10

Recent Literature.

[April

printed, with additions, from the Amherst ‘Record,’ June-Aug., 1883.
(See antea, No. 44S, Bull. N. O. C., VIII, p. 238.)

The ‘American Naturalist,’ Vol. XVIII, 1884, contains, besides various
extracts and abstracts from other publications, the following (Nos.
783-792) :

783. The Carolina Wren; a Tear of its Life. By Charles C. Abbott,
M. D. American Naturalist, Vol. XVIII, pp. 21-25.

7S4. Wood Notes and Nest Hunting. By Horace Lunt. Ibid., pp.
155-160.— Pleasantly written notes about, chiefly, the Wood Pewee and
Ovenbird.

785. A Labor-Saving Fish Hawk. By T. R. Peale. Ibid., pp. 212,
213. — About the nesting of this species.

786. Barn Owls in Missouri. By F. A. Sampson. Ibid., p. 309.

7S7. Notes on the Red-zving Blackbird. By Charles Aldrich, Ibid.,

pp. 309, 310. — On its nesting habits and decrease in numbers through the
reclamation of wet lands.

788. Migration of North American Birds. By C. Hart Merriam.
Ibid., pp. 310-311. — Circular of the A. O. U. Migration Committee for
1S84.

7S9. On the Shedding of the Clazvs in the Ptarmigan and Allied Birds.
By Leonhard Stejneger. Ibid., pp. 774-776.

790. Does the Crow Blackbird eat Crayfish ? By Clarence M. Weed.
Ibid., p. 832. — Part of a crayfish was found in the stomach of a young
Crow Blackbird. (See on this subject, antea, Nos. 47S.and 480.)

791. Innovations in Nomenclature. Editorial. Ibid., pp. 906-908. —
Approves of ‘trinomial nomenclature,’ but objects to four other recent
American ‘innovations.’

792. Note on the Pelvis in Birds and Dinosaurs. By Dr. J. G. Baur.
Ibid., pp. 1273-1275.

‘Science’, Vols. Ill and IV, 1884, contains the following (Nos. 792-805) :

792. Barn-owls in southern Ohio. By A. W. Butler. Science, Vol III,
p. 31. — Fourteen specimens were taken, in the fall of 1883, near Cincin¬
nati, where it had previously been of rare or accidental occurrence.

793. Osteology of the Cormorant. By J. A. Jeffries. Ibid., p. 59. —
Reply to Dr. Shufeldt (see antea. Nos. 592-594) on this subject.

794. Barn-owls in Missouri. By F. A. Sampson. Ibid., p. 116. —
Unusual numbers about Sedalia.

795. Osteology of the Cormorant. By R. W. Shufeldt. Ibid., p. 143.
— In answer to Mr. Jeffries (see No. 793).

796. Migration of birds in England. Ibid., pp. 158, 159. — From
‘Nature.’

797. Rare Vermont birds. By F. H. Herrick. Ibid., p. 216. — Notes
on 14 species. Records the capture at Rutland in spring of Oporornis
agilis, and the breeding of Recurvirostra americanaf ), Helminthofhaga
celataf) , Lanius ludovicianus, Loxia leucoptera, Chyrsomitris pinus,
Picoides arcticus, and Gallinula galeata at different localities in the
State. Notes also the capture of Phalacrocoraoc carbo, Sterna fuliginosa.

iSSs.J

Recent Literature .

21 I

Hydrochelidon la r if or mis and Alle nigricans. The Cormorant and
Short-tailed Terns mentioned, and perhaps some of the other instances,
appear to have been previously recorded. (See below, No. 801, where H.
celata and R. americana are expunged from the list.)

798. Stones placed in pine-trees by birds. By C. R. Orcutt. Ibid., p.
305. — Stones substituted in some cases for acorns by the acorn-storing
Woodpeckers in California.

799. Osteology of the Cormorant By Theodore Gill. Ibid., p. 404. —
Refers to a special paper by Yarrell on the subject, in which the ‘occi¬
pital style’ of Shufeldt and Jeffries is called the ‘xiphoid bone.’

800. Osteology of the Cormorant. By J. Amory Jeffries and R. W.
Shufeldt. Ibid., p. 274. — Comment on Dr. Gill’s note. (See last title.)

801. Rare Vermont birds. By Francis H. Herrick. Ibid., p. 303. —
States that RecurvirOstra americana and Helminthophaga celata were
given in his former note (see above No. 797) on this subject “on mistaken
evidence.”

802. Coues's Key to North American birds. [By J. A. Allen.] Ibid.,
Vol. IV, pp. 86, 87. — Notice of the work.

803. Increase in growth of young robins. By Charles S. Plumb. Ibid.,
P • 159-

804. The American ornithologists' union. Ibid., pp. 374-376. — Report
of the meeting of 1884.

803. The bird collection of the U. S. national museum. By Robert
Ridgway. Ibid., pp. 496, 497. — Its history and present status.

‘Science Record,’ Vol. II (closing, we are sorry to say, the short-lived
career of this excellent journal, ‘worthy of a better fate’), contains the
following (Nos. 806-81 1) :

806. The American Ornithologists' Union. By E [ 1 1 iott J . C[oues].
Science Record, II, pp. 13, 14. — Account of the founding of the A. O. U.

807. The Blue Grosbeak. By G. E. Manigault, M. D. Ibid., pp. 33,
34. — ‘Quite abundant’ near Charleston, S. C. Short account of its habits,
and record of the capture of two specimens of Swainson’s Warbler in
‘August last’ (1S83!) The latter proves to have been based on an erro¬
neous identification (see Auk, II, p. 105).

808. Chuck-will's Widow. By Arthur T. Wayne, Ibid., pp. 82, 83. —
Account of its habits as observed at Charleston, S. C.

809. Classification of Birds. By Leonhard Stejneger. Ibid., pp. 154,
155-

810. Note on the Bronzed Cozv-Bird. By Geo. F. Gaumer. Ibid.,
pp. 262, 263. — Description of Molothrus ceneus, and account of its habits
as observed in Yucatan.

8x1. The English Sparrow. Ibid., pp. 264, 265. — A reproduction of
a humorous, eri-oneous, and unfair newspaper report of the Report of the
A. O. U. Committee on the European House Sparrow.

812. Ortiithological Field Notes, with one Addition to the Cincinnati
Avian Fauna. By William Hubbell Fisher. Journ. Cincinnati Soc.
Nat. Hist., VII, No. i* April, 1884, pp. 10-13. — The species added is

2 I 2

Recent Literature.

[April

Falco peregrinus ncevius, and there are notes on Astur atricapillus,
Loxia curvirostra americana , Lanins borealis , and Bubo virginianus.

813. A List of our local Birds represe7ited in the Museum \of the
Vassar Brothers Institute]. By W. G. Stevenson, M. D. Trans. Vassar
Brothers Institute, II, 18S3-S4, pp. 153-162. — A nominal list of the species
represented.

814. Dates of the Appearance of Herring, Shad, Bass, Tautog, Scup,
Frostfish, Fish-hawks, Kingfishers, and Greenland Seal in Taunton
River, from 1871 to 1883, inclusive. Bv Elisha Slade. Bull. U. S. Fish
Comm., Ill, p. 478, Dec. 7, 1883. — Table of dates.

815. A Rare Visitor. By Thirlstane [zzr David Thirslane Bruce].
BrockportS^N. F. ] . Republic, May 29, 18S4. — Capture of Cathartes aura >
near Brockport, N. Y. (See Auk, I, p. 293, where the same specimen is
again recorded.)

The ‘American Field,’ Vols. XXI, XXII, 1SS4, contains, besides articles
from ‘The American Naturalist,’ ‘The Auk,’ ‘Science,’ London ‘Field,’
etc., the following (Nos. 816-S45) :

816. Bird Migration in the Mississippi Valley. By W. W. Cooke
and Otto Widmann. American Field , Vol. XXI, Jan. 5, p. 9; Jan. 19, pp.
67-68; Jan. 26, pp. 88,89. (Concluded from preceding volume. See
Auk, I, p. iSS.)

817. The Upland Plover. By Mont Clare (of Claremont. N. H.).
Ibid., Jan. 12, pp. 3.5-37. — On the habits of the bird.

818. American Ornithologists’’ Union — Bird Migration. By C. Hart
Merriam. Ibid., Feb. 2, p. .113.— Circular of the Committee on the
Migration of North American Birds. (See The Auk, I, pp. 71-76.)

819. Bird Migration. By W. W. Cooke. Ibid., Feb. 16, p. 162. —
An appeal for correspondents in the Mississippi Valley District.

820. Toke-toed Birds — (Zygodactyli) . By Col. A. G. Brackett, U. S.
Army. Ibid., Feb. 23, p. 1S5. — On North American Woodpeckers and
Cuckoos.

821. The Titlark Sparrow ( Passerculus Antkinus Bonap.). By B. T.
Gault. Ibid., Feb. 23, pp. 185, 186. — Account of three specimens, and of
nest and eggs, taken in San Diego Co., Cal.

822. The Cranes. By Col. A. G. Brackett. U. S. Army. Ibid., March
1, p. 209. — Desultory notes on, chiefly. North American Cranes and
Herons.

823. The Genus Empidonax. By Morris Gibbs. Ibid., March 8, p.
232. Interesting notes on the four species occurring in Michigan.

824. The Humming-bird\fi\ — ( T rochilidoe) . By Col. A. G. Brackett,
U.S. Army. Ibid., March 8, pp. 232, 233. — Unimportant notes on sev¬
eral North American species.

825. Perching Birds — ( Insessores ). By Col. A. G. Brackett, U. S.
Army. Ibid., March 15, pp. 256, 257. — Remarks on various North
American species, consisting largely of quotations from authors.

826. A Plea for the Hawks. By G. II. Ragsdale. Ibid., March 22,
p. 281. — Urging discrimination in the slaughter £f these birds, the greater

i8SS.]

Recent Literature.

2I3

part of which are beneficial, they subsisting chiefly upon noxious mam¬
mals and insects.

827. Nuttall's Woodpecker ( Picks Nuttallii). By B. T. Gault. Ibid.,
March 29. p. 305. — On its habits, from observations made in the San Ber¬
nardino Valley, Cal.

828. [ Woodcock Nesting in Northern Mississippi. ] By N. B. Nesbitt.
Ibid., March 29, p. 305.

829. The Valley Quail. By T. S. Van Dyke. Ibid., May 17 and 24,
pp. 473, 474, 496. 497. — A detailed account of its habits forms Chap. XXIII
and XXIV of a series of papers entitled ‘ The Hills and Streams of South¬
ern California.’

830. Bird Migration . By B. W. Everman. Ibid., June 7, pp, 544,
545. — List of arrivals at Camden, Ind., March 30 to May 12, 1884. Also,
under same heading, notes by ‘W. C. A.’ on a few species observed at
Greensboro, Ala.

831. A Winter Day's Observations on Birds at Dan's Station, Stark
Co., Ind. By II. K. Coale. I!>id., June 7, p. 545.

832. Habits of Geese [in Confinement^ . By Junius P. Leach. Ibid.,
June 14, p. 569.

833. Colonel Brackett on Cranes. By ‘Byrne.’ Ibid., June 21, pp.
592, 593. — Correction of errors in Col. B’s article on this subject (see
above, No. 822).

■834. Bob Blue [Calipepla squamata~\ and his Kinsfolk. By Charles
Hallock. Ibid., June 28, pp. 616, 617.— On the Quails of Texas.

835. History of a Wing-tipped Quail [Oriyx virginianus]. By
J. L. T. Ibid., Vol. XXII, July 12, p. 34.

836. A Rare Bird. By Dr. A. Wall. Ibid., July 26, p. 82. — Capture
of the Wood Ibis near Bloomery, W. Va.

837. The Birds [of California ]. By T. S. Van Dyke. Ibid., Aug.
23, pp. 176, 177. — An article of three columns in length, giving remarks
of some interest on various species.

838. Foraging by Smell. By Charles Hallock. Ibid., Sept. 6, p 255. —
Detailing observations on the habits of the Turkey Buzzard in relation to
its alleged keen sense of smell.

839. What the Crow Eats. By R. J. W. Ibid., Oct. 4, p. 321. — Ver¬
dict against the Crow.

840. Four-footed Birds. [By Edward M. Brigham.] Ibid., Oct. 25.
pp. 392, 393-— On the habits and embryonic characters of Opisthocoma
cristata, which is said to have ‘quadrupedal characters’ in its early
stages, which it retains ‘ for several days’ after hatching!

841. What the Crow Eats. By F. L. P. Ibid., Nov. 8, p. 440. —
Record of the killing of ‘fifteen hundred’ in one hunt, at Muldon, Miss.

842. Fashionable Follies. By Charles Aldrich. Ibid., Nov. 15, p.
465. — On the ‘wanton and wasteful’ destruction of birds for millinery
purposes.

S43. What the Crow Eats. By Charles Aldrich. Ibid., Nov. 22, p.

2i4

Recent Literature.

[April

488. — In behalf of the Crow, and criticising the wholesale slaughter men¬
tioned by ‘F. L. P.’ (see above, No. 841).

844. The Canada Goose. Bv A. A. Mosher. Ibid., Dec. 6, p. 537. —
Nests in large numbers about Spirit Lake, la.

845. What the Crow Does Eat. By M. G. Ellzey, M. D. Ibid.,
Dec. 13, p. 561. — Strong charges against the utility of the Crow.

Publications Received. — Gardiner, Edward G. Beitrage zur Kentniss
des Epitrichiums und der Bildung des Vogelschnabels. Inaugural-Disser
tation, etc. 8vo. , Leipzig, 1884, pp. 1-50, pll. 2.

Jordan, David Starr. Manual of the Vertebrates of the Northern
United States, etc. 4th ed., revised and enlarged. Chicago, 1S84, 8vo..
pp. 406.

Lawrence, George N. Descriptions of supposed New Species of Birds
of the Families Tyrannidae, Cypselidse and Columbidae. (Ann. New York
Acad. Sci., Ill, No. 5, pp. 156-158, Jan. 5, 1S85.)

Meyer, A. B. (1) Ueber neue und ungentigend bekannte Vogel im
koniglich zoologischen Museum zu Dresden. (Zeitsch. f. d. ges. Ornithol.,
I, 1884 (30 pp., repaged, pll. vii-ix.) (2) Notizen iiber Vogel, Nester und
Eier aus dem Ostindischen Archipel, spiciell iiber die durch Herrn C.
Ribbe von den Aru-Inseln jiingst erhaltenen. (Zeitschr. f. d. ges. Or¬
nithol., I, pp- 269-296, pll. xiv-xviii.)

Newton, Alfred. Ornithology. (Encyclopaedia Brittanica, ed. 9, Vol.
XVIII, pp. 1-50, Dec. 18S4.)

Reichenow, Ant., and Herman Schalow. Compendium der neu bes-
chriebenen Gattungen und Arten. (Journ. f. Orn., 1S84, pp. 399-424.)

Ridgway. Robert. Description of some new Species of Birds from
Cozumel Island, Yucatan. (Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington, III, 1884-85,
—4 PP- repaged.)

Salvadora, Tommaso. Uccelli dello Scioa e della regione fra Zeila e lo
Scioa. Genoa, 1884, 8vo., pp. 269.

Willard, S. W. Migration of North American Birds in Brown and
Ontagamie Counties. (Trans. Wisconsin Acad. Sciences, Arts and
Letters. 18S3— pp. 20, repaged.)

American Naturalist, Feb., March, April, 1S85.

Bulletin Essex Institute, XVI, Nos. 7-12.

Canadian Science Monthly, Oct. 1884, Jan. 1885.

Journal Cincinnati Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, No. 4.

Kansas City Review of Science and Industry, VIII, Nos. 9, 10, 11, Jan.,
Feb., March, 1SS5.

Milwaukee, Second Ann. Report of Board of Trustees of the Public
Museum of the City of. Svo., 1SS4. (2) Circular of the Public Museum
of the City of Milwaukee, Nos. 1, 2.

Naturalist, The. A Journal of Nat. Hist, for the North of England,
Nos. 114- , Jan. -March, 1S85.

Naturalist, The, in Florida, No. 2-4, Oct. 1884-March, 1885.

1 SS5 - ]

General Notes.

2I5

Ornithologist and Oologist, Jan. -March, 18S5.

Random Notes on Natural History, II, 18S5, Nos. 1-3.

Tidings from Nature, I, No. 6. Feb. 1SS5.

Transactions of Vassal- Brothers Institute, and its Scientific Section,
II, 1SS3-84.

West-American Scientist, I, No. 3. Feb., 1885.

Zeitschrift fur die gessammte Ornithologie, I, Heft 4, 1884.

Zoologist, Jan., Feb., March, 1SS5.

GENERAL NOTES.

The Wood Thrush in Maine. — On September 6, 1SS4, I shot a young
male Wood Thrush ( Tardus mustelinus ) at Saco, Maine. This is, I
believe, the first recorded instance of its capture along the coast north of
Massachusetts, and the only one for Maine. — Joseph L. Goodale, Catti-
bridge , Mass.

The Occurrence of the Catbird {Minins carolinensis ) on the Farallone
Islands, Pacific Ocean. — Our Catbird appears to be not only extending its
range, but wandering into very strange places. On the third of Septem¬
ber, 1884, the U. S. Lighthouse Steamer ‘Manzarrita’ landed myself and
assistant on one of the Farallone Islands for the purpose of collecting sea
lions for the National Museum. We were rowed ashore amid the roar of
hundreds of sea lions, and the screams of myriads of birds.

Immediately upon landing I accompanied the Inspector to the light¬
house, which occupies the highest rocks three hundred feet above the sea.
Near the tower, surrounded by Murres, Puffins, and Gulls, I saw a bird
which of all birds was the least to be expected in such a place — a ‘regular’
eastern Catbird.

I rushed to the landing for my gun and was back on remarkably short
order, considering the number of times my unfortunate stomach had paid
tribute to Neptune on the passage out from San Francisco, but the bird
had disappeared and could not be found. On the following day, however,
it was discovered among the rocks near the sea, and its skin is now in the
Smithsonian Institution, still surrounded, it is true, bv Murres and Puffins,
but not noisy ones. The specimen is perhaps not appreciably different
from others of the same species with which it has been compared, its small
bill being matched in specimens from Key West, and its light colored
under parts not being exceptional.

The occurrence of this species on these islands is the more remarkable
as it has not yet been recorded from California, being known on the
Pacific Coast of the United States only in the region of the Columbia

General Notes.

[April

2l6

River. The Farallones (Spanish, meaning pointed rocks in the sea) are
disposed in three groups several miles apart, the largest being about a
mile long and lying thirty miles west of the Golden Gate. They are well
named, for there is neither soil nor vegetation upon them, except the
guano of the birds and three species of weeds. In summer the eggs of
the birds which swarm there to breed, are gathered by the barrel-full for
the San Francisco market. — Chas. H. Townsend, Smithsonian Institu¬
tion, Washington , D. C.

The Yellow-rumped Warbler Wintering in Maine. — On January 1, 1885.

I shot two Yellow-rumped Warblers ( Dendreeca coronata ) from a flock of
six at Pine Point, Maine. On opening the crop of one, I found it filled
with the seeds of the pitch pine. I believe this species has never before
been taken in the winter season north of Massachusetts. — Joseph L.
Goodale, Cambridge , Mass.

The Migration of the Swallows. — I have noticed for several years that
before the young Swallows were capable of enduring a prolonged flight,
old and young gathered together in one vast assembly and moved
gradually southward, making short stages from farm to farm ; at last (in
1SS4, on August 9), with a favorable north wind and a clear sky, they left
the Island in a body, only a few stragglers remaining, just enough to
remind us that summer was still with us. — Francis Bain, North
River , P E. I.

Nelson’s Sharp-tailed Finch (A mmodramus caudacutus nelsoni ) on the
Atlantic Coast. — Mr. Arthur T. Wayne sends me a Sharp-tailed Finch
which is positively indistinguishable from Illinois specimens, but which
was shot on the salt marshes near Charleston. South Carolina, Oct. 8,
1884. That it is really an inland-bred bird scarcely admits of a doubt,
nor is its occurrence on this coast altogether surprising in view of the
fact that other species which breed only in the interior — Coturniculus
leconfei, for example — extend their autumnal migrations in a south-east¬
erly direction and winter numerously very near to, if not actually on, the
Atlantic seaboard. — William Brewster, Cambridge , Mass.

Wintering of the Swamp Sparrow in Eastern Massachusetts. — The cap¬
ture of two Swamp Sparrows ( Melospiza pa lust ris) in Cambridge, on
January 11, 18S3. has already been recorded,* but a second instance may
be of interest.

On December 29, 1884, a flock of four were seen and one killed in a
dense thicket on the Fresh Pond marshes in Cambridge, and on January
31, iSS^, near the same place. I saav the remains of another, which had
been partly eaten by a Shrike. Since then I have looked for them several
times unsuccessfully, but think that the rest had probably been killed by
Shrikes. — Arthur P. Chadbourne, Cambridge , Mass.

Journal Boston Zoological Society, Vol. II (1883), p. 32.

i88S.]

General Notes.

217

Cyanocitta stelleri frontalis Nesting in Holes in Trees. — While collecting
birds and their eggs in company with my brother, Capt. B. F. Goss, in
the spring of 1884, in the vicinity of Julian, California, we found quite
a number of the nests of the Blue-fronted Jay, and in all cases but one in
holes and trough-like cavities in trees and stubs, ranging from four to
fifty feet from the ground, generally ten to twenty feet up. The nest
found outside was built upon a large horizontal limb of an oak close
beside a gnarl, the sprout-like limbs of which thickly covered the nest
overhead, and almost hid it from view beiow.

From our knowledge of the breeding habits of the family we looked
for their nests on trees and bushes, and spent days in climbing over and
up and down the hills and mountain-sides, carefully examining every
spot that seemed to us a natural nesting place, but without success,
though often finding nests of the California Jay ( Aphelocotna califor-
nica) ; and I am inclined to think we should have returned without their
eggs had I not, in suddenly coming to the top of a hill, discovered a
pair of the birds hopping over the ground and picking up bits of sticks,
which they dropped on seeing me, and flew away. Here was a pointer,
and to remove any suspicion that their actions had been observed, I did
not halt for a moment or change my course, but walked leisurely on until
well out of sight, then swung back around the hill, and cautiously ap¬
proached a ledge of rocks over-looking the ground and concealed myself
behind them. On peeping out I saw the birds busily hopping about
picking up material for a nest; they soon flew with it, both together
or nearly so, directly to, or rather into, an opening or hollow near the base
of a large tree. After watching them make a few trips I stole away and
hastened to inform my brother of the lucky find. It was a surprise to us
both.

The nests are quite bulky, made loosely of sticks, stems of weeds, and
lined with fibrous rootlets and grasses, and as they are all built at or
near the opening, the tell-tale sticks project and make the finding of
their nests an easy matter. Measurements of the first two sets of eggs
taken, viz., May 19: 1.20 X -87, 1.20 X -8S, 1.21 X .88; May .21: 1.22 X
.88 1.15 X .86, 1. 19 X -86, 1.16 X .85. Color light blue, speckled and
spotted with dark brown, rather thickest at large end. — N. S. Goss,
Topeka , Kansas.

The First Nest and Eggs of Eremophila alpestris found in Niagara
County, N. Y. — If there is one nest which I have looked for more than for
another, it is the nest of the Horned Hark. From early in March till late
in May, for the past five years, I have searched in vain. On the 17th
of June, 1S84, while collecting in the town of Porter, Niagara County,
I was fortunate in securing the coveted prize. I was in company with
a young farmer, and, as we were returning from our forenoon’s tramp, he
asked what bird it was, with a black throat, which he saw early in the
morning and late in the afternoon, running in the road, and which breeds
three times a year. I asked him if it ran or hopped, and how he knew

General Notes.

[April

2l8

it bred three times a year. He answered that it always ran, and that
he had seen young birds in April, June, and August. I told him that it
undoubtedly was the Horned Lark, which was gettingto be quite common
in this vicinity, and also added, “Have you ever found its nest?” He did
not know with certainty, but thought he knew where there was one, and
took me to it. The nest was built in the side of a manure heap in
the field, and contained four fresh eggs. I secured the male bird only,
not having time to secure the female. But I was content to get what I
did; and I know that I am safe in saying it is the first nest and eggs of
E. alpestris secured in Niagara County, and think I might also include
Orleans County. A week later the young man sent me a young bird alive,
just from a nest, which I killed and sent to Dr. A. K. Fisher, who pro¬
nounced it ‘a jewel.’ I secured a number of young birds in July, but did
not succeed in finding any August broods; and but for the assertion of
my young friend that he had seen them in that month, I should not
have expected to find them; but I am quite certain that I saw birds after
the 5th of July that were breeding. — J. L. Davison, Lockport , N. T.

The Swallow-tailed Flycatcher in Manitoba and at York Factory. — The

Swallow-tailed Flycatcher (Af Hindus forjicatus ) is such a characteristically
southern bird, that its accidental occurrence in Manitoba is worthy, of
note. Last January I was shown a splendid specimen taken at Portage
la Prairie by Mr. Nash. He found it lying dead on the prairie in the
October of 1884. In addition to this record I quote the following rather
startling statement from the ‘Report’ on the Hudson’s Bay by Professor
Bell of the Canadian Geological Survey, 1882. “But the most singular
discovery in regard to geographical distribution is the finding of the Scis-
sors-tail or Swallow-tailed Flycatcher ( Afdvulus forjicatus Sw.) at York
Factory .... The specimen in the Government Museum was shot at York
Factory in the summer of 18S0 and I have learned since that these remark¬
able birds were occasionally seen at the posts of the Hudson’s Bay Com¬
pany, all the way west to the Valley of the Mackenzie River.”

The once surprising New Jersey record is now somewhat eclipsed. —
Ernest E. T. Seton, Toronto , Canada.

Food of the Hummingbird ( T rochilus colubris ). — Somewhere it has
been stated, that the Hummingbird derives the most of its nourishment
from the minute insects which adhere to the nectar of flowers, and
which are taken with the honey. Undoubtedly many insects are thus
secured, and furnish their share of nutriment to the species, but in
the following account of a Hummer in confinement, kindly furnished
to me by Miss Hattie Brubaker, it will be seen that insects are not
wholly essential to the maintenance of life, in Trochiluscolubris at
least.

The bird, she writes, was taken September 1, near De Pere, Wis., and
throve nicely until October 28, when it met an untimely death. After

»88S.J

General Notes.

219

it had struggled in vain for nearly two days to escape from a room into
which it had accidentally flown, it was picked up in an exhausted condition
and carefully placed out of doors in an arbor, in hopes of its recovering
sufficiently to fly away. A severe cold rain that night completely
numbed it, so that it was again taken to the house a mere bunch ol
rumpled feathers — no life then being apparent. A slight warming quite
unexpectedly revived it, and it was but a short time before it opened its
eyes and flew to a nail, and then immediately began to rearrange its
plumage. As flowers and sweetened water were offered to this captive
before it was taken to the arbor, without its once noticing them, Miss
Brubaker was rather at a loss to know how to feed it; but at last she
conceived of placing some sugar and water in a conspicuous gladiolus
blossom, “which the Hummingbird soon discovered and visited, drinking
greedily the honey that was in the blossom. After this it became quite
lively, flying from its nail to some dried flowers and grasses in another
room, where it had rested during the two days it had remained in the
house without food or water.

With the aid of a petunia blossom as a decoy, this little bird was soon
taught to drink from a small phial, holding about two teaspoonfuls of
sugar and water (about one-third sugar), that was suspended by a string
to the window casing. It was but a day or so before it seemed per¬
fectly contented, not showing the least fear, but seemingly growing
stronger as well as larger in its new home.

Miss Brubaker thinks the bird was not an old one, as its tail-feathers
grew considerably after she had it. She says that at first they kept a
variety of cut flowers in the room with it, but it barely alighted upon
them, flying at once to the bottle which it had learned to appreciate.
Somewhat after the manner of obtaining nectar from a flower, it would
sip a moment at the bottle and then dart away; but it was not long in
finding that the supply of sweetened water was inexhaustible, and that
there was no necessity of hastening its meal. At times it would drink
so much that its wings were unable to sustain the weight of the body,
and a fall to the floor was the result of its excessive fondness for this
artificial nectar. When left to itself and no check put upon its drinking,
it would consume at least half the contents of the phial daily — at least
one-half as much as its own bulk.

“We are certain,” she writes, “that for at least a month the bird had
access to no flowers whatever, thus making it certain that the sweetened
water furnished it its sole nourishment, and during this captivity it did
not show the first signs of diminishing strength.”

At the approach of cold weather it was placed in a cage, in which its
little history was brought to a close by its accidentally entangling one of
its claws in a loose wire which secured a small perch in the cage, and
thus suspended, with its head downward, it was found by Miss Brubaker
the next morning — another ‘bunch’ of rumbled feathers. — Samuel
Wells Willard, West De Fere , Wise.

220

General Notes.

[April

The Chuck-will’s-widow ( Antrostomus Caroline lists') in Massachusetts. —
In the month of December, 1884, I found, in the barn of Mr. Geo. A.
Taplev, in the town of Revere, Mass., the dried skin of a bird which Mr.
Taplev thought was that of a ‘strange Whip-poor-will.’ The bird was intact,
and at first sight one would suppose it to be a stuffed instead of a dried
specimen. Attracted by the large size of the bird, the yellow coloration
of the plumage, and other signs, I thought I had discovered a species new
to this State ; namely, the Chuck-wilPs-widow, or Southern Whip-poor-will.
On presenting the specimen to Mr. Allen, of the Museum of Comparative
Zoology, my opinion was confirmed. Mrs. Tapley says the bird was
caught in October by a cat. I need not sav that I am greatly pleased with
having been the means of adding a new species to the list of Massachu¬
setts birds. That the specimen was weak enough to be caught by a cat
seems to indicate that it may have been blown to our State by a gale. —
Fletcher Osgood. Chelsea, Mass.

The Hawk Owl in Eastern Massachusetts. — Mr. Brewster’s interesting
article on Surnia funerea in the last number of ‘The Auk’ (Jan., 1885,
p. 108) reminds me that I have in my notebook a record of an example
which I have neglected to make public. This, perhaps, should be done,
as it antedates, so far as I can learn, all previous records, when the year
is certainly given, for Massachusetts.

The Hawk Owl is mentioned in Mr. Peabody’s ‘Report’ of 1839, but
merely in a general way — “seldom wanders into New England.” It does
not appear in Mr. Allen’s ‘List’ of 1864, but is given in his ‘List’ of 1878,
as ‘very rare.’ Mr. Babcock’s specimen, noted in the ‘American Natural¬
ist,’ 1869, was taken, as Mr. Babcock informs me, in 1862 or 1863.

In January, tS6o, a neighbor called with the request that I would come
and see a strange Owl he had just shot, and, being merely wing-tipped,
had put in a cage with the view of making a pet of him. I found it to be
of this species. His wing healed, and he became fairly tame, and on
occasional visits I found he bore confinement well, and his good appetite
made a constant demand on his keeper. This state of things continued
more than a year; but in the spring of 1S61, being exposed one night to
a sudden fierce and cold storm, which beat into his cage on account of a
change of wind, he was found the next morning dead under the perch.
He was brought to me according to request, but his plumage, of course
already injured by confinement, was in such a deplorable condition, from
the soaking and filth at the bottom of the cage, that my courage was not
equal to the occasion, and I reluctantly threw him away. — F. C. Browne,
Framingham, Mass.

The Ptarmigan of Anticosti — a Correction. — In a recent paper * on
some birds observed in the Gulf of St. Lawrence I followed Verrill f in

* ‘Notes on the Birds observed during a Summer Cruise in the Gulf of St. Law¬
rence.' Proc. Boston Soc. Nat. Hist., Vol. XXII, Oct. 3, 1883, pp. 364-412.
t Proc. Boston Soc. Nat. Hist., Vol. IX, Dec. 1862, p, 138.

General Notes.

22 1

>88S.]

referring the Ptarmigan of Anticosti to Lagopus alius. My single adult
specimen from that Island was a female, which, of course, lacked the
black loral stripe so diagnostic of the male of L. rupestris. Upon com¬
paring it with some Rock and Willow Ptarmigan from Newfoundland (the
only material available at the time) I found it resembled the latter rather
closelj' in general coloration and in this respect differed very decidedly
from the former. Accordingly I concluded that it must be L. alius, quite
overlooking certain important discrepancies in size and proportions. To
tell the truth, the comparison was made very hastily, for, from the fact
that the bird had been shot in a dense forest, miles from any open rocky-
country such as the Rock Ptarmigan is said to inhabit, I had already
quite made up my mind regarding it.

A re-examination, however, convinces me that the specimen in question
is really L. rupestris ; indeed, Mr. Ridgway, who has kindly compared it
for me with the material in the National Museum, decides that it is indis¬
tinguishable from the bird found on the mainland of North America at
large.

It has further transpired that the Willow Ptarmigan of Newfoundland is
varieta’ly separable from true alius , while the Rock Ptarmigan of that
island is apparently even specifically distinct from L. rupestris. Thus I
was misled by material which, to say the least, was far from typical.

Of course it is by no means settled that all the Ptarmigan on Anticosti
are L. rupestris, but in view of these developments Verrill’s record of
alius there (he saw no specimens) requires confirmation. — William
Brews.ter, Camiridge, Mass.

A Blue Heron’s Meal. — There is a heronry not far from my home, and
during the breeding season the great broad-winged birds can be seen day
and night flying between their nests and the seaside. I once surprised
one ready to start back with its finny burden, and becoming alarmed it
disgorged ten good-sized fish before it mounted into the air. Is this not
an unusual load for this bird to carry? — Francis Bain, North River,
P. E. I.

Wood Ibis ( Tantalus loculator ) in Eastern New York. — Mr. Howard
Burhans, of Glasco, Ulster County, N. Y., informs me that he had a fine
adult Wood Ibis sent to him for mounting. The bird was shot by the
late Howard Tipp, on July 8, 1884, near Glennie Falls, which is west from
Glasco, and about one and a half miles from the Hudson. It was discov¬
ered in a low swampy meadow, and was so tame that it was easily
approached. — A. K. Fisher, M. D., Sing Sing, N. T.

Wilson’s Plover in Nova Scotia. — I shot on Brier Island, April 28, 1880,
a female Ochthodromus wilsonius, and have the same in my collection.
The wind was blowing very hard from the southeast, and I think carried
the bird off the shore by and beyond her intended destination ; at any
rate she appeared tired, alighting directly on reaching the shore, resting

222

Correspondence.

[April

a few moments, and then running to the edge of the water and bathing
freely. After dressing her feathers she started along the beach in the
direction in which I was sitting, a mistake not noticed by her until too
late. I can find no record of the occurrence of this species so far north,
therefore think its capture worthy of note. — N. S. Goss, Topeka , Kansas.

The Ocurrence of Chroicocephalus franklini in Wisconsin. — October
22, 1884, I took a female specimen of this Gull near the mouth of Fox
River. Two other Gulls accompanied it, which I was unable to secure.
They were probably the same species. — Samuel Wells Willard, West
De Pere , Wise.

Rissa tridactyla kotzbuei in Washington Territory. — I can find no
mention of the occurrence of the Pacific Kittiwake Gull south of Alaska,
and therefore think it will be of interest for me to say that I killed a pair
of the birds March 2, 1882, at Port Townsend, the only ones observed by
me on the coast. I have the male in my collection. — N. S. Goss, Topeka ,
Kansas.

CORRESPONDENCE.

[ Correspondents are requested to write briefly arid to the point. No attention will
be paid to anonymous communications .]

Indian Bird Names.

To the Editors of the Auk : —

Sirs: Under the head of ‘Correspondence’ in the October number of
‘The Auk’ Mr. Henshaw notes with surprise my statement that “They
[the Chippewa Indians] have no specific name for fully one-half of those
[birds] which yearly nest before their eyes or pass by in migration.”
He goes on to say, “That Indians should know little of the birds, espec¬
ially of the smaller kinds, that visit this country only as migrants, is not
perhaps surprising, but that any considerable number of birds inhabiting
their country, even of the smaller and inconspicuous kinds, should not be
known to Indians and be named by them is surprising.” At the time I
made my statement I based it on the following facts. There occur in that
part of Minnesota about 250 species of birds; as the Chippewas have less
than 125 bird names, they name less than half of those “which yearly nest
before their eyes or pass by in migration.” I did not mean by this, less
than half of the migrants and less than half of the breeders, but less than
half of the sum total. Since reading Mr. Henshaw’s letter, I have gone
over the subject again, with the following results.

Dr. Hatch, in his 1880 list of Minnesota birds, gives 281 species. Of
these, at least 240 occur during some part of every year at White Earth

ISS5.]

Notes and News.

223

Agency. The Indians have names for 114 of these 240, or 47^ per cent.
There are 71 non-breeders, that is migrants and winter visitants, of which
14, or about 20 per cent., are named, and 169 breeders, of which 100
or about 60 per cent. , are named. So that Mr. Henshaw is correct in
judging that more than half of the breeders should have names.

The past summer I spent several months among the Otoes, a small
tribe in the Indian Territory, and though no complete list of their bird
names was collected, yet enough was learned to indicate that in this mat¬
ter they are poverty stricken.

Morehead , Minn., Dec. 4. 1884. W. W. Cooke.

NOTES AND NEWS.

In Dr. Merriam’s ‘ Preliminary Report of the Committee on Bird Mi¬
gration,’ published in the last number of ‘ The Auk,’ attention was called
to the fact that the amount of material, in the way of returns from observ¬
ers, could not be properly elaborated without considerable pecuniary assist¬
ance.’ Foreseeing this state of affairs, the Union, at its last meeting
(Sept., 1884), instructed the Council to prepare and present a proper
memorial to Congress in behalf of the Committee. We are happy to
state that the appeal was so far successful that an appropriation of $5000
in aid of the work was secured through the Department of Agriculture.
This sum will doubtless enable the Committee to not only carry on the
present year’s field-work successfully, but to do much toward getting the
results of last year’s work in proper shape for publication. As is well
known, the Migration Committee and the Committee on the Geograph¬
ical Distribution of North American Birds has been consolidated, and the
Committee has now in hand not only the subject of migration, but also
the elaboration of all available or obtainable data on the distribution of
the species throughout the continent, a subject of well-knowm interest and
importance.

In 1883, the legislature of Maine repealed all acts providing for the
appointment of taxidermists and the taking of birds, nests, and eggs for
scientific purposes. Abuses had sprung up under the old statutes, and
the lawr-makers believed that the best remedy wrould be found in a policy
of total prohibition. For two years, therefore, ornithology has made
little progress in Maine. During the past winter the Portland Society of
Natural History made a determined and successful effort to secure the
passage of a law in behalf of collectors. The bill presented by the
Society was adopted, with several unimportant changes, but with one
provision wdiich is objectionable — which, however, wras made a qua

224

Notes and News-

[April

non by the legislative committee — viz , that but ten collector’s commis¬
sions shall be in force at any one time.

The collection of birds in the Museum of Comparative Zoology at
Cambridge numbers 33,000 specimens, about '4000 of which are mounted
and on exhibition, and represent not far from 3000 species. In conse¬
quence of financial embarrassments which the Museum has recently ex¬
perienced, the increase of the collection is likely to be for the present
seriously checked ; but it is to be hoped that this unfortunate state of
affairs maybe of short duration. The museum contains much valuable
ornithological material, including several thousand birds in spirits, and
a very good suite of skeletons, both mounted and unmounted, besides a
very fair oological collection, which includes that of the late Dr. T. M.
Brewer.

Mr. J. A. Allen, who for twenty years has had charge of Mammals and
Birds at the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Cambridge, and where
for fifteen years he has held the position of ‘Assistant in Ornithology,’
has accepted the curatorship of Mammalogy and Ornithology in the
American Museum of Natural History, Central Park, New York City.
He will enter upon the duties of his new position about May 1, after
which date his address will be as here indicated. Dr. C. Hart Merriam
sailed for Europe January 1, for the purpose of spending several months
in scientific study at Brunswick, Germany. His return is expected within
a few weeks.

We learn with deep regret of the untimely death, by accidental drown¬
ing in the river Don, of the well-known Russian naturalist and traveller,
Dr. N. Severtzow, a Corresponding Member of the A. O. U. Dr. Severt-
zow became first known to the scientific world through the publication of
the results of his explorations in Central Asia in 1857. He promptly
espoused the Darwinian doctrine of evolution, and is especially known for
his valuable publications on the geographical distribution of the animals
of Turkestan.

At the January meeting of the Ridgway Ornithological Club, papers
were read on ‘ The Hummingbirds of California,’ by B. T. Gault, and
' Notes on Some Australian Birds,’ by Robert Ridgway, and at the Febru¬
ary meeting a paper on ‘ The Vireos of Michigan,’ by Dr. Morris Gibbs.

Juvenile and amateur publications in Natural History appear in differ¬
ent parts of the country with bewildering frequency, not less than twelve
or fifteen such publications having started within the last twelvemonth.
Most of them aim to cover a wide field, and treat of ornithology only
incidentally, but several are exclusively ornithological. One of the latest
to claim attention is ‘The Young Ornithologist,’ published and edited in
Boston by A. A. Child, an eight-page monthly sheet, of which Vol. I, No.
1, bears date February, 18S5.

THE AUK:

A QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF

ORNITHOLOGY.

vol. ii. July, 1885. nq. 3.

NOTES OF AN ORNITHOLOGICAL TRIP IN
ARIZONA AND SONORA.

BY F. STEPHENS.

In March, 1S84, Mr. C. G. Pringle, of Charlotte, Vt., made a
journey by wagon from Tucson, Arizona, southwest to the Gulf
of California, collecting botanical specimens ; on this trip he was
so successful as to wish to make another. Early in August he in¬
vited me to accompany him on a second journey over the same
route, an invitation I very gladly accepted. The route lay over
deserts most of the way, and as horse-feed and water had to be
carried in some of the most interesting portions of the route, I
took but a light 50-cal. gun instead of my 12-bore, — a mistake I
afterwards regretted.

I did not intend making many skins, partly because I wished to
add as little as possible to the material necessary to carry, and
partly because the birds were now moulting and in poor condi¬
tion. Therefore this must be a record more of what I saw than of
what I got. As the country traversed is almost a terra incognita
I will describe some of its principal features, to give a better un¬
derstanding of its bird life.

Leaving Tucson August 7, 1884, we drove up the valley of the
Santa Cruz a few miles and turned to the southwest over a gap in
the low Sierra de Tucson, and emerged on a plain. Along the
higher edge of the plain are many giant cactuses (Cereus gigcin-

226

Stephens on Birds of Arizona and Sonora.

L July

tens), mesquit, palo-fierro trees, and a general assortment of
smaller cactuses. In this semi-forest growth were several charac¬
teristic desert species, such as Colaptes chrysoides , Centurus
uropygialis , Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus , and Ainphi-
spiza bilitieata. Further along this tree and cactus growth disap¬
peared, leaving a plain only very sparsely covered with grass,
where birds were nearly absent except some Calamospiza bicolor ,
then migrating. Nearly all these were males in the black and
white breeding plumage ; but they had nearly all changed to the
winter plumage by our return some three weeks later. On a
solitary little mesquit tree in the plain I saw a Hawk, and on
approaching to see what the species was I observed a large nest in
the same tree. Finding the Hawk not wild I killed it. It proved
to be a young Buteo swainso?zi , and was probably reared in the
tree where it was killed. At our night camp I shot a Callipepla
squamata. The next day we drove west of south over a narrow¬
ing part of the plain. In places there was a fair growth of grass,
and again more or less brush, but almost no cactuses. In the
morning we watered the horses at a well one hundred and eighty-
six feet deep, paying ten cents per horse. A heavy rain appeared
to be falling to the south, which we were glad to see, as it insured
us water for our night camp. Peuccea cassini was common ami
I heard one P. arizonce.

On the morning of the 9th I heard Callipepla squamata
ahead, and started on in advance of the wagon, but failed to get
any. Shot three Peuccea arizonce , and saw several Otocorys.
After walking three or four miles I waited for the wagon, which
had not come on as soon as I expected. While waiting I heard a
faint bob-white back along the road, and started back in a hurry.
After looking and listening for a mile or so along the road I saw
and shot a Callipepla squa?nata. Thinking I might have mis¬
taken the cu-efi of this species for the other call, I gave up fur¬
ther search and went to where Mr. Pringle and his assistant were
collecting plants. We soon drove on, but before we had gone a
quarter of a mile a Partridge ran behind a bush, and I knew that
a bird new to me was before me. As I jumped out of the wagon
it ran on to the next bush. I flushed it from behind the cover but
missed the bird as it flew away. I marked it down among some
bunches of sacaton grass, but failed to find it again. It was a
much darker bird than I had expected to see, its head being very

>88S.j

Stephens on Birds of Arizona and Sonora.

227

dark, and it appeared almost brick red below as it flew away.
I had been led to suppose that the unknown Partridge said to occur
in this region was Ortyx graysoni , and from its description I ex¬
pected to see a bird much the color of O. virginiana ; but this bird
was evidently something else. In the afternoon I heard another
bob-white , and guided by the notes, I found the bird, perched on
a branch of a small mesquit tree. Creeping up behind a small
bush I succeeded in getting within twenty yards of it, but even
this short range was too far for my little gun and No. 10 shot.
I had a good view of this bird, and I certainly believe this one
was O. graysoni . It had none of the reddish tint of the lower
parts of the other bird, and had a plain whitish stripe on the side
of the head. The notes, plainly heard, were two, bob-white ;
the bob was as loud as the white , but this last note lacked the
ring of the last note of O. virginiana. I believe this to be the
only O. graysoni I have ever seen, if it really was graysoni.

In the afternoon we watered the horses at the stage station,
kept by a Mexican. The water had been hauled from a spring
live miles away, and they charged us twenty-five cents per horse.
Camped for the night in the best grass we saw on the route. The
large spiders known in Arizona as tarantulas were abundant
here, and my companiorrs were not pleased with the prospect of
such bed-fellows. I had camped out too long in the deserts to
care for them.

I was awakened at daybreak bv the call of bob-white , and
was not long in turning out. How I wished for my 12-bore, for I
knew that I had very little chance with my little gun and No. 10 shot
in this open prairie. There appeared to be several of the birds scat¬
tered singly in various directions, but after two or three calls they
became silent, perhaps because of the lateness of the season. When
I heard a call I would go in the direction of the sound and wait
to hear it again, generally without success. After a little another
would strike up in another direction, and I spent the morning
wandering about, but saw only one bird, which I missed. As it
flew toward the rising sun it appeared bright red beneath. The
notes that I heard with distinctness were different from those I
heard the preceding afternoon. They were three instead of two,
like ah-bob-white , similar to those of O. virginiana, but the ah
louder in proportion, the emphasis increasing to the white , which
had some ring.

228

Stephens on Birds of Arizona and Sonora.

[July

This camp was near the divide between the Gila and Altar
Rivers, and the country became more broken, barren mesas al¬
ternating with brushy arroyas. Grass became very scarce from
this on. In the forenoon we passed the Mexican custom-house
of Sasabe, where we obtained written permission to travel in
Sonora one month. A few miles below Sasabe I saw a pair of
Ortyx, the male with a dark head and reddish beneath, the fe¬
male ( ?) dull broyvn, and I thought its head was subcrested.
They were not very wild, and I wounded the male, but it got
into a thick bush and could not be found. It probably crept into
some squirrel hole, of which there were several under the bush.
Shot a Pyrrhuloxia sinuata , and saw others. Also saw several
Lophortyx gambeli and got a chick but a few days old. On the
morning of the nth, I got three Callipepla squamata. This is
about their southwestern limit. A little further on I saw an Ortyx
cross the road, and made out to kill it. This proved to be a male,
the type of Mr. Wm. Brewster’s Colinus ridgxvayi.* It had a
dark head and reddish breast and abdomen, and was the same
bird that I had seen further back.

As our night camp was made in very good collecting ground
we laid over all day on the 12th. There are several volcanic hills
near, and plenty of small trees and cactuses. I obtained seven
Peuccca carpalis , including adults and young. Saw Polioptila
phunbca , Amphispiza bilineata , Centurus uropygictlis , Co¬
lap tcs chrysoides , and many other birds.

On the 13th we drove down a narrow valley all day. It was
moderately well timbered, and the cactuses, Cerens schotti and
C. thurberi , began to appear. At our night camp Progne su¬
b/s was abundant and noisy. Saw PJiainopepla nitens during
the day.

On the 14th I took a nest and set of eggs of Pipilo fiiscjts
mesoleucus , killing the parent ; also a Harporhynchus curvirostris
palmer /, having a very large bill. Passed through Altar, a town
of some 1200 or 1500 inhabitants, on the Altar River, here a
small stream one can nearly jump across. It was the first stream
we had seen since leaving Tucson. Here we took the river road
to Caborca, some thirty miles distant, passing Pedroquito mid¬
way. Near Pedroquito I shot a Scardafella inca , and saw others.
This Dove seems to prefer the small cultivated enclosures around

See Auk, 1 1, p. 199.

i8SS.]

Stephens o?i Birds of Arizona and Sonora.

229

the houses, and lives more on the ground than Chamccpelia pas¬
serine/, which 'is more abundant in the same region, but is com¬
monest in brush. S. htca has a coarse note. I saw a little group
on the ground, the males strutting around the females, carrying
their tails nearly vertical, and cooing. As most of these Doves
were near houses I refrained from shooting, for the people would
have been alarmed by Americans firing so near them.

At a quartz mill near Caborca we found four Americans, and
were glad to meet men we could converse with, our Spanish be¬
ing too limited for satisfactory communication with the natives.
They were even better pleased to see a party from the United
States. This is a very fine collecting locality. At daybreak on
the morning of the r6th, I heard the cu-cu-cu-cu of Glaucidium
phalce?ioides , and shot it in a Thurber’s cactus. There were
enormous numbers of Doves in the timber. Their cooing was so
loud and continuous that one could scarcely distinguish any other
bird-note. Mclopelia leucoptera was the principal noise-
maker. As the sun gained height the noise diminished. We
felt the heat here more than further inland, although the ther¬
mometer averaged some 150 lower than at Tucson; yet the least
exertion made us drip with perspiration. There did not seem to
be a breath of air. The last water of the Altar is used up here
in irrigating, and we had to depend on the wells again, and they
proved very few. About the Poso Moroneno ( poso is well) the
new giant cactus, Cereus pringlei, is abundant. This species is a
giant, averaging as tall as C. giganteus , say 30 feet for moderately
tall ones ; branches more numerous and both branches and trunk
more massive. Among the thousands of these cactuses I saw
were scarcely any Woodpecker holes; probably insect life is too
scarce, for the Woodpeckers were seldom seen. Birds of all
kinds were very rare. At the San Felix mine I shot an Auri-
parus Jiaviceps and two Campylorhynchus brumieicapillus.

After leaving the San Felix mine we saw no human being until
our return to the Poso Moroneno. We filled our water barrels
here as a precaution, and had reason to congratulate ourselves on
having done so, as we found the water at the Gringo Well so foul
that neither man nor horse would drink it. On the low sandy
plain, ten to twenty miles back from the Gulf, I saw thirteen
Harporhynchus lecontei and secured three. Another wounded
one escaped me by crawling into a labyrinth of squirrel holes.

230

Stephens on Birds of Arizona and Sonora.

[J»iy

Their call-notes (no 'song heard) were similar to those of H. le-
contei heard elsewhere, bnt an undefinable difference in their
actions caused me to think they might be different, which feeling
was increased by their darker colors. They were in the moult,
some having nearly full fall plumage, which contrasts very strongly
with the much lighter, faded summer dress. Others, better com¬
petent than I to give an opinion, think them not distinct from H.
lecontei.

About noon on the 20th we reached Port Lobos, the proposed
terminus of the Tucson and Port Lobos Railroad. It is a town,
strictly, in name only, as there is not a habitation nor inhabitant.
The last wagon track made on the road from the mine to the Gulf
was made by Mr. Pringle’s wagon in his former journey. For¬
tunately we found the water in the old well fit for use, but grass
for the horses was absolutely wanting, and we were therefore
forced to turn back the next morning. I spent most of the after¬
noon along the beach. At high tide the surf washes the base of
the high cliffs of cemented gravel. Some four or five miles to
the northwest was a low rocky point (Point Lobos). By the aid
of a field glass I could see many sea birds there, apparently sev¬
eral species of Gulls and Cormorants. Quite a number of Gulls
were flying about, but few came near and 1 did not attempt to
shoot any. A decaying Tern washed ashore, of which I wrote
down a brief description on the spot, tallies pretty well with
Sterna a?iccstheta. Saw several Ospreys and a large Hawk, but
the latter was too far away to identify. Two Sparrows shot at
the foot of the cliffs Mr. Wm. Brewster identifies as Passercuhis
rostratus.* I also took a 9 juv. Calypte costce , probably migra¬
ting. Saw several large long-necked seals. Large turtles were
abundant outside the surf, and several turtle shells lay along high-
water mark. I should think fish were abundant. The surf was
small and frequent. The tides apparently rise and fall nearly fifteen
feet. In the distance we could see the higher parts of Isla Angel
de la Garda, and further to the right was a faint blue line of
mountain peaks on the peninsula of Lower California.

What a grand field, although a very difficult one, this Gulf and
its shores present for scientific exploration ! It was with regret
at our inability to stay longer that we turned back in the morning.
Two or three miles back from the beach I saw a small covey of

*See Mr. Brewster’s paper in ‘The Auk’ for April, 1885, pp. 196-200.

i88s-] Henshaw on the Gulls of the California n Coast. 2^1

Lophortyx gambeli. The next day I took another Harporhyn-
chus lecontei and saw three more. Rain fell steadily nearly all
day, and as that made us independent of wells we struck across
country to the Poso Moroneno. Traveling was very bad, and we
even mired twice, and were delayed by swollen streams where
were dry "washes’ as we came down. The scarcity of provisions
was becoming a serious matter with us, as we had not counted on
delays by excess of water, but we finally reached Caborca, dinner¬
less. While camped over night twenty miles below Caborca,
waiting for the water to subside enough to allow our crossing, I
heard at twilight what I supposed was a Micrathene whitneyi ,
but failed to get it. The next morning I heard it again and saw
two small Owls in a bush before it was light enough to tell posi¬
tively what species they were, but the one I shot was Glaucidium
phalcettoides ; the other disappeared, so it is possible that the two
species may have similar notes, as from their actions I think these
two Owls were of the same species.

Nothing further worth noting was seen until we passed Sasabe.
On reaching the good grass we gave the horses a day’s rest, and I
searched for "Bob-whites,’ but failed to find any, but shot a Cen-
tronyx bairdi and the next day a second. Each was alone, not
wild ; no note was heard, and its flight was zigzag.

Reached Tucson September i, having traveled nearly five hun¬
dred miles on the round trip. While my lot of skins was small,
only about fifty, Mr. Pringle brought in a large quantity of plants,
very many of which proved to be new, and we voted the journey
a success.

A few days later Mr. Herbert Brown showed me two male
Colinus ridgiva yi, sent him a short time before from the neigh¬
borhood of the Baboquivori Mountains, within Arizona ; so this
species has positively been taken within the United States.

THE GULLS OF THE CALIFORNIAN COAST.

BY H. W. HENSHAW.

In fall and winter the coast of California, and, indeed, the
whole Pacific coast from Puget Sound to Cape St. Lucas, is fairly

232

Henshaw on the Gulls oj the Californian Coast.

[July

swarming with Gulls, and it is surprising that so little has been
made known respecting the species represented and their relative
numbers.

A limited opportunity for collecting and making observations on
the coast from Santa Barbara to San Diego during the months of
November and December of 1SS4, yielded some notes which seem
worthy of record.

Larus argentatus smithsonianus. — This Gull has hitherto been reported
from the Pacific coast only from Alaska. It is an exceedingly abundant
species from Santa Barbara to San Diego, frequenting the shore and bays
in numbers second only to the Larus occidentalis. Indeed in some local¬
ities it doubtless outnumbers the latter species as a winter resident.

Larus occidentalis. — Very numerous. This is far excellence the Gull
of the Californian coast, being abundant at all seasons.

Larus delawarensis and

Larus californicus. — Both species are fairly numerous.

Larus philadelphiae. — This species is not uncommon in San Diego Bay
in December, and I saw it on the coast farther north in November. The
bulk of the species, however, probably winters to the southward.

Larus canus and

Larus brachyrhynchus. — Under these two names I mention provisionally
two species of small Gulls which appear to be quite identical with two
species inhabiting Alaska in summer, farther south than which they have
not been known hitherto to occur. Both appear to be not uncommon
along the southern coast of California, though they are, perhaps, the least
common of the several species mentioned.

Whether the L. canus (so-called) of Alaska is identical with the European
species, or whether it is a distinct form (species or variety), is at present
in doubt, and much more material is necessary to settle the question than
is at present contained in the National Museum collection.

The exact status of the Alaskan L. brachyrhynchus , its relationship to the
European species and to L. canus , is also doubtful, from a similar lack of
specimens. Mr. Walter Bryant has kindly sent me for examination a
specimen of brachyrhynchus in immature plumage, taken in San Francisco
Bay in the late fall, where he reports it as being uncommon. It is notice¬
able that nearly all the specimens observed by myself, together with the
few taken (with one exception), were young birds, the implication being
that the adults for the most part winter further north, probably from San
Francisco northward, and perhaps in Puget Sound.

Stercorarius parasiticus. — This species is common in Alaska, but the
bird has not been known thus far from further south than British Colum¬
bia. It appears to be common in December from Santa Barbara north.

>SS5.]

Batchelder, Whiter Notes from New Mexico.

233

WINTER NOTES FROM NEW MEXICO.

BY CHARLES F. BATCHELDER.

( Concluded from p. 128.)

Scattered along the river for a mile or so below the hotels
are a number of small cliffs or precipitous outcrops of sandstone
thirty or forty feet high. Their faces, which come down close
to the water, are broken by many clefts and narrow gullies, and
large blocks split off from their sides lie here and there piled
one upon another. These were a favorite resort of the Canon
Wren ( Catherpes mexicanus). They were not a very abun¬
dant bird, but single birds were apt to be met with in such places
as these, which seemed to suit their tastes so well. What they
want is rocks piled in confusion, the more abruptly perpen¬
dicular the better, among whose clefts and interstices they can
skip and dodge about to their heart’s content. They evidently
prefer a place that is close to a stream, but in one or two in¬
stances I met with one in some dry little ravine back among the
hills where he seemed contented among some loose rocks or
even about fallen trees and up-turned stumps. They are quick
in their motions, restless and shy. Their flight, for they occa¬
sionally fly considerable distances, is swift and low. At this
season of the year I had not the pleasure of hearing their beau¬
tiful song, so enthusiastically described by more fortunate
observers. However, though the breeding song was not to be
heard, they were far from silent. The commonest note is a
peculiar, loud, harsh, penetrating cry, not unlike the ordinary
cry of the Nighthawk, and can be heard at a long distance. Be¬
sides this note I one day heard one repeatedly utter a sharp ped-
body , the first syllable being rather prolonged and having the
principal accent. The quality of the notes was about the same
as that of the ordinary call-note. In illustration of one peculiar
habit I quote the following from my notebook under date of
December 23 : “This forenoon I heard a Canon Wren under my
window, and looking out I saw him hopping about on the
gravel. He presently flew to the hotel’s extensive wood-pile
and moved about on it for some time, uttering his loud harsh
cry almost incessantly. I watched him sitting on the edge of

23 4

Batchelder, Winter Notes from New Mexico.

[July

a pile of corded firewood, and almost every time he uttered his
note he would at the same instant jerk his body, not to mention
his conspicuous tail, around to one side or the other, alternately
to the left and right, revolving about a quarter of a circle each
time. Finally he flew to a little bridge over a gully back of
the house.”

The only other Wren that occurred was the Rock Wren
( Salpinctes obsolettis) , of which I obtained two one cold
morning (December 22) when the ground was covered with a
light snow that had fallen the day before. They were at points
some distance apart, each on the side of a steep, rocky hill, thus
bearing out their name much better than they do in some parts
of their habitat. To trespass somewhat beyond my bounds, at
Riverside, California, where I found them abundant in January
and February, 18S3, they frequented open plains and bam hill¬
sides destitute of rocks, and nearly so of vegetation. Their
favorite resorts there were places where the clayey soil, baked
hard by the sun, had been cut out by the occasional heavy
rainfalls into little gullies, perhaps ten feet deep and often less
than that in width, whose perpendicular sides reproduced in
miniature the form of the great canons of some of our western
rivers. In the sides of these gnllies there were a great many
holes, some made by the water, others by the ground squirrels
or other rodents, and about these holes and around the pro¬
jecting corners of the crooked, narrow gullies the birds were
continually dodging back and forth, giving you a glimpse of
them here, and then disappearing and turning up unexpectedly
some distance oft'.

The same morning that I met with the Rock Wrens I shot
the only Arctic Bluebird ( Si alia arctica) that I saw during
my stay. It was perched on the edge of a rudely made brush
dam that held back the waters of the stream, forming a pond
from which started one of the irrigating ditches, its exquisite
coloring contrasting brilliantly with the new-fallen snow that
covered the ground. Very likely the bird had been driven down
from the mountains by the snowstorm.

There are several spots along the river that will remain fixed
in my memory not merely on account of their natural beauty,
but because they formed the background to scenes in which that
most interesting bird, the Water Ouzel ( Cinclus tnexicanus )

1SS5.]

Batchelder, Winter Notes from New Mexico.

235

played the prominent part. The Ouzels seem to show excellent
taste in the choice of their surroundings. In following up the
stream if you come to a place where it splashes down over the
rocks in a low fall into a clear, broad pool from whose depths
a few rocks here and there barely lift their heads above the sur¬
face, keep your eyes open, you may chance to see a Dipper ; it
is such a spot as this they fancy, and about the foot of the fall
or on one of the wet rocks that rise out of the pool is where to
look for him. The charm of the bird is doubtless heightened by
its frequenting such picturesque places, but I fear that it is
attracted to them chiefly by the abundant food that can be
gleaned about the rocks at the foot of the falls, luckless insects
carried down by the force of the current, or any other tidbits
the stream may furnish. They are very tame, unsuspicious
birds, and hardly seem to be aware when one is watching them.
One morning following down the stream past a point where it
is bordered by some low sandstone cliffs, I heard a loud note
somewhat like the cry of a Kingfisher. Looking around I saw
an Ouzel, and restraining my first impulse to shoot it, I seated
myself on a rock some twenty yards away and watched its
actions. There was a slight fall in the stream and below it a
deep pool, across which a small log had lodged. On this log
sat the Dipper. On each side the rapids above the pool were
covered by several inches of loose spongy ice that had formed
during the night and had not yet yielded to the sun’s rays, and
only the middle of the stream was free from it. On the pool
there was some floating ice, the remains of a skim formed in the
night, and even the log the bird was on was partly coated with
it. The Ouzel stood with its legs a little bent, its body being
nearly horizontal, facing across the log, and apparently watch¬
ing the water for anything eatable that might come within reach.
Meanwhile it repeatedly lowered and raised its body, apparently
merely by bending its legs, keeping the position of the body the
same all the time, i. e., not tipping it forward or back. The
dipping was done rapidly with an interval between each dip.
I timed it by my watch, and found the motion was repeated
about forty times a minute. Presently it turned around, jumped
into the water, and swam quickly to the foot of the rapids, sit¬
ting on the water much like a Grebe. It poked about the
rapids, walking on the stones, and when necessary swimming

236 Batchelder, Winter Notes from New Mexico.

[April

from one to another, stopping now and then to cluck its head in
for some bit of food, and occasionally standing still on a stone.
Once, at least, it stood for a few moments on' a stone, the top of
which was covered by the water. Whenever it stood still it
kept up the dipping, but I did not detect the motion except
when the bird was stationary. After poking about the rapids
for a while it came out on the snowy ice and walked about on
it. Then coming to the edge of the ice it dropped oft' into the
water, and presently reappeared having swum down stream
under the ice. Apparently there was room for it to do so with¬
out diving. All the while it paid not the slightest attention to
me. Perhaps it was as well that it never knew the fate that was
in store for it: it now occupies a place in my collection.

They were as a rule quite silent birds. Besides the Kingfisher¬
like cry the only note I heard from them was one day when
passing the same spot, I heard a cry that sounded like a magni¬
fied song of a grasshopper or katydid. Turning, I found it
came from one of two Ouzels that were chasing each other,
flying swiftly along the stream at about a foot from the surface.
Their flight reminds me of that of the Black Guillemot.

The Ouzels were much more numerous than writers on the
subject had led me to expect. Along some ten miles of the
Gallinas River there must have been as many as twenty individ¬
uals during my stay. Very likely there were more of them than
in summer, for though they are not a strictly migratory species,
many of the mountain streams where they make their homes
must freeze in winter, and so compel them to seek a temporary
habitation among the streams in the foot-hills, that are either too
large or too far south to freeze up entirely.

Down the river below the mouth of the canon, where the grav¬
elly banks of the stream are thickly covered with a growth of low
willows and other bushes, Song Sparrows ( Melospiza. fascia ta
montana ) were to be found. With the exception of two or three
on the stretches of level ground bordering the river above the
springs, I found none elsewhere. As compared with the East¬
ern Song Sparrow I noticed no difference in habits. Their chirp,
the only note I heard them utter, was indistinguishable from that
of M. fas data.

Here, too, I occasionally came across a little flock of Tree Spar¬
rows (Sp izclla monticola ochracea) , though they did not con-

.SSS-J

Batchelder, Winter Notes from New Mexico.

237

fine themselves to such places. One day I found one fraternizing
with a flock of Juncos in a bare weedy field, and another was
found in a clump of scrub oaks high up on the hills. In their
habits they seemed to differ in no way from their Eastern
relatives.

In the willows along the river bank the Canon Towhees
(Pipilo fuscus mesoleucus) were sometimes to be seen, though
they frequented other places as well. Among their resorts were
the small cliffs scattered along the river, where they poked about
among tbe masses of fallen rocks at their bases, and in the clefts
and gullies by which they were intersected. They were apt to
be found, too, about the Mexican villages, where they might be
seen perched on the high adobe wall surrounding a courtyard,
or exploring the ruins of some deserted house that offered a safe
retreat in case of alarm. Perhaps, however, the places where
they were most numerous were some small irrigated fields on the
outskirts of one of these little villages. Where these fields bordered
the river or an irrigating ditch, they were fringed with bushes,
chiefly willows, that were a favorite haunt of the Towhees.
Here one would sometimes be seen running along and then stop¬
ping, somewhat like a Robin on an earthworm hunt. Their run
really consists, however, of a series of rapid hops. There is much
that is Thrush-like about their air and motions, and if seen from
behind one might almost be mistaken for a Robin, its form and atti¬
tudes are so similar, though it does not stand as upright as a Robin
very often does. As a rule they kept on the ground, but now and
then they would get up in a bush or even in a low tree, but as
soon as a Towhee saw he was attracting attention he immediately
shifted his position or retired silently with a swift low flight to
some safer place.

Though they commonly go in small flocks I am inclined to
think that some at least remain paired throughout the year. They
are not infrequently found in couples ; in one such case dissection
proved them to be male and female ; in another when I had shot
one bird the survivor showed evident signs of distress.

Their ordinary note is a chuck a good deal like a magnified copy
of the Song Sparrow’s chuck.

Among these bushes along the river were flocks of Juncos, too,
though, indeed, it would be hard to say where they were not.
Here in the bushes, in the bare weedy fields, among the pines on

238

Batchelder, Winter Notes from Neiv Mexico.

[J^y

the hills, as well as among their favorite clumps of scrub oak in
the level openings in the canon, they were sure to be found,
wherever a plentiful supply of seeds could be picked up, for they
were very industrious in appeasing appetites that seemed never
quite satisfied.

On the edge of an irrigating ditch one day (December iS) I came
upon a Ruby-crowned Kinglet, the only one I met with. It was
feeding near the ground, among the willow bushes that bordered
the ditch.

Another straggler, shot down the river, was brought to me
December 23. It was the Great Northern Shrike. With the ex¬
ception of a specimen obtained by Dr. Cones at Fort Whipple,
Arizona, in February, 1S65, this is, I believe, the most southern
instance of its occurrence in the West that has been yet recorded.

My friends who shot this Shrike brought me at the same time
some Red-winged Blackbirds ( Agclccus phceniceus') that they
had shot from a flock down the river. Eight days before several
others were brought to me, shot from a large flock near the same
place. Ten birds out of eleven shot on these two occasions were
apparently females, which suggests the probability that the flocks
wintering in this neighborhood are made up chiefly of that sex.

A bird that I saw but once (December 20), was the Kingfisher
( Ceryle alcyon). His habits were perhaps somewhat modified
by the extreme dryness of the country, for though he was not far
off from the river, yet while I saw him he stayed high up on a
steep hillside where he generally chose a pine fora perch, though
once or twice he alighted on a dead tree.

The only water bird that occurred was the Green-winged Teal
(. ffiierqucdula carolinensis) . They were quite plenty, and
adapted themselves easily to circumstances in this scantily-watered
country. Their favorite resort was an irrigating ditch that fol¬
lowed the course of the river some distance below where it
emerges from the canon. This ditch was not more than six feet
wide, but the water was clear, and it had a swift current. The
banks were thickly lined with slender low willows, that overhung
the water, offering an excellent shelter that the Teal seemed to
highly appreciate. They were also sometimes to be found along
the river, on some of its stiller stretches that were thickly fringed
with bushes. Here they led a life of comparative safety, for any
one approaching through the dense growth of willows could
usually be heard before he caught a glimpse of them, and rising at

>8SS.]

Nelson, Counter-Notes on Alaskan Birds.

239

the first suspicious sound, a low flight kept them screened by the
friendly bushes until well out of gunshot. On the ditch they
were usually scattered along singly or in twos, but on the river
half a dozen or more might sometimes be found together. I
probably saw not more than ten or a dozen different individuals
on any one occasion along the mile or two of the river where I
observed them.

Among the more open spots along this part of the river, small
flocks of Pine Finches sometimes paused in their wandering,
though they spent most of their time, when not moving about,
in places where large stretches of tall dead weeds furnished abun¬
dance of seeds wherewith to stuff' themselves. One day, leaving
the river and walking out on the bare desolate plains, apparently
so devoid of life, I came upon a flock that must have numbered two
hundred, so busily feeding among some weeds that they did not
stir until I was close to them. Then they rose and flew back and
forth, circling around several times before they flew away. As
the flock turned in the air the whir of their many wings was
plainly audible.

The plains, though they seem so deserted, are not without life.
They have one characteristic inhabitant, the Horned Lark
( Eremophila alpestris chrysolcemd) , that may be met with
scattered here and there in small numbers in whatever direction
you go. Their colors harmonize well with the dull tints of the
surrounding ground, and as one crouches low at your approach
you are very likely to overlook him. They remind one of the
fact that nature, the great economist, allows no available space to
be wasted and adapts all to their surroundings. The Larks cer¬
tainly seem well contented with their home, bleak and barren
though it may be, and are, perhaps, especially fortunate in occu¬
pying a place their title to which no other bird is inclined to
dispute.

COUNTER-4 NOTES ON SOME SPECIES OF BIRDS
ATTRIBUTED TO POINT BARROW, ALASKA.’

BY E. W. NELSON.

In ‘The Auk’ for April, 1885 (p. 200-201), Mr. John Murdoch
makes some rather hasty criticisms upon certain statements made

240

Nelson, Counter-Notes on Alaskan Birds.

[July

by me in my notes upon the ‘Birds of Bering Sea and the Arctic
Ocean.’* Mr. Murdoch’s strictures apply wholly to certain species
which I claimed to occur at, or in the vicinity of, Point Barrow,
and his tone would seem to imply that his residence for two years
a few miles south of the Point proper has given him a complete
knowledge of the birds of that vicinity, so that former or later
observers must revise their lists to conform with his or else risk
having their statements summarily discredited. I think any
experienced field ornithologist will admit that Mr. Murdoch’s
implied claim of having exhausted the possible avi-fauna of a
locality in two years’ residence is the best work on record. I
supposed myself to be a tolerably thorough worker in the field,
but I yield the palm here. During over four years’ residence on
the Alaskan Coast south of Mr. Murdoch’s location, I found that
each succeeding season brought me a number of additions to mv
list of species observed and taken, and four years’ longer residence,
would no doubt have continued to add to my list. Should I
adopt Mr. Murdoch’s plan of discrediting everything not taken
by myself with twice two years’ residence at a locality, I should
reject Cyanecn/a suecica from the birds of St. Michaels, and
although two specimens of y^gialltes mongolicus were taken on
Choris Peninsula by the English ship ‘Plover,’ yet, as on my visit
of several days to that locality I found none, I should reject it.
Such a method, however, is scarcely a scientific one, and the fol¬
lowing notes in reply to Mr. Murdoch’s criticism will show, I
believe, that in every instance the notes upon the species as printed
in my works under consideration should stand as they are pub¬
lished.

/Egiothus linaria. — On August 17, 1881, we landed from the ‘Corwin’
at the extreme end of Point Barrow, and during our visit saw flying about
among the native huts, or perching on the numerous wooden frameworks
scattered about, quite a number of Redpolls, and among the adidts
were seen both the light and dark-colored forms with which I had become
so familiar on the coast further south. The birds were very tame, and at
the time I was perfectly satisfied of the identity of the two forms, and see
no cause for altering my opinion because Mr. Murdoch did not take them
afterwards.

Passerculus sandwichensis alaudinus. — Stated by me to occur “all along
the coast of Bering Sea and at least to Point Hope and probably to Point
Barrow.” This bird certainly occurs at Point Hope where it was seen by

* Cruise of the Revenue Steamer 'Corwin' in Alaska and the N. W. Arctic Ocean in
1881. Washington, 1883.

iSSs-J

Nelson, Counter-Notes on Alaskan Birds.

24I

me on several occasions, and as Point Barrow is a little further north on the
same coast with a suitable country intervening, my statement that this
bird ‘probably’ occurs north to Point Barrow is not an unreasonable one,
when we consider the wandering disposition of the present form. But
since Mr. Murdoch’s positive statement that the bird “does not occur
there,” Passerculus may think better of it and hereafter avoid the tabooed
ground.

Asio accipitrinus. — Some fragments of a skin of this bird were seen by
me among the natives less than one hundred miles south of Point Barrow
on the coast, and the wandering habits of the species, and its abundance
on all the open coast country to the southward of the point where the
fragments mentioned above were seen, gives sufficient support to my
statement that the species occurs “nearly if not quite to Point Barrow.”

./Egialites semipalmatus. — When we first landed at Point Barrow a pair
of these birds were found feeding in a sandy pool a few steps from where
our boat was beached.

Ereunetes pusillus. — From the fact that I found this bird nesting where-
ever I made observations in Northern Alaska during the breeding season,
and as I found it numerous at Point Barrow on our visit there, I naturally
took for granted that it bred upon the adjacent suitable ground a short
distance back from the shore. Mr. Murdoch’s observations appear to show
that it did not breed close to the Point the two seasons he remained
there.

Numenius hudsonicus.— Skins of this bird were brought to me by natives
from the headwaters of a river rising perhaps one hundred miles inland
from Point Barrow, and the fact that these birds pass Kotzebue Sound
in spring bound north, were the grounds upon which I based my state¬
ment that it occurs north to the “vicinity of Point Barrow.”

Dafila acuta. — Among a lot of Ducks brought on board the ‘Corwin’ by
the natives during our stay at Point Barrow, were several adults of this
species with their primaries all moulted. These came from fresh water
lagoons just back from the shore. As these birds, like most others of
their kind, pass their summer moult upon their breeding ground directly
after the breeding season, the capture of these specimens in the midst of the
moult is pretty conclusive proof that these birds do breed in the near vicinity
of Point Barrow, although Mr. Murdoch may not have found them during
his two seasons there.

Nettion carolinensis. — My statement that this species occurs “nearly if
not quite to Point Barrow” holds true, as a small flock of them were seen
by me about one hundred miles south of the Point in a lagoon bordering
the shore, and a little further south they were found quite numerous in the
summer of 1S81.

Mergus serrator. — During a dense fog that caused us to anchor a few
miles off Point Barrow on the day of our arrival at that point, a flock of
some half dozen individuals of this species flew close by the stern of the
ship, heading for the shore, and others were seen at various not remote
points along the coast.

2\2

Scott on the Breeding Habits of Arizona Birds.

[July

ON THE BREEDING HABITS OF SOME ARIZONA

BIRDS.

BY W. E. D. SCOTT.

Third Paper. Phainopepla nitens.

A few words as to the distribution of the species ( Phainopepla
nitens) under consideration, as I have found it occurring in Pinal
and Pima Counties, Arizona, and something regarding its move¬
ments in a migratory sense, will occupy part of the present paper,
which should, perhaps, more properly have to do only with data
regarding the breeding season.

At Riverside, in Pinal County, during the spring of 1SS2, I
found this species to be rather uncommon, and doubtless it will
be found breeding at that point, though I failed to detect it ; and
during my stay of two months at Riverside I saw only three or
four of the birds.

Later in May I had occasion to go into the mountains to the
north of Riverside, at a considerably higher altitude than that
place, and here, in what is known as the Mineral Creek District,
in the Pinal Mountains, I found the species an abundant one. My
stay was so short and my time was so fully occupied with other
matters, that I had no leisure to do more than make the above
observation.

Coming back to this same region, Mineral Creek, in late July,
and remaining for about five weeks, I found that the young birds
were full grown, and that the great numbers of birds I had seen
in May were now only represented by a very few moulting birds,
mainly young ones. Again, leaving Mineral Creek about the last
of August, I returned to that point about the 10th of October and
remained until December 15. Soon I found that in certain local¬
ities, — sheltered flats in broad canons, where there is a heavy
growth of a kind of juniper, then laden with fruit, — the birds
were very abundant, often gathering in flocks of fifty or more,
and reminding one of the common Cedar Bird (Ampelis cedro-
rum). The individuals making up these parties were mainly
young birds of the year, all having fully co?npleted the moult ,
the young males being in a curious parti-colored plumage,

ISS5.]

Scott on the. Breeding Habits of Arizona Birds.

2 43

sometimes almost black mixed with only a few gray feathers, and
presenting every phase between this dress and an almost gray or
leaden colored one, with only a few black feathers intermixed.
The iris in most of these young birds was dark brown.

They feed mainly on the berries of the juniper, but often one or
more might be seen passing with peculiar flight through the air,
turning on its own track, descending abruptly, as abruptly rising,
and all the time with very measured wing-beats, evidently in pur¬
suit of small insects.

All the time they, both adults and young birds, male and fe¬
male, were calling to each other in a peculiar, bell-like, whis¬
tling note that was very musical. This I have since found is
at all times the principal song.

I observed these birds at this point well into December, and
think it probable they remained as long as the food supply was
abundant.

During the season of 1883 I had little or no leisure to look
after birds, and so I was unable to renew my acquaintance with
this species until the last part of May, 1884. I was then living at
the point treated of in the former two articles of this series, a
canon* in Las Sierras de Santa Catalina, on the northern side of
the mountains, and running northward and a little easterly to the
valley of the Rio San Pedro.

Here in May the birds were abundant, and wherever the mes-
quite extended into and mixed with the live-oak belt, they followed
the first mentioned kind of wood, and later in the season I fre¬
quently met single ones well away from the mesquite in the oak
region. Even at this time of year (May) they show a strong
preference for all kinds of small fruits, especially wild mulberries,
though insects enter as no small item into their diet.

My observations of the present year lead me to believe that the
birds begin to breed early in, that is by the 5th, of May, at this
point, which is about a mile down the canon from my house, and
at an altitude of about 3500 feet ; though the first nest I found
last year (1884), and which contained perfectly fresh eggs, was on
the 17th of June.

* This canon rises high in the mountains, as before described, and runs for twelve
miles to the valley above mentioned. In the first article of this series ( vide 'Auk’ for
January, 1885, p. 2, line 11), an error in printing speaks of the canon as two miles in
length.

244

Scott on the Breeding Habits of Arizona Birds.

[July

That there is a wide difference in the time of the breeding of
different pairs in the same locality cannot be doubted, but my ex¬
perience leads me to believe that here, at least, only one brood is
raised during the season.

All through July and August, and for the greater part of Sep¬
tember, the birds remained abundant, feeding on the various
berries and small fruits which became ripe as the season pro¬
gressed, and wherever such fruit as they liked was at all abundant
they paid little attention to any other kind of food, though insect
life fairly teemed in and about the berries that attracted the birds.
They showed a particular fondness for a kind of wild grape, and
hunted the country through for such fruit, in parties of from ten
to forty. In August and early September the young and old birds
were moulting, and by the end of the latter month they began to
disappear from the higher altitudes, retiring gradually as the
weather became cooler.

At any time during the past winter, that of 1SS4-S5, until about
the middle of March, by going down the canon to the vicinity of
the river I could find a few individuals. But after the last of
October I did not find them in flocks, but generally singly, or
at most two or three in the same locality ; and their food after the
middle of November seems to be, in this region, almost entirely
insects, which is contrary to the above recorded observations
at Mineral Creek.

After the middle of March of the present year, though I was
constantly collecting near the river in this and adjacent canons,
and on the mesas and hills at the lower altitudes, I lost sight of
the species entirely. And on my frequent journeys to Tucson,
about thirty-five or forty miles south, I rarely noticed the birds
until well to the south of the mountains, and then only sparingly.
My first notice of their return to the point near my house is April
20 of the present year, when they immediately became common,
and were in some cases, at least, mated.

A female taken April 28, 1885, had an egg-yolk fully developed,
and two others almost ready to enter the oviduct, and though I
had not as yet noticed the birds building, this one must have begun
to build, or possibly had already finished a nest.

The following data regarding nests and eggs collected during
the breeding season of 1884, are from six nests before me and
from notes made during that period.

■SS5.]

Scott on the Breeditig Habits of Arizona Birds.

245

Nest No. i. June 17, 18S4. Built in an oak, twenty-five feet
from the ground. Contained three fresh eggs. It was saddled
on a thick limb near where it forked, and about ten feet from the
main stem of the tree. It is composed mainly of the stems of a
soft flowering weed abundant hereabout, and the flowers, which
are worked into and form a part of the structure. Also some
strips of fine bark, and various dried grasses, small twigs, and
much plant down, help to make up the walls and bottom. These
are thick and very soft, and the materials composing them are not
woven at all, but simply laid together with some little attempt at
fastening them with thread-like grasses. Externally the nest is
two inches deep, and the external diameter is a little less than
four inches. The greatest depth inside is one inch, and the di¬
ameter of the interior at the rim of the nest is two and three-
fourths inches. It is not at all an elegant structure, though
peculiar, and is very fragile, being quite as delicate and soft as
that of Trochilus alexandri.

The eggs, three in number, are greenish white in ground color,
but so completely flecked all over with faint lilac spots as to seem
at a very short distance of that general shade. Again, all over
the lilac spotting, are very strongly defined spots of deep umber
brown, almost black. These spots vary much in size, from that
of a pin-point to as large as five one-hundredths of an inch in
diameter. They are almost as various in shape as in size, and
are dotted all over the egg in a rather regular manner. No. 1
measures .90 X .63 inches; No. 2, .84 X -64 inches, and the other
is about like No. 2, but is unfortunately broken.

Nest No. 2. June 17, 1884. Mesquite, twenty feet from ground.
Contained two young just hatched and an addled egg. Is a very
similar structure in general appearance to the last, but the walls
are much more compact, and the materials composing the whole
are packed much more firmly together, being evidently secured to¬
gether and plastered with saliva, especially on the rim of the nest
and inside. The nest is saddled on a large limb, at least two
inches in diameter, and is additionally supported by a twig that is
about a third of an inch thick, and which, branching from the
limb referred to at a point near the nest, passes through the wall
on one side of the nest and is firmly built into the structure. The
external diameter of the nest is four inches, and the external depth
rather less than two inches. The internal diameter is two and

2^.6 Scott on the Breeding Habits of Arizona Birds.

[July

one-half, and depth one and one-quarter inches. The single egg
remaining is entirely similar to those described, as far as color
goes, and measures .91 X .64 inches.

Nest No. 3. June 17, 1S84. Mesquite, ten feet from ground.
Contained three young, just hatched. Saddled very securely on
a limb four inches in diameter ; it is very like Nest No. 2, only
that it is rather smaller and deeper. The materials are the same,
and the gluing with saliva is very apparent.

Nest No. 4. June 21, 1884. Oak, ten feet from ground.
Contained three eggs, partly incubated. These differ from those
already described in having the ground color greenish white, un¬
spotted for the half toward the smaller end, and in lacking almost
totally the faint lilac spotting, and further in having the dark
umber markings almost confined to a circular band passing wreath¬
like around the larger end. They measure .S8X.70, .90X.70,
and .S8 X .6S inches, respectively. The nest does not differ mate¬
rially from those already spoken of, but is placed in a fork so that
two branches support it, while it rests partially on a third limb.

Nest No. 5. June 21, 1884. Mesquite, ten feet from ground.
Contains two eggs about to hatch. Is identical in material and
position with No. 4, being placed in a fork of the limbs which
support it. The eggs are not to be distinguished from those of
nest No. 1 .

Nest No. 6. June 29, 1S84. Sycamore, forty feet from ground.
Contained two young, half-grown. Is a loosely made structure,
like No. 1, and is built on and attached to four rather small limbs
where they branch.

This is not the only nest of this species which I have observed
at a considerable height from the ground, at least three more
being noted last year, but as they are built invariably, so far as I
know, in such cases near the extremity of the branch, they are
often unattainable.

The number of eggs would seem to be quite as frequently three
as two ; and it will be noticed that considerable latitude in choice
is manifested as to the kind of tree built in, the height from the
ground, and the position and method of placing the structure on
the limb or in the forks of a branch.

-8SS.]

Henshaw on a Hybrid Quail.

247

HYBRID QUAIL [LOPHORTIX GAME ELI
x L. CA L IFOR NIC US) .

BY H. W. HENSHAW.

As instances of undoubted hybridization among birds are
comparatively rare, the following case, or rather two cases, of hy¬
bridization between the Californian Valley Quail ( Lophortyx
calif ornicus) and the Gambel’s Quail ( Lophortyx gambeli)
deserve record.

While bearing a superficial resemblance to each other, these
two Quails seem to be specifically quite distinct. The former is
pretty closely confined to the West Coast, i. e ., from the western
slope of the Sierras to the ocean. In the mountains it attains a
vertical range of 7000 or 8coo feet. The general area occupied is
well wooded and has a considerable rain-fall, though it is probable
that in the peninsula, where it appears to be abundant, it becomes
more or less of a desert bird. The Gambel’s Quail is confined to
the southern portions of the Interior Basin, where it inhabits only
comparatively low altitudes. Though perhaps hardly to be termed
a desert Quail, the area it occupies receives on the whole a much
less copious rain-fall, and is consequently much more arid than
that inhabited by its congener. As the two species occupy regions
differing considerably in physical conditions, it was with much
interest that I learned during the past season that there is a locality
in San Bernardino County, California, along the line of the
Southern Pacific Railroad, where they come together. At this
point occur hybrids.

While examining Mr. Stephens’s fine collection of Arizona birds,
he called my attention to a ‘ hybrid Quail ’ which he received
from Mr. Herron, of Colton, which he very kindly placed at my
disposal. Subsequently Mr. Herron, with equal courtesy, gave
me a second hybrid, which may have come from the same brood,
or which at any rate was shot in the same locality, viz., the vicin¬
ity of San Gorgonio Pass. The following descriptions will show
the chief characteristics of these hybrids.

No. 1 most nearly resembles the California Quail. The brown of the
head inclines to chestnut, the latter being the color of the head in gambeli.
The anterior white band on the forehead is mixed with black. The feath¬
ers on the sides and back of the neck, which in californicus have two

248

IIenshaw on a Hybrid Quail.

[July

minute roundish white spots near the end, giving a mottled appearance to
these parts, are in this specimen unmarked with white except on the sides
of the neck anteriorly, where the spots appear, though less marked than
in the corresponding part of calif ornicus; these parts, therefore, are nearly
as in gambeli. The wine-colored abdominal spot of californicus is present,
but the feathers of the abdomen, instead of being tipped with a broad band
of black, giving the scale-like appearance of californicus, are only narrowly
so margined in the lower portion ; while above, especially in the buff-
colored area (which is as deep in this specimen as in californicus'),
the black margins are reduced to an extremely narrow fringe of black.
This specimen has the sides and flanks chestnut, as in gambeli , but the
chestnut is not so deep. The edging of the tertiaries is pale, as in gambeli.

No. 2 more nearly resembles ga?nbeli. The crown patch is chestnut,
though hardly so light as in typical gambeli. The bristly feathers of the
forehead are much darker than in californicus, and nearly as in gambeli.
The feathers of the sides and back of neck show traces of white, but, as in
the other specimen, much more closely resemble gambeli. In the abdom¬
inal spot the wine color of californicus is but faintly visible, being over¬
laid, so to speak, with black, thus being nearer gambeli. The spot on
the upper portion of the abdomen is yellowish-buff, but paler even than
in gambeli, the corresponding area in which bird it resembles in size and
shape. The broad black edgings to the feathers of the abdomen and breast
of californicus are in this specimen, as in the other, mainly confined to
the lower portions, leaving the upper parts nearly immaculate. In this
specimen the chestnut on the side and flanks is like that in gambeli. The
edges of the tertiaries are very pale, as in gambeli.

The intermediate character of the specimens thus cannot be
doubted, and is visible at a glance. But, it may be asked, What
certainty is there that these specimens are veritable hybrids be¬
tween birds specifically distinct, and not the ordinary ‘•interme¬
diates’ which are usually conceded to be proof of specific identity,
not diversity? To such a query answer may be made that where
a species inhabits two regions so diverse in climatic and other
conditions as to produce at either extreme a variety or race, the
intermediate links showing that the two forms grade together
must come from areas intermediate, if not in actual geographical
position, at least in respect to climate, etc. In the present case
no such intermediate area exists. The California Valley Quail is
abundant down to the very edge of the desert, within sight and
hearing, so to speak, of the home of the Gambel’s Quail. Spec¬
imens shot by myself within a few miles from the desert differ
in no respect from specimens from the interior valleys of Califor¬
nia, and certainly show no indication of an approach to the char¬
acters of gattibeli. Specimens of the Gambel’s Quail, on the

ISSS.]

Bicknell on the Singing of Birds.

249

other hand, from just within the desert — the exact locality where
the hybrids were found — might have come from Utah or Arizona
so far as comparison shows to the contrary. They are in every
respect typical of the species and reveal no tendency to an approach
towards calif ornicus as a result of their proximity to the habitat
of that bird. The specimens in question can, therefore, be nothing
else than pure hybrids.

To what extent hybridization between the two species occurs
at this point is at present not known, but Mr. Herron promises to
pay attention to the matter and ascertain, if possible, the relative
proportion the hybrids bear to the unmixed birds. It will be
found, probably, that the hybrids are comparatively rare, as of a
considerable number of Gambel’s Quails already shot at the
same locality, Mr. Herron recalls nothing peculiar. Probably it
will be found that actual mating between the two species does not
take place, but that the hybrids are the result of unusual meetings
between the opposite sexes of the two species, which are more in
the nature of accidents than anything else.

A STUDY OF THE SINGING OF OUR BIRDS.

BY EUGENE P. BICKNELL.

[ Concluded from p. i§4-\

Agelaeus phceniceus. Red-shouldered Blackbird.

In mild winters squads of Red-winged Blackbirds sometimes
wander northward ahead of time. These find the swamps unpre¬
pared for them, and keep silence save for the dull chuck which it
is customary for Blackbirds to use on all occasions. But song
always accompanies the general migratory movement however
early it may be entered upon, and I have known their spring con¬
cert to begin as early as February 22. No matter how backward
the season, they will not brook more than a reasonable delay, and
after the middle of March will come and settle and start singing
even when the swamps are still ice-bound and they themselves
are the only sign of spring.

250

Bicknell on the Singing of Birds.

[July

March and April, and less truly May, are here their chief song-
months. Later they resign the gallantry of courtship and, per¬
haps viewing the practical situation to which it has brought them,
lose their readiness of voice, many, in fact, being reduced to
complete silence. This state of things begins to be noticeable
after the middle of May, and gradually becomes more apparent,
although singing never wholly fails before July. By the middle
of that month, even though the birds continue abundant, usually
but few remain in voice. Dates of final songs bear record between
July 17 and 28, and August 3.

After this time the movements of the species are rather perplex¬
ing. About the end of July almost all the adult males disappear,
while the females and young remain abundant — even appear to
increase in numbers — and multitudes often congregate at late
afternoon in the mowed meadows. In September these have
departed and the species is usually uncommon ; indeed, in some
years it appears to be altogether absent in this month. In October
it becomes common again and singing is transiently renewed. But
so fleeting is the period of autumn song that it may readily escape
notice, and doubtless for this reason it is chronicled on my
records only for two seasons. In 1S7S it lasted from October 14
to 17, when song from a number of birds was full and perfect;
in 18S0 several songs of varying perfection were heard on Octo¬
ber 17, but on n© other day.

Sturnella magna. Meadow Lark.

Though the Meadow Lark gives us many months of its music,
its song finds chief place in memory among the bird voices of
earliest spring. Then flocks assemble in tall trees overlooking
their favorite meadows, where the medley of their mingled songs
is an agreeable change from the winter silence of the sere grass
lands.

Often they are preceded in song only by the Bluebird and the
Song Sparrow. I have known them to be singing by February 8
(18S0) ; but they do not often anticipate early March, and when
it happens that they are not present at the breaking up of winter
of course their song is not to be heard until they put in an
appearance, which may not be till early April.

* SSs- ] Bicknell on the Singing of Birds. 2^1

I have no record of their singing later in the summer than the
third week of August, and often they cease earlier.

In the autumn, however, they have their voices again. In 18S0,
flocks in full song were noted from Octobor io to November
7, and all my data of other years is comprehended by these
dates.

Icterus spurius. Orchard Oriole.

We are never long left unaware of the advent among us of
this active bird, for its rapid rollicking song bears a signal part
in the repletion of bird voices which fill the morning hours in the
early days of May. True to its tropical traditions it fairly revels
in the hottest weather, and it may be heard singing with unabated
hilarity all through those excessively hot days that often come
suddenly upon us at the end of May or early in June.

The immature male, in the yellowish, black-throated plumage,
sings as enthusiastically as his more richly attired compeers, and
is often noisy with the earliest arrivals.

Singing begins to decline in July, and my record usually closes
shortly after the middle of the month, sometimes barely reaching
that point. But, again, songs may be scattered sparingly along
till August, and I have one record of imperfect song-notes from
an adult male on August 11. My record of latest songs is as
follows: 1874, July 28; 1876, July 30; 1878, July 11, 17, 19,
and imperfect song-notes August n ; 18S0, July 11 and 18; 1881,
before the 17th ; 1882, July 25 ; 1SS3, July r8- Records of the
singing of immaturely plumaged birds run to July 10.

Icterus galbula. Baltimore Oriole.

It would almost seem as if the Baltimore Oriole timed its advent
by the blossoming of the fruit trees. At all events, the blossoms
and the Orioles usually come together. And when the cherry and
apples trees wear their full spring array the bright birds are in
high spirits, gaily flashing from one tree to another, and sounding
forth their golden-toned trumpets from the fragrant clouds of
white bloom, amid which they spend many an hour while the
blossoms remain. And when it may, much of its time is also

252

Bicknell on the Singing of Birds.

[J«iy

passed with a splendid foreign cousin of these trees, the Japan
quince, — that brilliant flowering shrub that flames about lawns
and gardens in early May, and that finds a rival brightness when
the Fire-bird busies itself among its scarlet blossoms.

On their arrival these Orioles are particularly vivacious and
noisy, and though their spirits appear soon to subside they con¬
tinue in full note. But through most of July they are feeble¬
voiced and often silent. There is, however, no strict silent-period,
for in some summers they are less quiet than in others, and even
when most reticent they seem unable to restrain occasional
imperfect song-notes. But the lapse of song in mid-summer un¬
doubtedly points to an illy-defined silent-period, for full song is
resumed in August. In the latter month, chiefly in its third
quarter, their notes are frequent in the early morning and become
as full-toned as in spring, at times seeming to be more extended,
even as the bird’s plumage is brighter. Still, at this season a
few simple notes is a more usual expression than the full song.
The latter I hear last in August, from the 5th to 27th. The
simpler notes have always closed my record of the presence of
the bird — August 19 to September 6.

Mr. William Brewster gives me the following notes on the
Baltimore Oriole as observed at Cambridge, Mass. : —

“Through late July and early August they are silent and retir¬
ing, but with the first cool mornings, generally about August 20,
the male begins singing again and flashes in and out among the
leaves with all the vivacity of June. His plumage now is even
brighter than in spring. At this season he sings only in the
early morning.”

Scolecophagus ferrugineus. Rusty Blackbird.

Sings in the spring during its stay, which is longer than that
of any other migratory bird — sometimes from early March till
mid-May — and in the autumn from its arrival in September until
the great body of the species has passed south. Latest songs are
in October, from the 20th to 30th. “Imperfect song-notes
November 5,” is down in my record.

In the mild winter of 1S79-S0, these Blackbirds were observed
at different times, and their song-notes heard January 18 and
February 29.

ISSS.]

Bicknell on the Singing of Birds.

253

The Crow Blackbirds.

The Grackles are unaccountably erratic in their visitation to
ray neighborhood, and my notes on their vocalization are meagre
and unsatisfactory.

It may be said, however, speaking of the Crow Blackbirds
broadly, without distinction between the Purple and the Bronzed
varieties, that they are to be numbered with the birds which have
their voice in the autumn. I have heard their squeaky song-notes
in October, as late as the 23d.

Corvus frugivorus. Crow.

Cyanocitta cristata. Blue Jay.

With these birds there appears to be little relation between the
use of the voice and the seasons.

The Blue Jay seems disposed towards quiet in the breeding
season, particularly in the vicinity of its nest, and is most noisy
during its migrations in autumn.

The cawing of Crows belongs to all seasons.*

Tyrannus carolinensis. Kingbird.

%

From the time of its arrival on through the season of family
cares this bird’s notes are louder and more frequent than later in
its stay. But the Kingbird does not easily hold its peace under
annoyance, and its harsh twitter constantly breaks forth in those
dissensions which are ever rising between the irritable birds when
they are flocking in the late summer preliminary to departure.

But at this season their notes are usually much abbreviated, for
their voices are declining ; and when the great body of the little
combatants have fought their last fight and departed, which is
about the end of August, it is the exception if the loiterers that
continue to be met with are not mute.

* I regularly hear the strange croak of the Fish Crow ( Corvus maritimus) from early
spring until summer. The boundary dates of my record are February 22 and August
15 ; but I do not often hear the bird after May. Whether it is absent through the late
summer, autumn, and winter, or is present but silent during this time, lies beyond my
observation.

254

Bicknell on the Singing of Birds.

[ July

Myiarchus crinitus. Great-crested Flycatcher.

In July the voice of this bird begins to fail, and a silent-period
is nearly approached, if, indeed, it be not actually reached, in
trying summers.

During this time of semi-silence the usual utterance is a single
note, which is often faint, and with a mournful intonation as it
sounds at slow intervals among the high trees of the woods.

Towards the end of August there is noticeable on the part of the
birds an attempt to regain their earlier vocal prowess, but they
soon return to the low note which they learned in July. This
is their farewell, and is in strange contrast to the harsh outcry
with which they came upon the scene.

Sayornis phoebe. * Phcebe-bird.

The well-known Phoebe comes to us in the spring the first of
the Flycatchers ; the first, in fact, of our strictly summer birds
— those that never show themselves in winter — and for this rea¬
son, as well as because it actually comes to us and need not be
sought, it always meets with a special welcome among the
evidences of the advancing season in March. According to
custom, on the first morning of its arrival its song comes in
through the windows from gable-peak or other familiar perch
about the grounds, and not till then does spring seem really to
have begun. But its song is one of those which appeals to the
sympathies rather than to the ear, fully making up in sincerity
what it lacks of music. Still, it must be reluctantly admitted that
later, when more graceful and gifted songsters are with us, the
plain Phoebe does appear a trifle unsophisticated, and its notes
may grow monotonous. Nevertheless their jerky character
seems to be held in high opinion by their author, and is admirably
seconded by its tail.

Usually the Phoebe-bird must be waited for until after the
middle of March ; but it may put in an appearance any time be¬
tween the first and last days of the month — March 5 to 30.

* Cf. Stejncger, Auk, Vol. II, No. I, p. 51.

ISSS.]

Bicknell on the Singing of Birds.

255

As to its singing in the summer, there is much variability in
different years. In some, little will be heard from it through the
greater part of July, August, and September; and in prolonged
heated terms it may be generally silent for weeks at a time in any
part of this period. If the weather be agreeable it is much less
taciturn.

With considerable regularity singing is resumed in the latter
part of September, and usually lasts into the following month.

On bright autumn days, especially, the Phoebes seem animated
by the same cheerful spirit in which they passed the spring, and
in their ardor of song even dare again the high pitch of note
where the voice seems about to crack at every ascent. Such
songs are often among the last.

My record tells of farewell songs from September 28 to October
17. These really announce the general departure of the species
— the latest with us, as it was the earliest of the Flycatchers — and
though single birds seem to be loath to leave and often linger late
about the thinning orchards and leafless shrubbery along the bor¬
ders of ponds and streams, their only note is a simple chip.

Contopus virens. Wood Pewee.

When it first comes the Wood Pewee seems to be a little shy
of using its voice. Perhaps, with its solitary disposition, it is
not at ease amid the confusion and medley of the migrations. At
all events it puts off' its coming till much of this is over with ; and
in the summer it is most voiceful in the early morning and in the
evening when it can have the woods all to itself. Often it
may be heard repeating its plaintive, inquiring call when the
woods are quite dark, either before the sun has risen or after it
has set.

In late July or early August its voice shows evidences of decline,
and gradually the species goes out of song. In some seasons
singing may continue with tolerable constancy through most of
August, but it is never general in September, although occasional
songs are to be heard up to the time of the bird’s departure. The
latest songs are often stronger than those of several weeks previous.
Dates of last songs for ten years are from August 28 and Septem¬
ber 2 to September 19 and 24.

25 6

Bicknell on the Singing of Birds.

[ July

When singing is at its weakest, the song may be reduced to a
single low note, suggestive of a low note of the \ ellow-bellied
Flycatcher.

Empidonax flaviventris. Yellow-bellied Flycatcher.

I have heard the song-notes of this spring and fall migrant in
the last days of May, and once in mid-August (August 14, 1S80) :
but on the fall migration it is usually silent.

Empidonax acadicus. Small Green-crested Flycatcher.

Continues in full note through June and into July. With me
its notes cease in the latter month, between the 5th and 20th, but
where the species is more abundant doubtless it may be heard
later.

Since this went to the printer I learn from Dr. A. K. Fisher that
at Sing Sing, N. Y., where the bird is common, its notes con¬
tinue nearly to the end of August, and probably even later.

Empidonax trailli. Traill’s Flycatcher.

I hear this species only while it is passing north on its migra¬
tion, when it sometimes tarries into June.

Empidonax minimus. Least Flycatcher.

Silence comes earlier to this species than to almost any other of
our summer birds ; but where I have found this to be true is near
the southern limit of the bird’s summer range, and it is not unlikely
that it has somewhat different habits of song further within the
area of its distribution.

In some years I have missed its note after the last days of June,
and my latest date, July 20, is isolated in my record, the nearest
approaches to it being July 12 and 14.

Trochilus colubris. Ruby-throated Hummingbird.

The only sound I ever heard from this bird was an excited
chippering. MyJjooks show no record of this after the breeding

season.

i885.]

Bicknell on the Singing of Birds.

257

Chsetura pelasgica. Chimney Swift.

The rapidly accelerated chatter which the Swift runs of!' so
airily while on the wing, accompanies its flight through most of
the summer — in fact as long as the birds remain common. This
may be from early August till well on towards the end of the
month.

Late in the stay of the species I have sometimes heard their full
notes while watching small companies of the birds tarrying at
dusk over low grounds and meadows to join the Swallows insect¬
hunting.

In the summer the Chimney Swifts are disposed to be liveliest
late in the day, and the warm evenings are enlivened by their
nervously rapid twittering as in wisps of two or three or more they
race with astonishing velocity through the air.

But they are quickly affected by a fall of temperature, and in
suddenly cool evenings, chiefly in late summer, are to be seen
flying silently about in marked contrast with their usual noisy
demeanor.

Caprimulgus vociferus. Whip-poor-will.

I have never heard the notes of the Whip-poor-will after the
middle of the year, though it is well known to sing in the autumn.
At Sing Sing, Dr. Fisher has heard it up to September 19 ; and it
has been heard by different members of my family at the following
times and places: Canaseraga, N. Y., July 24, 1871 ; Scarsdale,
N. Y., August 31, 1880; Bay Ridge, L. I., August 10, 1881.

Chordeiles virginianus. Night-jar.

The sharp cry of this bird is to be heard in spring, summer, and
autumn, and doubtless is independent of the seasons. I have no
personal knowledge as to the seasonal limitations of its well-
known ‘booming,’ and aerial evolutions.

Picus pubescens. Downy Woodpecker.

In addition to its usual short, sharp note, the Downy Wood¬
pecker has a rattling cry, which starts and ends with an abrupt

Bicknell oh the Singing of Birds.

[July

25:

precision suggestive of a mechanical contrivance set of! with a
spring. This it uses in lieu of song. It is set off for the first
time in the new year in March, usually about the middle, but
sometimes earlier, and again not until the end of the month, or
even early April.

It is in use through the summer and autumn, often becoming
infrequent in October, and in November still more so, although
in some years not ceasing altogether until the end of the month.
On a few occasions I have heard it in winter.

The hammering of this little Woodpecker, which is often loud
and resounding in great disproportion to the bird’s size, is intro¬
duced into the- woodland sounds about the time its song-notes
begin. In early seasons I have heard it by the middle of
February.

Sphyrapicus varius. Yellow-bellied Woodpecker.

The Yellow-bellied Woodpecker poses in a very different
character as a traveller than as a settler in its summer home.
By reference to Dr. Merriam’s entertaining paper on this bird, in
the ‘Bulletin of the Nuttall Ornithological Club’ for January, 1879,
we learn of its habits on its arrival in Lewis County. There it is
bold, familiar and preposterously noisy. In the region of which
I write it is in general a reserved and quiet bird, and does not often
indulge in hammering, even in the spring. Perhaps at the time
it passes — April — it is not ready to begin courtship, and drum¬
ming, which, as with other Woodpeckers, in a measure takes the
place of song, is deferred until the birds are ready to seek their
mates.

But though the species in general is undemonstrative with us,
there may be an occasional noisy individual. I can cite a good
instance under date of April 8, 18S0: On the morning of that day
a high-plumaged male had chanced upon a wonderfully resonant
hollow limb in an old chestnut tree in open woods. No true Wood¬
pecker could miss turning such an occasion to account, and the
hard barkless shell was made to do good service. With great
satisfaction the bird would deliver at short intervals a loud tattoo —
a run of about eight determined raps in irregular succession.
After each sally it would throw back its red-patched head with an

Bicknell on the Singing _of Birds.

«sss.j

259

air of satisfied achievement and survey the woods, which seemed
doubly silent after the loud reveille.

I have never known this Woodpecker to drum in the autumn.
At that season it seems especially reserved. Many take up their
habitation in orchards or on private grounds where there are old
apple trees, and from their silence and the close manner in which
they hug the limbs seem to haunt them with a constant suspicion,
although they are not shy of approach. In these trees they keep
up a feeble, restless picking, in their microscopic search of the
bark for their hidden food. This is the only sound I have heard
trom them in the autumn, except an occasional low scream,
which may rarely be uttered in the winter.

Melanerpes erythrocephalus. Red-headed Woodpecker.

This fine bird is usually uncommon about New York, and long
periods may elapse when it appears to be altogether absent. But
it is liable to come in flocks any autumn, when many may stay
and spend the winter.

The species was common from September, 1881, until the
middle of the following May. Their usual note — a guttural
rattle, similar to the cry of the tree-toad ( Hyla versicolor ) — was
kept up all through the winter. In April their vocabulary was
augmented by a hoarse, hollow-sounding cry. Then the birds in
small companies still occupied the same woods where they had
passed the winter, but were more noisy and active, and would
sometimes set up a confused screaming all together. The tree-
toad rattle I have also heard in August.

Colaptes auratus. Golden-winged Woodpecker.

The well-known High-hole has, for a Woodpecker, a very varied
repertoire. Its long rolling call may be taken as especially repre¬
sentative of song, and is a characteristic sound of the empty
woodland of early spring. It is usually given from some high
perch, and has a free, far-reaching quality, that gives it the effect
of a signal thrown, out over the barren country, as if to arouse
sleeping nature. This call continues irregularly through the
summer, but then loses mj.ich of its prominence amid the multi-

260

Bicknell on the Singing of Birds.

[July

tude of bird voices. It is not infrequent in September, but later
than the middle of October I have not heard it.

Another vocal acquirement of the High-hole is a sound much
like that caused by the whetting of a scythe. These notes I have
recorded from April 8 to September 5 ; but there seems to be no
seasonal regularity about their utterance. The species has also
some singular, conversational-like tones, and other notes, which
are usually uttered when the birds are in company, and are
sometimes attended with a great show of bowing and obsequious
conduct.

It is hardly necessary to allude to the familiar call-cry of the
species, which may well have conferred the name Clape which
the bird bears in certain sections.

In the breeding season the High-hole seems to be quieter than
either before or after, perhaps from considerations of caution.

Ceryle alcyon. Kingfisher.

When the Kingfisher is present in winter its loud rattle is
given with as much vigor as at other seasons.

The Cuckoos.

Our Cuckoos have a variety of notes, some of which are cer¬
tainly common to both species. I have never been fortunate
enough to determine positively which were distinctive of either,
and the notes of both are confused in my records.

Cuckoos continue in voice after their arrival until from the
middle to the end of August. Later in the season their notes are
faint and brief ; latest records for such are September 4 and 14.

Scops asio. Screech Owl.

The Screech Owl shows a very perplexing irregularity through
the year in the use of its strange quavering cry. This much is
plain from my records, which, however, are not sufficiently full
to give a clear reading of the larger facts. But that the bird is
noisy or the reverse with some reference to the time of the year
there can be no doubt. The late summer, far more than the

sSS5.l

Bicknell on the Singing of Birds.

2 6 I

spring, seems to be the season when its cry is most frequent and
most regular from year to year. Usually, after a considerable
time of silence, it begins to quaver in July or in August, thence
continuing off and on until winter. But there is no great regu¬
larity about this ; simply my notes through a series of years
cover all this period, and the bird is to be heard in one or more
of the autumn months every year.

I am not without scattering records of having heard it in
winter ; but it is virtually a silent bird from December or earlier
until March or later.

With some uniformity it is to be heard for a short time in late
March or early April ; but I have* not a record for late April, May,
and June.

Philohela minor. Woodcock.

Although the aerial manoeuvres of the Woodcock at dusk and
in the dark are, freely speaking, familiar to us all, in a stricter
sense there is still a prevailing ignorance in regard to them.

My journal supplies the following, slightly adapted, under
date of April 19, 1SS4 : The birds would start up from amid the
shrubbery with a tremulous whirring sound of the wings, rising
with spiral course into the air. The spiral varied considerably
in pitch, sometimes expanding to sweep far out over a neighbor¬
ing field, when a single revolution would carry the bird upward
almost to the extremity of its flight, which was sometimes directly
over the point of departure. The rapid trilling sound with which
it started off, as Woodcocks do, continued without interruption
during the ascent, but gradually became more rapid, and as the
bird neared its greatest height passed into pulsations of quaver¬
ing sound. Each pulsation was shorter and faster than the last,
and took the tremolo to a higher pitch, sounding like a throbbing
whir of fine machinery, or suggesting in movement the acceler¬
ating rhythmic sound of a railway-car gradually gaining full speed
after a stop. At last, when it seemed as if greater rapidity of ut¬
terance was not possible, the vertex of the flight would be reached,
and, descending with increasing swiftness, the bird would break
forth into an irregular chippering — almost a warble — the notes
sounding louder and more liquid as it neared the earth. Suddenly

262 Bain on Winter Birds of Prince Edward Island.

[ July

there would be silence, and a small dark object would dart past
through the dusk down amid the shrubbery. Then, at silent in¬
tervals, a single strange and rather startling note — a loud, sharp
and somewhat nasal speat or spneat — which sounded as if de¬
livered with a spiteful directness at some offensive object.

I had no means of estimating the height of the bird’s ascent,
but in the evening dusk it went up almost out of sight.

This performance I have heard at midnight on the bird’s
arrival in spring. It is also said to take place in the early morn¬
ing. Is it ever indulged in the autumn?

WINTER BIRDS OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND.

BY FRANCIS BAIN.

Prince Edward Island, situated in the southern basin of the
Gulf of St. Lawrence, possesses in some respects a climate
peculiarly its own. Sheltered from the chilling breath of the
Labrador Current by the elevated primary ridges of Nova Scotia
and Cape Breton, it enjoys a summer season with a more elevated
temperature, a purer atmosphere, a clearer sky, and more abound¬
ing sunshine on its rich, verdure-clad swells, than are to be found
on the immediate Atlantic seaboard.

In winter, on the contrary, the shallow waters of the Gulf are
soon covered with ice, sometimes extending unbroken as far as
the Magdalens, and the temperature of the season is uniformly
severe. Snow lies deep on the ground, and the rivers and bays
for four months are firmly locked in ice. The atmosphere,
however, is pure and bracing, and free from the damp chilling
mists of the ocean seaboard.

These conditions have an influence on our winter avifauna.
Water birds which frequent bays and mouths of rivers are
completely driven away. Only a few deep-sea fowl stay to glean
a hardy living where the blue waves break among the parting
floes. The depth of snow is unfavorable to members of the Finch
tribe which, like the Tree Sparrow, seek their living from seeds
on the ground. But the splendid deciduous forests which flourish

Bain on Winter Birds of Prince Edward 1 stand .

*885-]

on the fertile New Red Sandstone soil, afford food to some of the
tribe during the inclement season, which are not known to win¬
ter in the neighboring Provinces.

The Purple Finch frequently winters here. He does not
frequent the abodes of men, but the lonely forest, where the
domed summits of the great yellow birches, Betula excel sa , are
thick-laden with strobiles, is his home. The stay-at-homes never
see him. But on a keen, bright morning, when the gilded twigs
are surging aloft in the frigid blue, from their loftiest tops rings
out the glad, sweet carol to startle and charm the adventurous
woodman.

Strange that the occurrence of a roving song bird in a district
should be connected with the distribution of the ancient geolog¬
ical formations. But it is so. The soils of the New Red Sand¬
stone formation sustain a class of plants affording more suitable
food for the forest choresters than is to be found in the Primary
districts. The Connecticut Valley is well known as the winter
home of many of our song birds. Western Nova Scotia has
features of bird life distinct from the surrounding districts. And
Prince Edward Island affords an oasis for the wintering of certain
Fringillidae in the midst of less fertile Primary lands.

The highly cultivated character of the country, with numerous
stock yards and farmsteads, favors the wintering of birds. The
Song Sparrow has been supposed not to winter north of Massa¬
chusetts. But among the stock yards of Prince Edward Island
we often find the jovial songster tuning his pipe in midwinter
as gaily as if he was in his old New England homestead.

In the latter part of October the Snow Buntings come here.
It is worthy of remark that they appear in New Brunswick
considerably earlier, indicating that they arrive from the North
by that way instead of by direct flight across the Gulf. At first
tney do not frequent the cultivated districts, but may be seen
foraging along the shores and in deserted grainfields. In Decem¬
ber, when snow and ice bury up their food in the wilds, they
come about the grain stacks and farm yards in large, white flocks,
whirling, like snow drifts, in the keen winter air. They are very
fond of oats, for which this Island is famous. They always shell
the grain before devouring it, using only the farinaceous kernel.

It is rare to hear Snow Buntings sing, but on a bright morning
in March, ensconced in a sheltered nook, I have heard them sing

Bain on Winter Birds of Prince Edward Island.

L J»’y

a low, sweet song, resembling the Linnet’s in general outline,
but much less strong, full, and rapid.

The Redpolls arrive the first week in November, when the
ripened and gilded cloak is just reft from the forest boughs.
Then we see little of them, but will occasionally hear their gentle
chitter as they pass back to the groves of great yellow birches,
on the seeds of which they principally feed. Free and happy
is their life in the wilderness now, as you may witness if you
watch a group of them whispering and calling sportively as they
rifle the seeds from the crowded strobiles of a giant excelsa.
But when winter fully comes they are driven from the forest’s
summit, evidently suffering from the cold. They then crowd
close in shivering flocks of fifty or more, and come and feed on
hay stacks and on the seeds of goosefoot, polygonum, and other
weeds about the gardens. I have seen the hunger-driven flock
settle on loads of hay exposed for sale in the city market. Yellow
birches are our only deciduous forest trees which carry a quantity
of seeds through the winter, and it is this circumstance which
makes them so important for the support of the winter flocks.

The Goldfinches leave the last of October, the last individuals
evidently suffering during cold storms, and their place in winter
is taken by a few wild, bounding Pine Goldfinches, whose slim
voices sound sweet notes round the dark spires of ancient spruces
where the White-winged Crossbills feed. We sometimes have
large flocks of Red Crossbills, but their coming is very uncer¬
tain. They were in force in December, 1877, and in January,
1S84. Spruce seeds were abundant both these seasons.

Pine Grosbeaks come in November, but their numbers are
uncertain. When coniferous seeds are plenty, flocks of fifty
bright-plumed beauties, with theirgentle, unsuspecting, wilderness-
ways and soft voices, come frequently about the spruce groves.
But when these are scarce, as they are this season, it is rare to
hear the call of a solitary wanderer in the most unfrequented
forest scene. But Grosbeaks are not dependent alone on a
precarious supply of cone-borne seeds for a living. They feed
much on the buds of the trees, and will even go to the shores for
a meal, like Buntings and Robins.

In midwinter they retire to the shelter of the deep, coniferous
forests. On a sunny morning, when the fir drapery flashes with
crystals, the group of forest wayfarers may be found in their

•SSs-J

I? AIX on Winter Birds of Prince Edward Island. 26 ^

sheltered home, keeping each other company with quiet flocking
calls, a male constantly breaking into a delightful Linnet-like
song, with some peculiarly rich flute-notes of his own. In such
circumstances they do not mount the blast-swept summits of the
trees but content themselves with foraging on the lower sheltered
boughs.

All these winter visitants, except Snow Huntings, are irregular
and uncertain in their appearance here. During mild seasons we
have them in numbers, but cold and stormy winters drive them
to districts where food is more easily obtained. But Grosbeaks
and Crossbills are never in numbers unless coniferous seeds are
abundant.

But few Tree Sparrows winter here, although they are abun¬
dant in November. Black Snowbirds are almost equally rare,
and it is only now and then that Robin favors us with his pres¬
ence during the dreary months. One or two will sometimes
stay where the berries of the mountain ash ( Sorbus americana')
are plenty.

Our only permanent residents really abundant in the winter
months are the little Black-capped and Hudsonian Chickadees.
We have rarely any Shrikes, and the Chickadees’ mode of
of nesting secures them against the larger birds of prey, and,
being the only insectivorous tribes of consequence during winter,
they have an ample supply of food, so that they enjoy a regular
paradise here among the groves of gray lichened firs. Every¬
where you turn, even in the most severe weather, a merry chick ,
pee dee greets you, and a little black cap bobs from among the
snow-laden boughs.

The Hudsonian Chickadee is less pert and obtrusive than its
black-capped friend. Like a coy maiden in sober brown it
keeps to the retirement of the thickets, attracting little attention
with its soft, whispered notes. I think that both species, though
plenty at all times, are less abundant in midwinter.

The Gold-crested Kinglet, and the Red-bellied and White-bellied
Nuthatches are permanent residents, though by no means abun¬
dant. Besides the Downy and Hairy Woodpeckers, and a rare
Black-backed Woodpecker, the Brown Creeper may some¬
times be seen in midwinter. Blue Jays are numerous, but
Canadian Jays uncommon. During severe winters Crows get
very scarce, yet a few will brave the most Arctic temperature
while grain stacks are to be pilfered from. .

266

Bain on Winter Birds of Prince Edivard Island.

I July

Goshawks are resident here and the terror of the desolate win¬
ter forest. Often we see the blood-stained snow and the scattered
feathers of a Jay, or the fur of a hare, where this marauder has
had his meal.

Among Owls, the Barred and Horned Owls arc the most com¬
mon. The Snowy Owl visits us in winter ; and the curious
bell-like tones of the little Acadian Owl form the first voice of
spring in the wintry woodlands.

After the ice closes round the Island in January we see but few
water fowl. Yet, in mild winters, occasional Golden eyes, Old-
squaws, Mergansers, or Eider Ducks, maybe observed. Herring
and Black-backed Gulls come in during softer spells and survey
the ice-locked bosoms of the harbors for some quieter opening to
fish in. But the Terns and the great fleets of Bonaparte Gulls,
that all summer long drifted, like snow-clouds, round the blue
bays, had all left in October, when these were first silvered with
the breath of December.

The Kittiwake is the true bird ,of the wintery wave. In the
narrows of the harbor, where the contracted current is swiftest,
there is often a restricted opening in the ice, even in midwinter.
When the deep waters of the Gulf are frozen solid as far as the eye
can see from the most elevated hilltop, the Kittiwakes will come
in and gather round this little spot of blue, circling and dipping
and rending the keen air with their harsh ke-a , kc-o ; reminding
us, as we watch them amid nature’s fiercest aspect, of the amaz¬
ing possibilities of animate being.

It will be observed that our northern visitors are about the same
as appear in the neighboring Provinces of the mainland. It is
otherwise with our summer visitants from the South. A number
of birds of more southern habit, as the Catbird, Bluebird, Scar,
let Tanager, Rose-breasted Grosbeak, Indigo Bunting. Bobolink-
Red-winged Blackbird, Meadow Lark. Baltimore Oriole, and
Whip-poor-will, which visit New Brunswick and Nova Scotia,
are never seen on Prince Edward Island. There is no reason
to be found in the existing state of things why some of these
birds should not stay over here and enjoy our delightful summer
season, which is superior to that of the Atlantic seaboard. The
reason is to be found in the fact that the Island was separated
from the mainland in the earlier days of the modern period, when
the climate was cooler than at present, and the more southern

ISSS.]

Seton on Manitoban Birds.

267

tribes of birds had not yet distributed themselves in these north¬
ern Provinces. Since their distribution in these parts the
Northumberland Straits have proved a barrier to their move¬
ments which they have not yet learned to overcome.

In studying the botany of the Maritime Provinces we find that
the same thing exists in regard to the plants of Prince Edward
Island. Many plants of more southern habit, common to the
Provinces of the mainland, have been excluded from the Island
by its early separation from the continent.

In the birds the fact shows the exceeding tardiness with
which they adopt new lines of migration, and, consequently, the
tenacity with which they adhere to established habits in their
migrations and distribution.

It also reveals something of the great northward movement of
the feathered tribes which must have followed the recession of
the cold of the Glacial Period, pointing out those which were the
last to arrive within the limits of these Provinces.

NOTES ON MANITOBAN BIRDS.

BY ERNEST E. T. SETON.

The Peregrine Falcon ( Falco communis') is a regular sum¬
mer resident of this country, although, for some reason as yet
unknown, it is not often seen on the Big Plain until August.
I have had a number of good opportunities of studying the bird.
It has several times visited the poultry-yard. On four occasions I
have known the bold pirate to continue dashing round the barns
whilst shot after shot was fired at him ; on one of these he flew
oft’ after the third shot, probably hurt. On another occasion he
was killed at the third shot, after killing his victim. On a third
the fourth shot drove him off, and on yet another the fifth shot
brought the bold bird to the ground. This last was a young
male ; his injuries were very slight, and so he was kept alive and
sent to me. I kept him three weeks in captivity, and had a
good opportunity of making notes. The vocal sounds uttered
by this bird were three in number ; a hissing menace, like that

Seton on Manitoban Birch.

[j»iy

268

of the Owls, an exceedingly loud and piercing scream of anger,
and a reiterated shrieking, almost exactly like that of the Kestrel,
but stronger and in a deeper key. The regal beauty of this
bird, his proud, conscious look of strength and power, the snap
and fire of his every movement, can only be appreciated by
those who have had an opportunity of judging for themselves.

Baird’s Bunting ( Passerculus bairdi ) is a species of consid¬
erable interest. It is exceedingly abundant in suitable localities
of this country. I give the following in full from my unpub¬
lished notes on the Birds of Manitoba.

I found this species throughout Western Manitoba wherever
the surroundings were congenial. On the Big Plain it is fairly
common, but on the prairies of the upper Assiniboine It is ex¬
ceedingly abundant. I traversed that country in June, 1SS4.
At that time all the birds were in full song. The scrubby
prairies, from the Finger Board to Shoal Lake, were vocal
with the songs of Shattuck Buntings and Savanna Sparrows ;
where the prairies widened and became more clear, the loud
Meadow Lark joined in, or when the trail dipped into some
hollow where the red willow was thickly growing, the husky¬
voiced Leconte’s Sparrow added his weak song to the tumult.
But in the low flats by Shoal Lake, where the ground was hard-
baked and sparkling with alkali, where the grass wras scanty
and wiry, a new voice lent its aid to the choir, for here is the
favorite haunt of Baird’s Bunting. Whenever the trail crossed
one of these dry alkali flats, the notes of this bird were sure to
be heard on all sides. The song may be rendered trick-e-trick-
e-trik-eeeec-chiky-le-roit , with a peculiar tinkling utterance that
at once distinguishes it from the song of the Savanna Sparrow.
Another type of song with this species is like trick-e-trick-c -
trike-e-trrrrrrrrr.

In the Shell River country the dry alkali bottoms were more
frequent, and the Bunting became numerous in proportion. I
found its nest also, but will not describe it, as I was unable to
substantiate the fact by shooting the bird.

The general habits of this bird are much like those of the
Savanna Sparrow. When singing it is usually perched in
some tuft of grass, each foot grasping a number of stalks to
furnish support. When disturbed, it flits low over the flat and
drops into the grass.

•SS5-]

Seton on Manitoban Birds.

269

A number of the specimens taken were rather larger than the
measurements commonly given. The gizzards generally con¬
tained hay seeds and small insects, but a large, green caterpillar
was found in one of them.

The latest record I have is September 23. Shortly after this
they must have flown southward.

Another interesting resident of the northern prairies is the
Missouri Skylark ( Neocorys spraguei') . It is one of the com¬
monest of prairie birds in Western Manitoba ; its loud ventrilo-
quial voice is heard from the clouds on all hands when it is in
full song. It commonly arrives on the Big Plain about the
3d of May, and by the 6th or 7th is rested and singing. In
order to give a better idea of the numbers of this species, I
counted those that I passed beneath in a three-mile walk across
the prairie on the 10th of May ; altogether there were twelve,
trilling their silvery notes in the bosom of the clouds.

This song was for long a riddle past my solving. I felt
sure of its being the utterance of some bird on the prairie, but
where I could not tell nor trace ; wherever I went, it seemed to
be just a little further ahead, or to one side or another, or sud¬
denly behind. Throughout the whole season of 1882 I was thus
duped, and it was by chance that at last I found the singer to be
away up in the sky, but so high that on a bright day it is im¬
possible to follow with the eye the tiny speck whose music is
shaking the air for thousands of feet around. The song is sweet
and far-reaching, and Dr. Cones gives a most enthusiastic de¬
scription of its moving power and melody, yet, though I am
readily influenced by bird music, I never found this singer im¬
press me with the love and reverence invariably inspired by such
as the Veery utters, a bird whose notes resemble these as nearly
as possible.

When the Skylark feels the impulse to sing, he rises from the
bare prairie ridge with a peculiar bounding flight, like that of
the Pipit; up, in silence, higher and higher he goes, up, up,
one hundred, two hundred, three hundred, five hundred feet ;
then, feeling his spirits correspondingly elevated, he spreads his
wings and tail and utters his loud song, like tsing-tsing ,
tsingle-ingle ingleingleing , the single vibratory note uttered
faster and faster till the last ones are all fused. While this is
being sung the bird is floating downwards, and as soon as it

2 70

Seton on Manitoban Birds.

LJuly

is finished he proceeds, by the boun ding-flight, to regain bis
elevation and once more pour out his silvery strains. On the
14th of May I noted one of these birds singing with great devo¬
tion. He had trilled his refrain at least twenty times, when it
occurred to me to time and count his songs. The whole of
each trilling occupied fifteen seconds, and after I began to count
he repeated it from beginning to end eighty-two times ; just as
he should have entered on the eighty-third, his wings closed, his
tail went up, and down he fell headlong, but my eyes were
blinded with the brightness, and my neck refused to take part in
further proceedings, so that I was not able to mark the bird for
closer examination. This singer had serenaded me for about an
hour, and I do not think he ranked above his fellows in staying
power. Several times after a Skylark had sung and returned
to earth, with the headlong descent described, I have deliberately
flushed him, and at once he rises without further preamble,
soberly remounts his imaginary five lmndred-foot platform, and
again sings his trilling slurs from beginning to end. Thus on
one occasion I called the same bird three times before the cur¬
tain, but on the fourth encore he would not respond ; each time
that he was disturbed, he would flv off some two hundred yards,
and again settle on the ground. Once, only, have I observed
this species singing his full song on the ground.

The other habits and common notes of this species have a
considerable resemblance to those of the Titlark. It leaves the
Big Plain about the end of August.

The finding of a new form of the Rufftjd Grouse within the
limits of territory tolerably explored is not an occurrence that
any student would have expected. Yet in the woods of Mani¬
toba is a well-marked variety, which is known there as the Red-
or Copper-ruffed Partridge. In general appearance this bird differs
but little from the well known Bonasa umbellus umbelloides , but
it is distinguished by being more decidedly marked, — thus the bars
on the belly are complete and nearly black, — and by having
copper-colored touches on the back, the subterminal tail-band and
the ruff a rich, iridescent, coppery red.

Mr. Ridgway, commenting on a specimen sent him, says:
“This grouse is the handsomest bird of the species I have ever
seen : so far as general plumage is concerned it is decidedly refer¬
able to B. u. mnbelloides. ... It is quite peculiar enough in

•835.]

Seton on Manitoban Birds.

27 I

plumage to represent a distinct local race, provided the differ¬
ences are reasonably constant.”

And later, the same authority writes, “I do not think that a
new race can he characterized, the ‘copper-ruffed’ birds forming
a sort of connecting link between umbellus and umbelloides .”

To this I reply, first, that we have in Manitoba a Bonasa
which, in its entirely rufous tail and general color, is very
closely allied to B. umbellus , if, indeed, it is not absolutely that
form. Second, we have the well-known umbelloides. Third,
there are all grades between these two. Fourth, the form with
the copper ruff. And all of these are found in the same woods,
sometimes in the same pack. The relative proportion of each
is, perhaps: umbellus 10 per cent; umbelloides , 20 per cent;
grades between these, 60 per cent; copper-ruffs, 10 per cent.
So far I have not seen any indications of intergradation in color
between the last-named and the other forms.

Mr. C. W. Nash, an accomplished naturalist and sportsman,
now residing at Portage la Prairie, Manitoba, writing me on the
subject, strongly objects to the form being considered only a
chance variation, as it is the most stable of those found in the
country. He asserts that 10 per cent is too small a proportion,
and adds that the most brilliant ruffs he ever saw belonged to a
bird which had the purest gray tail of any he had shot, and
which was also the largest bird he killed last season.

Dr. Brodie informs me that many years ago this variety was
of frequent occurrence in the country north of Toronto. The
settlers recognized it as, in a measure, distinct from the com¬
mon Partridge, and superior to it in size and beauty.

If this form can be shown to be geographical I shall claim for
it the rank of a variety, but with my present information can but
think with Mr. Ridgway that not only this, but perhaps all of our
Canadian Bonasce , are more or less referable to the form umbel¬
loides. The brilliant coloration of the Grouse may prove analo¬
gous to the remarkable variations exhibited by several of our
Hawks and Owls.

272

Lawrence, Notes on Long Island Birds.

[July

LONG ISLAND, N. Y., BIRD NOTES.

BY NEWBOLD T. LAWRENCE.

[n the following notes, I take pleasure in recording several
additional captures to those already mentioned in a list of ‘Rare
Birds -taken on Long Island, N. Y.’, published in ‘Forest and
Stream,’ May 2, 1878.

1. Polioptila caerulea. Blue-gray Gnatcatcher. — Shot a female of
this species at Far Rockaway, April 18, 1874.

2. Dendrceca castanea. Bay-breasted Warbler. — Secured an adult
male in a small grove of oaks at Far Rockaway, June 23, 1870. Mr.
Eugene P. Bicknell has a record from Riverdale, N. Y., dating July 26,
1875. He also informs me that, from records kept of this bird for a
number of years at Riverdale, N. Y., in its regular migration, the latest
spring record is the end of May, and the earliest fall record the middle
of August.

3. Vireo philadelphicus. Philadelphia Vireo. — Mr. Eugene P.
Bicknell, while staying with me at Far Rockaway, had the good fortune to
secure a fine specimen of this Vireo on September 25, 1879. I had the
pleasure of skinning the bird, which proved to be a male. This is the
first record of its capture on Long Island.

4. Zonotrichia leucophrys. White-crowned Sparrow. — Shot a
specimen of this bird at Far Rockaway, May 30, 1882. Another was noticed
in its company but not secured.

5. Passerculus sandwichensis savanna. Savanna Sparrow. — This
bird, I think, may now be included among the winter residents on Long
Island. I have taken specimens at Far Rockaway during November and
December, and one (male) January 1, 1884. Mr. Wm. Dutcher secured
two specimens at the same place on February 23, 1885.

6. Ammodromus maritimus. Sea-side Finch.— One specimen .(fe¬
male) taken on the salt meadow at Far Rockaway, February 22, 1884.
Another was noted, but not secured, November 25, 1885.

7. Caprimulgus vociferus. Whip-poor-will. — On April 26, 1885,
Mr. Henry DeForest found a nest of this bird at Oyster Bay, containing
two eggs; the following week, May 3, he again visited the spot, and found
young birds that had evidently been hatched several days. I record the
above as an unusually early date. J. P. Giraud. Jr., speaking of this bird
in ‘The Birds of Long Island,’ says, “It arrives on Long Island about the
first of May, from the South ; in the latter part of the same month the
female commences laying.”

8. Nyctale acadica. Saw-whet Owl. — Mr. Osborne killed one of
these birds on Montauk Point, November 20, 1885.

9. Ardea caerulea. Little Blue Heron. — On April 3, 1885, while
taking a tramp over the salt meadows at Far Rockaway, I started a Little

i385.J

Lawrence, Notes on Long Island Birds.

273

Blue Heron from a small pond near the sand hills. The bird flew almost
out of sight. It finally lighting, I walked to about where I thought the
bird had gone down, and on following the banks of a small creek, had
the good fortune to flush the bird within twenty-five feet, when I secured
it. It proved to be an adult male. This is my first record of the Little
Blue Heron on Long Island, and I think it is an unusually early date.

10. Ochthodromus wilsonius. Wilson’s Plover. — Mr. Harold
Herrick secured a male of this species at Far Rockaway, May 17, 1879.
Two others were seen by myself the same day but not secured.

11. Macrorhamphus griseus scolopaceus. Greater Long-beak. —
Secured a specimen in Fulton Market, New York, October 15, 1884, killed
on the south side of Long Island.

12. Micropalama himantopus. Stilt Sandpiper. — I have always found
this bird unusually common in the vicinity of Far Rockaway, and should
like to give my experience with it on two occasions during the past two
years. On September 10, 1883, I was shooting on the meadows ; wind east ;
rained from six a. m. until twelve m. On that day I had three flocks come
to my decoys, composed of Little Yellow Legs and Stilt Sandpipers, and
numbering from fifty to one hundred birds in each. I killed nineteen,
twenty-one, and ten, respectively ; among them were twenty Stilts.

On July 28, 1884, there occurred one of the largest flights of Bay Birds
at Far Rockaway that I have seen in a number of years. The day was
bright and clear, with a light southerly wind; it had stormed hard from
the East all the preceding day. The flight was composed almost entirely
of Little Yellow Legs and Stilt Sandpipers, every flock containing more
or fewer of each. Saw several flocks composed entirely of Stilts. One
numbering twelve came to my decoys and I killed them all. I secured
that day twentj- Stilt Sandpipers, all old birds. On both the dates men¬
tioned a great many flocks of traveling birds were seen flying very high ;
some of them must have numbered over two hundred individuals.

13. Actodromas bairdii. Baird’s Sandpiper. — Shot a female of this
species on the salt meadow at Far Rockaway in August, 1882. Entirely
alone when captured.

14. Numenius borealis. Eskimo Curlew. — During a period of about
twelve years’ Bay Snipe shooting at Far Rockaway and vicinity, I have
only four records of this bird,— one September 12, 1875, one September 10,
1876, and two September 26, 1884.

15. Numenius longirostris. Long-billed Curlew. — My experience
with this bird in the vicinity of Far Rockaway is to find it more uncom¬
mon than the preceding, having but two records during the same period
of time. The first, a female, was killed on the ocean front of the outer
beach, in company with a flock of Bartram’s Sandpipers ( Bartramia
longicauda ), August 20, 1873. The second was shot on the salt meadow,
August 26, 1885. I might mention here that the Numenius hudsonicus is
common, the flight generally taking place from the 10th to the end of
July.

16. Steganopus wilsoni. Wilson’s Phalarope. — On October 10, 1874,

I had one of these birds settle in my decoys, swimming among them quite

j. Goss on the Bine k- capped Vireo ami Nonpareil.

[ Juiy

fearlessly. On October 15, 1S79, I saw one swimming in the East River
at the foot of Pine Street, New York City. It was very gentle, the steam¬
er I was on passing within twenty-five feet of it, when it started, flew a
short distance, and settled on the water again.

17. Rallus longirostris crepitans. Clapper Rail. — This bird seems
to be a winter resident on Long Island. Mr. Wm. Dutcher informs me
that the gunners at South Oyster Bay see a few every winter. I have the
following records from Far Rockaway : Nov. 9, 1872; Nov. 25, 1883; Dec.
5, 18S4. Messrs. Wm. Dutcher and L. S. Foster found a freshlv killed
specimen on the outer beach, February 23, 1885.

18. Porzana noveboracensis. Yellow Rail. — At Far Rockaway, Oct.
15, 1883, while crossing a large field within a short distance of the salt
meadow, I started one of these Rails, but having no gun I did not secure
it. It was very gentle ; I flushed the bird three times, it rising at first within
a few feet and flying but a short distance. Mr. Harold Herrick informs
me that he started a Yellow Rail on the Jamaica Bay meadows, near Far
Rockaway, in October, 18S2, but failed to shoot it.

THE BLACK-CAPPED VIREO AND NONPAREIL IN
SOUTHWESTERN KANSAS.

BY N. S. GOSS.

While collecting and observing the birds in Comanche County,
from May 7 to 18 inclusive, 1SS5. I captured three pairs of Vireo
atricctpillus , and saw quite a number, all in the deep ravines
in the gypsum hills on the Red or Salt Fork of the Arkansas
River, near the town of Rumsey. The birds were quite bold
and noisy, but this may be the case only during mating and the
early part of the breeding season. They are very pleasing sing¬
ers, their song being not like the ‘ who’s-afraid,’ jerky notes of
the White-eyed Vireo, nor as loud as those of the Red-eyed, but
a more warbling and varied song than that of any' of the family
which I have heard.

On the 1 1 th I found a nest near the head of a deep canon, sus¬
pended from the forks of the end of a horizontal branch of a
small elm tree, about five feet from the ground. It was screened
from sight above by the thick foliage of the tree, and the larger
surrounding trees ; but beneath for quite a distance there was
nothing to hide it from view. The material, however, of which
it was made so closely resembled the gypsum that had crumbled

iSSj.]

Goss on the Hlark-ca pped Viren and Nonpareil.

2 75

from the rocks above and thickly covered the ground, that I
should have passed it by unnoticed had I not on my near ap¬
proach been attracted to the spot by the scolding and the excited
actions of the birds. On discovering the nest I did not stop to
examine it, but kept leisurely on my course until out of sight ;
then cautiously turned back, and at a safe distance had the pleas¬
ure of seeing both the birds busily at work building their nest,
then about two-thirds completed. The nest is hemispherical in
shape, and composed of broken fragments of old bleached leaves,
with here and there an occasional spider’s cocoon, interwoven
together and fastened to the twigs with fibrous strippings and
silk-like threads from plants and the webs of spiders, and lined
with fine stems from weeds and grasses. On the 18th, my last
day in the vicinity, I went to the nest confidently expecting to
find a full set ot eggs, but on account of the cold, wet weather,
or from some other cause, the bird had not laid, and T had to con¬
tent myself with the nest.

That the bird is quite a common summer resident in the
vicinity may be safely set down as certain, and I think the
species, now so little known, will prove to be abundant in suit¬
able locations from Medina and Comal Counties, Texas, where
they were found nesting in the spring of 1878, by Mr. Geo. II.
Ragsdale and Mr. VV. II. Werner (see Bull. Nutt Orn. Club,
Vol. IV, No. 2, pp. 58, 99, and 193), north to and into the gyp¬
sum formation in Southwestern Kansas.

The description of the color and markings of the species has
been so correctly given by others that I do not think it necessary
to take up further space than to touch upon the points respecting
which the accounts (lifter, viz. : The broad white orbital ring
does not meet over the eyes, the black running down and sepa¬
rating it for a space of about .10 of an inch. The top and sides
of the head in front, in the female, are blackish, fading gradually
posteriorly to ashy slate. The other markings are similar to
those of the male, but not so bri ght.

The following notes, from my catalogue and register, are from
memoranda taken at the time of killing: —

Sex.

I.ength,

Alar extent.

Wing.

Tail.

Tarsus.

Rill.

$

4-6.S

6.95

2.15

I.80

•73'

•39

s

4.60

6.90

2.12

1-75

•73

•39

?

4.40

6.80

2. IO

I.70

•73

•38

?

4.40

6.80

2. IO

I.70

•73

•38

2 76

Ageksbokg on Birds oj Southeastern Dakota.

I July

Iris light brick red ; upper mandible black ; lower mandible
blue ; edges and tip of both whitish ; legs, feet, and claws deep
blue.

I found Passer ina ciris also cpiite a common summer resident
in the same vicinity and localities. The birds were very shy.
I succeeded, however, in shooting a pair. Their sweet song
greeted me along the streams and in nearly every ravine or canon
that I entered.

TIIE BIRDS OF SOUTHEASTERN DAKOTA.

BY G. S. AGEKSBOKG.*

Clay County, and also parts of Union and Yankton Counties,
have been thoroughly searched by the writer for the last sixteen
years, especially Clay ; also parts of Lincoln and Minnehaha
Counties, with an occasional trip further north. The topography
of this part of the country is not very varied, being mainly high,
undulating prairie, and low, often marshy, bottom lands. The
counties are bordered on the south by the Missouri River, and
traversed from north to south by the Big Sioux, Vermilion and
Dakota Rivers. It is essentially a prairie country, there being
very little timber except along the Missouri, and at different places
on the Big Sioux. We find no true lakes, but a number of reedy
swamps, which are the resort of myriads of water birds during
the migrations. Collecting trips have also been extended to
Cedar and Dixon Counties in Nebraska, separated from Dakota
by the Missouri River. The topography of these counties differs
somewhat from that of Southeastern Dakota, the land being
higher, drier, better timbered, and more broken by deep ravines.
The avifauna is the same, but many of our Dakota birds, as
Swainson’s Buzzard, the Turkey Buzzard, and the Swallow-tailed
Kite find there better breeding resorts, and consequently are there
more abundant.

Several birds given by Professor Aughey in his ‘Report on the
Nature of the Food of the Birds of Nebraska,’ which I have failed

Revised by Prof. W. W. Cooke.

1SS5.] Agersborg on Birds of Southeastern Dakota. 277

to find, after the most diligent search, in the counties named by
him, but I hope sooner or later to add them to my list.

I would further state that all the species of the subjoined list
are given on the basis of actual capture.

1. Merula migratoria. American Robin. — A not very abundant sum¬
mer resident. I have known it to winter here four times. A temperature
of 390 below zero did not seem to drive them off. In winter they feed on
the berries of Rhus glabra and Symphoricarpus vulgaris , occasionally
visiting decayed trees for larvie, cocoons, etc. Eggs ready to hatch found
as early as May 1.

2. Hylocichla ustulata swainsoni, Olive-backed Thrush, and its variety
alicice are common spring and fall migrants, alicicB being the more abundant
of the two. Arrive the last week in April, and remain for three weeks,
during which time they grow very fat. Their return passage in the begin¬
ning of October is rather hurried.

3. Hylocichla fuscescens. Wilson’s Thrush. — A rare summer resi¬
dent; have never found its nest.

4. Hylocichla mustelina. Wood Thrush. — Very rare. Breeds along
the Missouri and Big Sioux Rivers.

5. Galeoscoptes carolinensis. Catbird. — A very abundant summer
bird. Arrives about May 10 and leaves last week in September. Breeds
everywhere.

6. Harporhynchus rufus. Brown Thrasher. — Abundant all summer.
Breeds. Nests found mostly in gooseberry bushes, sometimes on the
ground.

7. Sialia sialis. Bluebird. — Can barely call this a common bird here ;
have noted its arrival as early as February 1.

8. Regulus calendula. Ruby-crowned Kinglet. — Passes through here
in small numbers about the middle of May ; have never seen it in the fall.

9. Regulus satrapa. Golden-crowned Kinglet. — More rare than
the foregoing, and not met with every spring.

10. Lophophanes bicolor. Tufted Titmouse. — Although given by
Professor Aughey as abundant in Dakota County, Nebraska, only thirty-
five miles distant, I have been unable to find it, the only Chickadee
found here being

11. Parus atricapillus septentrionalis, Long-tailed Chickadee, which
is an abundant species, especially in winter. Breeds.

12. Sitta carolinensis aculeata. Slender-billed Nuthatch. — Resi¬
dent; not common.

13. Sitta canadensis. Red-bellied Nuthatch. — Also found in Da¬
kota County, Nebraska, by Professor Aughey, but I have never seen it
here.

14. Certhia familiaris rufa. Brown Creeper. — Not common; resi¬
dent.

15. Salpinctes obsoletus. Rock Wren. — Reported from Dakota
County, Nebraska; not found here. It probably can not find congenial
resorts with us.

278

Agersborg on Birds of Southeastern Dakota.

[July

16. Troglodytes aedon. House Wren. — Common ; breeds.

16 a. Troglodytes aedon parkmani. Western House Wren. — Rare;
breeds here.

17. Telmatodytes palustris. Long-billed Marsh Wren. — Summer
resident; breeds.

18. Cistothorus stellaris. Short-billed Marsh Wren. — Very rare
summer visitor ; breeds.

19. Anthus ludovicianus. American Titlark. — A very rare bird here.
Only noticed twice; both times early in the fall.

20. Mniotilta varia. Black-and-White Creeper. — A not very com¬
mon bird during spring and fall migrations.

21. Helminthophaga celata. Orange-crowned Warbler. — One spec¬
imen taken, May, 1879.

22. Dendrceca aestiva. Summer Yellowbird. — Abundant every where
in summer; breeds.

23. Dendrceca caerulea. Cerulean Warbler.— Found in Dakota
County, Nebraska, by Professor Aughey; has not been noticed here.

24. Dendrceca coronata. Yellow-rumped Warbler. — Common
spring and autumn migrant.

25. Dendrceca striata. Black-poll Warbler. — Abundant for two or
three days in spring; have never seen it in the fall.

26. Dendrceca maculosa. Black-and-Yellow Warbler. — Very rare
migrant.

27. Dendrceca discolor. Prairie Warbler, and

28. Dendrceca pinus. Pine-creeping Warbler. — These species, al¬
though found in the neighboring counties in Nebraska, I have never seen
in Dakota.

29. Siurus auricapillus. Golden-crowned Thrush. — A not very
common summer resident; breeds.

30. Siurus naevius. Small-billed Water Thrush. — Passes through
here every spring in large flocks; have never met with it in the fall.

31. Geothlypis trichas. Maryland Yellow-throat. — Common sum¬
mer resident; breeds.

32. Geothlypis Philadelphia. Mourning Warbler. — Single speci¬
mens occasionally found during the spring migration.

33. Icteria virens. Yellow-breasted Chat. — Summer resident ;
breeds ; rather rare.

34. Myiodioctes pusillus. Black-capped Yellow Warbler. — Rare
spring migrant.

35. Setophaga ruticilla. Redstart. — Common summer resident;
breeds.

36. Pyranga rubra. Scarlet Tanager. — Rare summer resident;
breeds.

37. Hirundo erythrogastra. Barn Swallow. — Common summer
resident; breeds.

38. Tachycineta bicolor. While-bellied Swallow. — Very rare.

1885.] Agersborg on Birds of Southeastern Dakota. 2^9

39. Tachycineta thalassina. Violet-green Swallow. — Probably
accidental ; breeds.

40. Petrochelidon lunifrons. Cliff Swallow.— Common all sum¬
mer; breeds.

41. Cotile riparia. Bank Swallow. — Common; breeds.

42. Stelgidopteryx serripennis. Rough-winged Swallow. — Much
rarer than the preceding; breeds, in common with that species, along the
Vermilion and Big Sioux Rivers.

43. Progne subis. Purple Martin. — Common every summer.
Found breeding only in our towns ; not met with in the country.

44. Ampelis garrulus. Northern Waxwing. — In some winters a
very common species. Its appearance in great numbers seems to depend
upon the abundance of the wild grapes, on which it exclusively feeds.
When the grape crop fails the Waxwing can not be found. It arrives late
in December and remains till the last week of March.

45. Ampelis cedrorum. Cedar Waxwing. — A rare winter visitor;
also probably attracted by the wild grapes.

46. Vireo philadelphicus. Philadelphia Vireo. — Reported by Pro¬
fessor Aughey from Northeastern Nebraska. I have never seen it here.

47. Vireo olivaceus. Red-eyed Vireo. — Occasionally one is secured
late in the spring.

48. Vireo gilvus. Warbling Vireo. — Rare spring migrant; found
breeding by Professor Aughey across the Missouri River in Nebraska. I
have never succeeded in finding its nest, nor have I seen the bird in summer.

49. Vireo solitarius. Blue-headed Vireo. — Very rare during spring
migrations.

50. Lanius borealis. Great Northern Shrike. — A regular winter
visitant; arrives early in October and leaves again in April. It seems to
follow in the wake of Sfiizella monticola , and leaves in the spring at the
same time.

51. Lanius ludovicianus excubitorides. White-rumped Shrike. — A
species we should expect to find here but which I have never seen. That
it is not far away is proved by Professor Aughey in his Report. I may yet
be able to add it to the list of Southeastern Dakota birds.

52. Hesperiphona vespertina. Evening Grosbeak. — A rare winter
visitor: seen during severe winters only, and then in small flocks of from
two to twelve. Feeds on sumac berries and elm buds.

53. Carpodacus purpureus. Purple Finch. — Passes though here'
every spring in small numbers.

54. AEgiothus linaria. Common Redpoll. — Seen in large flocks nearly
every winter.

55. Astragalinus tristis. American Goldfinch. — Common resident.
In severe winters it may be absent for several weeks.

56. Plectrophanes nivalis. Snow Bunting. — Formerly abundan
every winter but now only occasionally met with, and then associated with
the Horned Lark. Its absence may be due to the changes through hus¬
bandry which this country has lately undergone ; very little small grain
is now raised, the chief crop being corn.

280

Agersborg on Birds of Southeastern Dakota.

[July

157. Centrophanes lapponicus. Lapland Longspur. — A not very
common winter visitor; always to be found on the bare fields or, towards
spring, near creeks, in company with Horned Larks.

5S. Centrophanes pictus. Smith’s Longspur. — Shot one a few years
ago ; it was alone in a flock of the following species.

59. Centrophanes ornatus. Chestnut-collared Longspur. — Passes
though here every spring in large numbers, a few remaining to breed.
About one hundred and fifty miles north of here they are common all
summer. The males arrive in large flocks the last week in April, to be
followed tenor twelve days later by the females, going in smaller and more
straggling flocks.

60. Passerculus sandwichensis savanna. Savanna Sparrow. —
Common summer resident; breeds mostly on the high table lands.

61. Pocecetes gramineus. Grass Finch. — Summer resident ; breeds.

62. Coturniculus passerinus. Yellow-winged Sparrow. — Summer
resident; breeds.

63. Coturniculus lecontei. LeConte’s Sparrow. — Abundant for a
few days the last of May. Found a nest on the Vermilion prairie, June
19, 1883, with five eggs ready to hatch. In coloration and shape they
looked like miniature eggs of the Horned Lark. Some of the eggs were on
the point of being opened by the chicks when found, and not being hard¬
hearted enough to rob the bird I left them alone. I am almost sorry now
that I did not put them in alcohol.

, 64. Melospiza lincolni. Lincoln’s Sparrow. — Reported from this
locality by Lieut. Warren’s expedition. I have never found it.

65. Melospiza palustris. Swamp Sparrow. — Not very common sum¬
mer resident; breeds.

66. Melospiza fasciata. Song Sparrow. — Like the foregoing, this
species is not a common summer resident.

67. Junco hyemalis. Black Snowbird. — Very abundant in spring
and fall; none remain here during winter. This bird is said to be a resi¬
dent of Northeastern Nebraska by Professor Aughey, and it has also been
noted from Fort Patten, Dakota, four hundred miles north of here. Why
it shuns this locality, which abounds in food the year around, I am unable
to guess, unless it is not elevated enough.

6S. Spizella monticola. Tree Sparrow. — Our most abundant winter
visitant. Large flocks seen everywhere in willow thickets and sunflower
patches. Arrive early in October, and they do not all leave us before May 1.

69. Spizella domestica. Chipping Sparrow. — Not common ; breeds.

70. Spizella pallida. Clay-colored Sparrow. — This little bird is
abundant in spring and fall, lingering here for nearly three weeks in the
spring. Every thicket, copse, and weed-patch is full of them; not only
the underbrush along the rivers, but young cottonwood groves and
weedy fields far out on the prairie. Expect some day to find this bird
breeding here, as it does, according to Professor Aughey’s Report, just
across the Missouri River, only a short distance away.

71. Spizella pusilla. Field Sparrow. — Not uncommon in summer;
never found it nesting.

iSSs.j

Agersborg on Birds of Southeastern Dakota.

28l

72. Zonotrichia albicollis. White-throated Sparrow. — Common
migrant.

73. Zonotrichia leucophrys. White-crowned Sparrow. — Not so
common as the preceding species.

74. Zonotrichia querula. Harris’s Sparrow. — One of our most abun¬
dant migrants. Arrives about May 1, and remains for nearly three
weeks, becoming very fat. It is found in the brush along the rivers, and
far out on the prairies wherever there are a few plum trees or willow
bushes in the ravines. It is a very tame bird and easily secured. About
October 1 it returns and does not leave until severe frosts occur, about
November 1. I do not think it breeds here. I found one the middle of June,
three or four years ago, and watched it closely for hours, hoping to find its
nest ; finally, tired of waiting, I shot the bird and found it to be an old male
with atrophied testicles, which probably accounts for its remaining here
when its companions went away.

75. Chondestes grammica. Lark Finch. — Very common in summer;
breeds early, as I have found its nest with a full complement of eggs as
early as May 1. The first brood is raised from nests placed in unplowed
fields; the second and third are generally built among potato vines or
vegetables with heavy foliage. Have no doubt that three broods are often
raised.

76. Passerella iliaca. Fox Sparrow. — A not very common migrant.
Only single birds have been noticed.

77. Calamospiza bicolor. Lark Bunting. — Common summer resi¬
dent. It prefers the low bottom lands with their tall growth of grass
for nesting places. Several nests may sometimes be found within an area
of a quarter section. The male is conspicuous during the whole season ;
the female less so, being rarely seen, especially during incubation. The
eggs of this species and of the Black-throated Bunting are so similar that
it is necessary to be very careful in identifying the nest and birds. Of the
many nests I have seen, those of the Lark Bunting were invariably placed
on the ground between the grass tufts ; those of the Black-throated Bunting
sometimes on the ground, at other times in the middle of a tuft, the
growing grass elevating it fo,‘ several inches. The nest of the Lark Bun¬
ting is, as a rule,' not so well upholstered with horse hair as that of the
Black-throated. Snaring is often the surest means of correct identifica¬
tion, but this may mislead, as it once did me. Setting a steel-trap on a
Duck’s nest to catch the mother, I was surprised next morning to find in
my trap the ‘wrong bird,’ — an oologist commonly styled ‘Skunk.’

78. Spiza americana. Black-throated Bunting. — Common sum¬
mer resident; breeds everywhere ; seeks generally a more elevated place
for breeding than the foregoing.

79. Zamelodia ludoviciana. Rose-breasted Grosbeak. — A not very
common summer resident ; breeds.

80. Zamelodia melanocephala. Black-headed Grosbeak. — Much
rarer than the foregoing; have never found it breeding here.

81. Passerina amcena. Lazuli Finch. — A few stray birds seen every
summer. Its nest I have never found, though it certainly breeds here.

282

Agersborg on Birds of Southeastern Dakota.

[July

82. Pipilo maculatus arcticus. Northern Towhee. — Rare.

83. Pipilo erythrophthalmus. Towhee. — Common summer resident;
breeds.

84. Dolichonyx oryzivorus. Bobolink. — Abundant; breeds. The
males arrive early in May in flocks of thirty to fifty ; the females a little
later and singly; at least, I have never seen any in flocks.

85. Molothrus ater. Cowbird. — Altogether too abundant; it out¬
numbers the Red-winged Blackbird in this locality. Remains longer in
the fall and arrives earlier in the spring than any of the other Icteridie,
with probably the exception of Sturnella ncglecta.

86. Xanthocephalus icterocephalus. Yellow-headed Blackbird. —
Abundant in summer. The farmer’s best friend, following the plow in
large numbers, often in company with Franklin’s Gull and the Purple
Grackle, picking up larvae, etc.

87. Agelaeus phceniceus. Red-winged Blackbird. — Abundant;
breeds.

88. Sturnella neglecta. Western Meadow Lark. — Abundant. One
of our earliest arrivals, and the last to depart. The eastern form, A.
magna , has not as yet made its appearance here.

89. Icterus spurius. Orchard Oriole. — Common ; breeds.

90. Icterus galbula. Baltimore Oriole. — Breeds.

91. Icterus bullocki. Bullock’s Oriole. — More common than the
last.

92. Scolecophagus ferrugineus. Rusty Grackle. — Rare during the
migrations; in some years I have not seen it.

93. Scoleocophagus cyanocephalus. Brewer’s Blackbird. — Like
the foregoing, is rare here. Breeds in limited numbers.

94. Quiscalus purpureus aeneus. Bronzed Grackle. — Nearly as
abundant as the Cowbird. Breeds along all our streams.

95. Corvus corax carnivorus. Raven. — Formerly more abundant than
now. Occasionally observed in winter, intermingling with Crows. I
doubt its breeding here.

96. Corvus frugivorus. Crow. — Abundant; resident; breeds.

97. Picicorvus columbianus. Clarke’s Nutcracker. — Accidental.
Two seen and one shot, October, 1883.

98. Pica rustica hudsonica. Black-billed Magpie. — This bird, which
was formerly very common here in winter, frequenting trappers’ camps
and farmyards, has within the last four years disappeared entirely. Those
seen as late in the summer as July by Professor Aughey must have been
exceptional, as they never remained here longer than till the last week of
March.

99. Cyanocitta cristata. Blue Jay. — Now quite common the year
round. It came here when the Magpies left, at first in small numbers, but
now is to be seen everywhere.

100. Otocoris alpestris. Horned Lark. — Resident; breeds; very
abundant in some winters. This species seems to be represented here in
summer bv var. leucolcema ; for our winter birds are much brighter than

1SS5.] Agersborg on Birds of Southeastern Dakota. 283

those of summer, and the change of color is so sudden as to preclude its
being due to the spring moult.

101. Tyrannus carolinensis. Kingbird. — Abundant summer resident;
breeds.

102. Tyrannus verticalis. Western Kingbird. — Rare; breeds. Does
not seem to go so far away from its nesting-places as the Kingbird, and is
hardly ever found any distance out on the prairies. More common a hun¬
dred miles north of here, along the Big Sioux River, than at this place.

103. Sayornis fuscus. Phcebe. — Very rare ; breeds.

104. Empidonax minimus. Least Flycatcher. — Abundant; breeds.

105. Empidonax hammondi. Hammond’s Flycatcher. — Not com¬
mon ; breeds. Only two fully identified nests with eggs found.

106. Caprimulgus vociferus. Whip-poor-will. — Summer resident;
breeds.

107. Phalaenoptilus nuttalli. Poor-will. — More abundant than the
foregoing; breeds.

108. Chordeiles popetue. Nighthawk. — Abundant during the migra¬
tions, intermingling with var. henryi , which latter form is the only one
I have found breeding here. Its favorite nesting places seem to
be large isolated rocks or boulders, which here and there crop out on the
prairies.

109. Chaetura pelasgica. Chimney Swift. — Rare ; breeds.

no. Trochilus colubris. Ruby-throated Hummingbird. — Rather
common ; breeds.

in. Ceryle alcyon. Kingfisher. — Not very common; only a few
pairs seen each summer; breeds.

1 12. Coccygus erythrophthalmus. Black-billed Cuckoo. — Common;
breeds.

113. Coccygus americanus. Yellow-billed Cuckoo. — I have so
far failed to find this species here, although it is said by Professor Aughey
to be common a few miles south of here, in Cedar and Dixon Counties,
Nebraska.

1 14. Hylotomus pileatus. Pileated Woodpecker. — Probably only a
winter visitor in the heavy timber along the Missouri River. Have
never seen it later than the last week in April.

1 15. Picus villosus harrisi. Harris’s Woodpecker. — Common;
breeds. Much more abundant in winter than in summer.

1 16. Picus pubescens. Downy Woodpecker. — Same as the last.

117. Centurus carolinus. Red-bellied Woodpecker. — Rare summer
visitor; probably breeds.

1 18. Melanerpes erythrocephalus. Red-headed Woodpecker. —
Common summer resident; breeds. Have on several occasions noticed
its habit of storing grasshoppers in cracks and crevices for further use.
Necessity often compels this bird to build its nest under roofs or in any
dark hole it may find on the treeless prairie farms, a habit it has in com¬
mon with the next.

284

Agersborg on Birds of Southeastern Dakota.

I J«iy

1 19. Colaptes auratus. Golden-shafted Flicker. — This bird’s prin¬
cipal food seems to be ants’ eggs, which it adroitly extracts with its long
tongue from the holes in the ground. Var. hybridus is not rare, and last
spring I witnessed the courting of a true auratus and a hybridus ; their
nest and progeny I sought for in vain.

120. Aluco flammeus americanus. American Barn Owl. — Recorded
from the neighboring counties of Dakota and Dixon, in Nebraska, by
Professor Aughey, but has never been seen here by any one, so far as I can
ascertain.

121. Bubo virginianus. Great Horned Owl. — Common resident;
breeds. Var. subarcticus visits us nearly every winter; var. arcticus only
accidentally; two specimens shot.

122. Scops asio. Screech Owl. — -Resident; not common.

123. Asio americanus. Long-eared Owl.— Resident ; breeds; rare.

124. Asio accipitrinus. Short-eared Owl. — Common; resident;
breeds. The low bottom lands along the Missouri River seem specially
suited to the habits of this species. It breeds later than other Owls, with
the exception of the Burrowing Owl.

125. Strix nebulosa. Barred Owl. — Common winter resident. Sin¬
gle birds probably stay through the summer.

126. Nyctea scandiaca. Snowy Owl. — Winter resident; in snowy
winters often abundant.

127. Nyctale acadica. Saw-whet Owl. — Resident; very rare; breeds.

128. Speotyto cunicularia hypogaea. Burrowing Owl. — Common
resident; breeds. The full complement of eggs is, as a rule, seven;
occasionally as many as nine may be found. In the winter as many as
twenty of these birds may be found nestling together in one hole. They
are always at such times abundantly supplied with food. I have found at
one time forty-three mice and several Shore Larks scattered' along the run
to their common apartment. They forage in fine weather and retreat to
their dirty adobes when cold weather threatens.

129. Circus hudsonius. Marsh Hawk. — Common resident; breeds.
Of the many eggs taken I have found only four sets where they were
marked with faint blotches. Five seems to be the full complement; only
twice have I found six. These Hawks are most abundant in spring, when
scores follow the Duck hunters to catch and devour the wounded water
birds.

130. Nauclerus forficatus. Swallow-tailed Kite. — A few spend
the summer here. Have no doubt that they breed across the Missouri
River in Nebraska.

1 3 1 . Accipiter fuscus. Sharp-shinned Hawk. — Common summer
resident ; breeds.

132. Accipiter cooperi. Cooper’s Hawk. — Rare; probably breeds.

133. Astur atricapillus. American Goshawk. — Very rare in winter.

134. Hierofalco gyrfalco islandus. Iceland Gyrfalcon. — Acciden¬
tal. Shot one during a blizzard, October 21, 1880.

iSSs-J Agersborg on Birds of Southeastern Dakota. 28^

135. Hierofalco mexicanus polyagrus. Prairie Falcon. — Rare dur¬
ing spring migrations.

136. Falco peregrinus naevius. Duck Hawk. — Not very common;
only seen during the migrations.

137. .lEsalon columbarius. Pigeon Hawk. — Rare during migrations.

138. ./Esalon richardsoni. Richardson’s Merlin. — Not so rare as
the preceding; migrant.

139. Tinnunculus sparverius. Sparrow Hawk. — Common during
migrations. A few remain all summer and breed.

140. Buteo borealis. Red-tailed Hawk. — Rare resident; breeds.

141. Buteo swainsoni. Swainson’s Buzzard. — The most abundant
Hawk in this locality. Summer resident; breeds. Of the many eggs
taken but four have been unmarked ; full complement three, some¬
times two. In its melanotic form it is not uncommon here.

142. Archibuteo lagopus sancti-johannis. American Rough-legged
Hawk. — Common winter resident. Have seen it but once in summer,
and then nesting.

143. Pandion haliaetus carolinensis. Fish Hawk. — Rare during mi¬
grations. Found it breeding in a large elm tree overhanging the Vermil¬
ion River, May, 1883.

144. Aquila chrysaetus canadensis. Golden Eagle. — Rare resident ;
breeds.

145. Haliaetus leucocephalus. Bald Eagle. — Rare in summer;
breeds.

146. Cathartes aura. Turkey Buzzard. — Common in summer;
breeds. A few also seen occasionally nearly every winter.

147. Ectopistes migratorius. Passenger Pigeon. — Rare in summer ;
breeds.

148. Zenaidura carolinensis. Mourning Dove. — Abundant summer
resident; breeds.

149. Meleagris gallopavo americana. Wild Turkey. — Not very
common; resident; breeds.

150. Pedicecetes phasianellus columbianus. Sharp-tailed Grouse.
— Winter visitor. Occasionally seen during summer. Breeds. It is
getting rarer every year.

1 5 1 . Cupidonia cupido. Prairie Hen. — Resident ; abundant every¬
where ; breeds.

152. Ortyx virginiana. Quail. — Common resident ; breeds.

153. Squatarola helvetica. Black-bellied Plover. — Spring and
autumn migrant; not very common.

154. Charadrius dominicus. Golden Plover. — Migrates through
here in immense numbers; their stay in spring is somewhat protracted.

155. Oxyechus vociferus. Killdeer. — Common summer resident;
breeds. It is the first Wader to arrive.

156. A£gialitis semipalmata. Semipalmated Plover. — Common
migrant.

157. A£gialitis meloda circumcinta. Belted Piping Plover. — Mi-

286

Agersborg on Birds of Southeastern Dakota.

[J«iy

grant. Have seen it on the sandbars in the Missouri River late in June,
probably breeding, but have found no nests.

158. Recurvirostra americana. American Avocet. — Migrant. Know
of its breeding only once in this locality. A few pairs may be seen all
through summer. ■

1 <59. Steganopus wilsoni. Wilson’s Phalarope. — Common summer
resident; breeds. A year ago I found a colony breeding on a barren, al¬
kali-covered piece of land in the midst of the rich surrounding bottom
lands. The nests were all placed on small tussocks or elevations caused
by the dropping together of burnt ’grass, ashes, etc., and surrounded by a
few inches of water. Nests are also found here and there in the tall
growth of grass on the river bottoms.

160. Philohela minor. American Woodcock. — One of our late acqui¬
sitions, and is yet very rare. Breeds, and remains until very late.

161. Gallinago wilsoni. Wilson’s Snipe. — Very abundant in spring
and fall, affording excellent sport. They never leave till the marshes are
frozen.

162. Macrorhamphus griseus scolopaceus. Red-bellied Snipe. —
Abundant in spring and fall.

163. Micropalama himantopus. Stilt Sandpiper. — Rare during mi¬
grations, and always when found it has been associated with the Red-bellied
Snipe.

164. Ereunetes pusillus. Semipalmated Sandpiper. — Common mi¬
grant.

165. Actodromas minutilla. Least Sandpiper. — Common migrant.
Probably breeds, as I have seen it here during the whole summer.

166. Actodromas maculata. Pectoral Sandpiper. — Common migrant.

167. Actodromas fuscicollis. Bonaparte’s Sandpiper. — Rare migrant.

16S. Limosa fedoa. Marbled Godwit. — A common migrant ; a few

have been noticed here all summer, but none found breeding.

169. Limosa haemastica. Hudsonian Godwit. — An abundant mi¬
grant, especially in spring.

170. Symphemia semipalmata. Willet. — Rare migrant; probably

breeds here occasionally.

171. Totanus melanoleucus. Greater Yellow-legs. — Common
migrant.

172. Totanus flavipes. Yellow-legs. — Migrant; common.

173. Rhyacophilus solitarius. Solitary Sandpiper.— Very rare mi¬
grant.

174. Tringoides macularius. Spotted Sandpiper. — One of our rarest
Waders; only half a dozen pairs are usually noticed during the migrations.

171;. Bartramia longicauda. Field Plover. — Common summer resi¬
dent. Breeds everywhere on the higher prairies.

176. Tryngites rufescens. Buff-breasted Sandpiper. — Abundant
in spring, when it arrives in large flocks. Only very few are seen on the
return passage.

177. Numenius longirostris. Long-billed Curlew. — Formerly abun¬
dant; now rare summer resident; breeds.

1SS5.] Agersborg on Birds of Southeastern Dakota. 28^

178. Numenius hudsonicus. Hudsonian Curlew. — Common mi¬
grant.

179. Numenius borealis. Eskimo Curlew. — In spring often very
abundant.

180. Eudocimus albus. White Ibis. — Accidental; shot one of two
seen in a marsh, twelve miles north of the Missouri River in May, 1879.

181. Ardea herodias. Great Blue Heron. — Rare in summer; breeds.

182. Butorides virescens. Green Heron. — Not common ; breeds.

183. Nyctiardea grisea naevia. Night Heron. — Rare migrant; seen
only on the sandbars of the Missouri River.

1S4. Botaurus lentiginosus. American Bittern. — Common summer
resident. Breeds in old fields, but oftener in rushes and among the tall
growth of Spartina cynosuroides and Calamagrostis canadensis.

185. Grus americana. Whooping Crane. — Rare migrant.

186. Grus canadensis. Sandhill Crane. — Common migrant. A few
remain during the breeding season. I have never found its nest, but am
reliably informed of its breeding here.

187. Rallus elegans. Red-breasted Rail. — Rare summer resident.
Have never found its nest.

18S. Rallus virginianus. Virginia Rail. — Not common summer res¬
ident; breeds.

189. Porzana Carolina. Sora Rail. — Abundant summer resident;
breeds in large numbers on our bottom lands.

190. Fulica americana. American Coot. — Abundant summer resi¬
dent ; every marsh and slough is covered with Coots’ nests.

191. Olor buccinator. Trumpeter Swan. — Migrates through here in
small numbers in spring and fall.

192. Anser albifrons gambeli. American White-fronted Goose. —
Rare migrant. Always found associating with the Snow Geese.

193. Chen hyperboreus. Snow Goose. — Formerly abundant spring
and fall migrant; now rare. These Geese are easily tamed, and I have
successfully used them as decoys by depriving them of their power of flight
and keeping them with a picket-rope or loose in the yard. They are very
sensitive to cold, and their feet often freeze in winter unless they are kept
in warm quarters.

194. Chen caerulescens. Blue-winged Goose. — Rare. Occasionally
one is shot out of a flock of Snow Geese.

195. Bernicla canadensis. Canada Goose. — Common migrant. Like
the Snow Geese, it is becoming less common every year. In spring it ar¬
rives a week ahead of var. hutchinsi , and ten or twelve days earlier than
the Snow Goose. The same order of migration is also noticed sometimes
in the fall. It breeds here occasionally. The young have been hatched
under hens and become very tame. I have several times been shown nests
in trees, claimed by settlers to be the nests of Geese, but the ‘Geese’ have
invariably been found to be Cormorants ( Phalacrocorax dilopkus). Of
the few -nests of the Canada Goose found, the majority have been far awav
from any water out on the prairies ; but one nest was built among some

288

Agersborg on Birds of Southeastern Dakota.

[July

large boulders two feet from the water’s edge, on Lake Minnetonka, Minn.
May not many if not all of the nests seen in trees by other observers have
belonged to the Shag?

196. Bernicla brenta. Brant. — Only four secured ; probably accidental.

197. Anas boschas. Mallard. — Abundant in summer v breeds.

19S. Dafila acuta. Pintail. — Common migrant; a few remain to

breed.

199. Chaulelasmus streperus. Gadwall. — Common migrant.

200. Mareca americana. Baldpate. — Common migrant.

201. Nettion carolinensis. Green-winged Teal. — Abundant during
the migrations. In the spring of 1879 I found several nests on the head¬
waters of the Big Sioux River. Never found it breeding here, nor have I
seen the bird in summer.

202. Querquedula discors. Blue-winged Teal. — Common summer
resident ; breeds.

203. Spatula clypeata. Shoveller. — Common in summer; breeds.

204. Aix sponsa. Wood Duck. — Common summer resident. Nests
most often in willow clumps surrounded by water.

205. Fulix affinis. Little Blackhead. — Abundant during the migra¬
tions.

206. Fulix collaris. Ring-billed Duck. — Accidental. Shot one in
May, 1SS3, out of a flock of Redheads.

207. /Ethyia americana. Redhead. — Abundant migrant. A few re¬
main to breed here.

208. ./Ethyia vallisneria. Canvas-back. — Of late years has become
common during migrations.

209. Clangula albeola. Butterball. — An abundant migrant, arriving
very early in the spring.

210. Harelda glacialis. Long-tailed Duck. — Accidental; one male,
shot in the fall of 1S7S.

21 1. Erismatura rubida. Ruddy Duck. — A rare summer resident;
breeds.

212. Mergus merganser americanus. American Sheldrake. — Com¬
mon migrant.

213. Lophodytes cuculiatus. Hooded Sheldrake. — Summer resident ;
breeds.

214. Pelecanus erythrorhynchus. White Pelican. — Common during
migrations.

215. Phalacrocorax dilophus. Double-crested Cormorant. — For¬
merly abundant; now only seen during the migrations. Its disappearance
has been caused by the cutting down of the small elm and cottonwood
groves along the smaller rivers, where, in common with the Crows, it had
its breeding resorts. These two birds were often found nesting in the
same tree.

216. Larus argentatus smithsonianus. Herring Gull. — Very rare
during the migrations.

217. Larus delawarensis. Ring-billed Gull. — A not uncommon
migrant.

>SS5.]

Recent Literature.

289

218. Larus franklini. Franklin’s Gull. — Abundant during migration,
remaining here for nearly three weeks, feeding in the newly plowed fields.

219. Sterna forsteri. Forster’s Tern. — Common migrant; may yet
be found breeding here.

220. Sterna antillarum. Least Tern. — Summer resident; breeds.

221. Hydrochelidon surinamensis. Black Tern. — Common summer
resident; breeds.

222. Colymbus torquatus. Loon. — Very rare; only seen a few times
in the fall.

223. Dytes auritus. Horned Grebe. — Rare in spring and fall.

224. Dytes nigricollis californicus. Eared Grebe. — A not very com¬
mon summer resident; breeds.

225. Podilymbus podiceps. Thick-billed Grebe. — Common in
summer ; breeds.

[Addendum. — Passerina cyanea. Indigo Bunting. — Mr. Agersborg
writes me that this species is a not common summer resident ; breeds. —
W. W. C.]

RECENT LITERATURE.

Nests and Eggs of the Birds of Ohio. — Part XX of this magnificent
work, dated April, 18S5, contains plates lviii-lx. The first is a beautiful one
of the nest of the Wood Thrush, the others give forty-one figures of the
eggs of various species, without the nests. A notice accompanying states
that three more parts, or twenty-three in all, will complete the work, which it
is expected will he finished by next January, the remaining plates being
nearly all done. The whole volume will then contain 69 plates, figuring
about the same number of nests, the eggsof'127 species, with some 400 pages
of letter-press. We have often, in tracing the course of this publication,
spoken* of its great merit, and can recommend it without reserve. It forms
the proper continuation of ‘Audubon,’ and is the only work America has
produced of that character, excepting Mr. D. G. Elliot’s. — E. C.

Willard on Birds of Brown and Outagamie Counties, Wisconsin. f — This
paper “gives a systematic series of facts from which the generalizations of
Messrs. Baird arid Allen may be again applied.” The 210 species enu¬
merated are arranged in six classes, “based upon their migratory habits

* Bull. N. O. C., V, p. 39, VII, pp. 45, 112, VIII, pp. 112, 166.

t Migration and Distribution of North American Birds in Brown and Outagamie
Counties. By S. W. Willard. Dc Pore, Wis., 1883, 8 vo., pp. 20. (From Trans. Wis¬
consin Acad, of Sciences, Arts, and Letters.)

290

Recent Literature.

[July

while in these counties.” Class I (11 species) consists of ‘residents’;
Class II (135 species), of true migrants; Class III (13 species), of birds
that “are migratory, but whose movements through these counties seem
greatly influenced by changes of temperature” ; Class IV (20 species) , of spe¬
cies which “are migratory, but whose movements .... are influenced to a
great extent by immediate changes of temperature”; Class V (13 species),
which arrive from the North in fall, or appear irregularly during the
colder months; Class VI (18 species), of rare or presumably irregular
occurrence. The birds in Class II, known to breed (100 in number), are
indicated as breeding, and the manner of occurrence of those of Class VI is
indicated by proper annotations. Otherwise the lists are simply nominal.
A table gives the dates of arrival in spring in 1882 and 18S3 of nearly
one hundred species for both Brown and Outagamie Counties. There
are also notes on the food of 24 species, mostly from Prof. F. H. King’s
well-known work on ‘The Economic Relations of Wisconsin Birds,’ fol¬
lowed by two pages of remarks on the movements and geographical limita¬
tions of certain species. The paper gives evidence of careful observation,
and is a valuable contribution to our knowledge of the manner of occur¬
rence and movements of the birds of the area in question. — J. A. A.

Lawrence on New Species of American Birds.* — The three species here
described are (1) Contopus albicollis, (2) Chcetura yucatanica, and (3)
Engyptila gaumeri. All were recently collected by Mr. George F. Gau-
mer in Yucatan. — J. A. A.

Ridgway on New Species and Subspecies of American Birds, and on
the Nomenclature of other Species. — Numerous papers on birds have
been published by Mr. Ridgway in the ‘Proceedings of the U. S. Na¬
tional Museum’ (Vols. VI. VII and VIII, 1883-1SS5), which we have not
hitherto noticed, and to which we now call attention.

The first in order of appearance is a paper based on a fine collection of
Japanese birds, f made by Mr. P. L. Jouey, in which Mr. Ridgway calls
attention to the close resemblance of Ant !ms japonicus to A. ludovi-
cianns (auct., = A. pensylvanicus Lath.). They are so much alike, he says,
“that their distinctness might almost be questioned.” The four winter
specimens of A. japonicus, constituting his series, differ constantly from
A. ludovicianus only in the paler color of the feet. J Other species re-

* Descriptions of supposed New Species of Birds of the Families Tyrannidae, Cyp-
selidae and Columbidae. By George N. Lawrence. Ann. New York Acad. Sci., III.
No. 5, Jan. s, 1885, pp. 156-158.

f Notes on some Japanese Birds related to North American species. By Robert
Ridgway, Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., VI, pp. 368-371. (Published December 29, 1883.)

J It may be stated in this connection that Mr. Sharpe (Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., X,
1885, pp. 592-599) makes both A. ludovicianus (= pcnnsylvanicus) and A. japonicus
subspecies of A. spipoletta (= spinoletta auct.) .

>3Ss.J

Recent Literature.

29I

ferred to are Regulus japonicus, Anorthura fumigata, Certkia familiart's,
Ampelis pkccnicopterum, sEgiothus linaria , etc.

A paper on Costa Rican birds* * * § describes as new Ernpidonax virides-
cens, Pittasonia michlcri zeledoni, and Acanth id i ops bairdi (Zeledon
MS.), and contains redescriptions or remarks on other little-known spe¬
cies, as Carpodectes antonice (Zeledon, MS.), Vireo carmioli Bd.,
Pkcenicothraupis carmioli Lawr., Lanio melanopygius Ridg. , and Empi¬
donax atriceps Salv., etc. Mr. Ridgway, in Mr. Nutting’s paper on
Nicaraguan birds, also describes a number of new species, as duly noted
below in our notice of Mr. Nutting’s paper.

A species of Hummingbird given as Selasphorus Jiammula in the cat¬
alogue of birds obtained by Mr. Nutting on the Volcan de Irazu, Costa
Rica, is now identified as S. torridus Salvin.f

Among birds collected by Mr. C. L. McKay, at Bristol Bay, Alaska,
Mr. Ridgway finds a fine adult male of the European Velvet Scoter ( Me -
lanetta fused), J and gives the characters by which it maybe distinguished
from its American representative, M. velvetina.

A new Snow Bunting (. Plectrophenax hyperboreus Ridg.)§ is described
from Alaska, based on seven specimens, collected at Nushagak and St.
Michael’s, by Messrs. C. L. McKay and E. W. Nelson. It is easily dis¬
tinguished from P. nivalis by having much less black on the wings, etc.

In a paper on some birds collected by Messrs. J. E. Benedict and W.
Nye, at the Islands of St. Thomas, Trinidad, and Old Providence, and at
Curatjoa, Venezuela, and Sabanilla, New Grenada, || the following are
described as new. 1. Minins gilvus rostra tus, from Curaqoa ; 2. Den-
droeca rufopileata. Cura^oa ; 3. Icterus curasoensis , Curatjo ; 4- “ Zenaida
ruficauda , Bonap. ? or sp. nov. Zenaida vinaceo-rufa Ridgw. ?,” Cura-
Qoa; 5. Certhiola tricolor , Island of Old Providence, Caribbean Sea,
250 miles north of Aspinwall ; 6. Vireosylvia grandior. Old Providence;
7. Vireo approximans, Old Providence; 8. Elainea cincrescens , Old
Providence.

A new Field Sparrow ( Spizella xvortheni) ,*|f allied to 5. pusilla and A.
atrigularis, is described from Silver City, New Mexico.

A “resident local species or race” of Coot, differing from Fulica americana
in the form of its bill, and in the color and form of the frontal shield, is

* On Some Costa Rican Birds, with descriptions of several supposed New Species.
Ibid., pp. 410-415. (Published April 11,1884.)

t Note on Selasphorus torridus Salvin. Ibid., Vol. VII, p. 14. (Published June 3,
1884.)

f Melanetta fusca (Linn.) in Alaska. Ibid., p. 68. (Published June 11, r884.)

§ Description of a New Snow Bunting from Alaska. Ibid., pp. 68-70. (Pub¬
lished June 11, 1884.)

|| On a Collection of Birds made by Messrs. J. E. Benedict and W. Nye, of the
United States Fish Commission Steamer “Albatross." Ibid., pp. 171-180. (Pub¬
lished July 29, 1884.)

II Description of a New Species of Field Sparrow from New Mexico. Ibid., p.
259. (Published Aug. 22, 1884.)

292

Recent Literature.

L July

described under the name Fulica caribcea ,* from the Islands of Gua¬
deloupe and Saint John’s, Lesser Antilles* * §

A new race of the Red-shouldered Hawk, from Florida,! is named
Buteo lineatus alleni. It is smaller and paler than B. lineatus, with no
rufous on the upper parts, except on the lesser wing-coverts.

A most welcome paper treats of the Sparrows of the coast of California^
usually hitherto called Passerculus autkinus ( P . anthinus auct., not of
Bonaparte), but which Mr. Ridgway finds includes “two quite different
birds.” Bonaparte’s P. anthinus , based on a specimen from Kodiak,
Alaska, is referred as a pure synonym to P. alaudinus Bon., leaving the
California birds unnamed. One of these is the very dark colored form
confined to the salt marshes about San Francisco, which is here named,
Passerculus sandtuiehensis bryanti. The other, inhabiting similar lo¬
calities from Santa Barbara southward, and still darker and more
heavily spotted, is called Passerculus bcldingi.

Mr. Ridgway having had an opportunity of comparing his CEstrelata fish-
eri with a specimen of CE. defilippiana% (found labelled in Jules Verreaux’s
handwriting in the American Iviuseum of Natural History in New York),
finds the two species “very distinct,” and gives a detailed comparison of
them.

He also calls attention to geographical variations in Icterus euenllatus, ||
Yucatan specimens being more intensely colored than those from the
southern and eastern parts of Mexico, while examples from Arizona,
Southern and Lower California and Western Mexico are decidedly paler
in coloration than those from other parts of Mexico. The name cucul-
latus having been based on specimens from the table-lands of Southwestern
Mexico, Mr. Ridgway names the paler northern form Icterus euenllatus
nelsoni, and proposes for the Yucatan bird, in case “it should be deemed
desirable or necessary” to distinguish it, the name Icterus euenllatus ig-
neus.

The same author describes a new species of Contopus^ under the name
Contopus pileatus, based on a specimen in the American Museum of
Natural History, New York City, from an unknown locality.

He has also found that Anser leucoparcius of Brandt** “is an exact syn¬
onym of Anser kutchinsi Swain. & Rich.,” and that the leucopa reia ofre-

* Description of a New Species of Coot from the West Indies. Ibid., p. 358.
(Published Sept. 17, 1884.)

t Description of a New Race of the Red-shouldered Hawk, < from Florida. Ibid.,
pp. 514, 515. (Published Jan. 19, 1885.)

J On two hitherto unnamed Sparrows from the Coast of California. Ibid., pp.
516-518. (Published Jan. 19,1885.)

§ On CEstrelata fisheri and CF„ defilippiana. By Robert Ridgway. Proc. U. S. Nat.
Mus., VIII, pp. 17, 18. Published April 20, 1885.)

|| Icterus cucullatus, Swainson, and its Geographical Variations. Ibid., pp. 18, 19.
H Description of a new species of Contopus from Tropical America. Ibid., p. 21.

** Note on the Anser leucoparcius of Brandt. Ibid,, pp. 21, 22.

iSSs-1

Recent Literature.

2 93

cent authors requires a new name. Owing to the small size of this
form, he has named it “ Brcnta minima, sp. nov. Little Cackling
Goose” (— Bernicla canadensis , d. leucoparcia, 13. B. & R., Water Birds
N. Amer., I, 1SS4, pp. 456, 429).

A new Warbler ( Granatcllus sallcei boucardi subsp. nov.)* is de¬
scribed from Yucatan, and also two new birds from Costa Rica,f namely
Cyanocorax cucullatus , sp. nov., and Vireolanius pulchellus verticalis ,
subsp. nov.

Three Honey Creepers supposed to be new, namely, Ccrthiola finschi ,
sp. nov., C. sundevalli , “sp. nov. (?),” and C. sancti-thomce, sp. nov.,
are described, and a ‘Synopsis’ is given of the species of the genus
Ccrthiola, \ of which 19 are recognized, and of which are given the prin¬
ciple references and synonyms.

Catkartes urubitinga Pelzeln is identified with C. burrovianus Cassin,
by comparison of typical specimens of the former with Cassin’s type of
C. burrovianus .% Also Onyckotes gruberi Ridg. is found to be the
Paudion solitarius of Cassin, || which now becomes O solitarius (Cass.).
Its habitat proves to be the Sandwich Islands, thus removing the
species from the list of North American birds. Mr. Ridgway gives
measurements of the five specimens known to him to be extant, includ¬
ing Cassin's type. There is still another example in the Museum of
Comparative Zoology, which, having been submitted to Mr. Ridgway
since the publication of his paper, he pronounces to be almost precisely
like Cassin’s type — an adult in the light phase of plumage. — J. A. A.

Nutting on Nicaraguan Birds. The collection forming the basis of the
present paper^f was made by Mr. Nutting at four localities, so chosen as to
form a chain of stations extending across the greater part of Nicaragua,
from east to west. The first of these is San Juan del Sur, on the Pacific
coast, where 70 species were obtained, of which 48 are recorded “for the
first time from Nicaragua.” The second is SucuyA, 22 miles northwest of
San Juan del Sur. Here 88 species were collected. The third is the Island
of Ometepe, in Lake Nicaragua, where 50 species were obtained. The
fourth is Los Sabalos, on the Rio San Juan del Norte, about 30 miles from
Lake Nicaragua. This locality furnished 78 species, including five new.
Most of the species were obtained at more than one of these localities —
some at all — -while about half seem not to have been previously reported

* Description of a New Warbler from Yucatan. Ibul., p. 23.
t Description of two New Birds from Costa Rica. Ibid., pp. 23, 24.
t Description of three supposed new Honey Creepers from the Lesser Antilles,
with a Synopsis of the Species of the Genus Certhiola. Ibid., pp. 25-30.

) On Cathartes burrovianus, Cassin, and C. urubitinga, Pelzeln. Ibid., pp. 34-36.

|| On Onychotes gruberi. Ibid., pp. 36-38.

11 On a Collection of Birds from Nicaragua. By Charles C. Nutting. Edited by R.
Ridgway. Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., VI, pp. 372-410. (Published Dec. 29-April n, 1884.)

294

Recent Literature.

[ July

from Nicaragua, although in many cases their presence there was to be in¬
ferred from their known general range. Brief field notes are given by the
author, while critical remarks are here and there added b_v the editor, who is
also responsible for the identifications and nomenclature adopted. Mr. Ridg¬
way’s critical remarks include descriptions of four species supposed to be
new, as follows : Oryzoborus nuttingi , Contopus dcpressirostris , Cymbi-
l an ins lineatus fascia tus , and Porzana leucogastra , all from Los Sabalos.
Geothlypis bairdi , also from the same locality, is described as new by
Mr. Nutting. — J. A. A.

Stejneger on the Genus Cepphus.* — This paper consists of four parts :
‘I. Cepphus motzfeldi (Benicken)’ pp. 210-216; ‘II. On the White-winged
Species of the Genus Cepphus'' (pp. 216-225) ? ‘HI- lias Cepphus carbo
ever been obtained within the faunal limits of North America?’ (pp. 225-
227) ; ‘ IV. Synopsis of the Species of the Genus Cepphus ’ (pp. 227-229).
The species recognized are 1. C. mandtii (Licht.) Newt. ; 2. C. grylle
(Linn.) Flern. ; 3, C. columba Pall. ; 4. C. carbo Pall. ; 5. C. motzfieldi
(Benick.) Stejn. The status of the last is not considered as satisfactorily
settled, but it is thought to be a black-winged Guillemot of the North At¬
lantic which has been mostly overlooked or regarded as a melanotic phase
of the Common Guillemot. The distinguishing characters of C. mandti ,
as compared with C. grylle, are dwelt upon at length, together with their
geographical distribution. The alleged occurrence of C. carbo in North
America is discredited. A pretty full citation of the synonymy and biblio¬
graphical references of the species concludes the paper. — J. A. A.

Ridgway on New Species of Birds from Cozumel Island, Yucatan. — In
January, 1SS5, the U. S. Fish Comniission Steamer 'Albatross’ touched
at Cozuynel Island, and the week spent there was turned to good account
in behalf of ornithology, the opportunity afforded being improved by Mr.
J. E. Benedict, Dr. T. II. Bean, and Mr. Thomas Lee in forming a large
collection of bird skins. Among these Mr. Ridgway has recognized 15
species and subspecies new to science. He has promptly published prelim¬
inary descriptions of them,f and promises a fuller account later. At about
the same time a collection of Cozumel birds, numbering 27 species, was
received by Mr. Salvin. who has given an account of them in the April
number of ‘ The Ibis’ (pp. 185-194, pi. v). It has therefore happened that
some of Mr. Ridgway’s species were redescribed and renamed by Mr. Sal¬
vin before Mr. Ridgway’s paper reached him. Mr. Ridgway’s species, with
the corresponding identifications of Mr. Salvin. are as follows: (1)
Harporhynchus guttatus { — II. melanostoma Salv. sp. n.) ; (2) Trog-

* Remarks on the Species of the Genus Cepphus. By Leonhard Stejneger. Proc.
U. S. Nat. Mus., VII, pp. 210-229, fig. 1-6. (Published Aug. 5, 1884.)

t Description of some New Species of Birds from Cozumel Island, Yucatan. By
Robert Ridgway. Proc. Biolog. Soc. Washington, III, 1884-85. (Extras printed Feb-
26, 1885.)

»ss3.]

Recent Literature.

295

lodytes beam'; (3) Dendroica petechia rnfivertex ; (4) Vircosylvia cin-
crea (= Vireo magistcr Salv.) ; (5) Virco bairdi; (6) Cy clor his insularis;
(7) Spin (fall's benedicti (=S. exsul Salv. sp. n., 1. c., pi v) ; (8) Eucfhia
olivacea intermedia; (9) Centuries led (— C. dubius Salv.); (10) Alt Ha
coznmelce (— Atilla , sp. ? Salv.); (11) Lamporis thalassinus; (1 2)
Chlorostilbon forpicatiis ( = C. caniveti Salv.) ; (13) Empidonax gracilis ;
(14) Myiarckus platyrhynckus; (15) Cardinalis saturatus. — J. A. A.

Cory’s Birds of Haiti and San Domingo. — Part I of Mr. Cory’s ‘Birds of
Haiti and San Domingo,’ published in March, 1S84, was noticed in ‘The
Auk’ for July last (Vol. I, p. 285), since which time three additional parts
have been issued, completing the work. * The general character of the
work is indicated in the notice already cited, where it is stated that it
“ promises to be a very important contribution to our knowledge of the
birds of a hitherto very imperfectly known region.” This promise is fully
realized, and we heartily' congratulate the author on the prompt comple¬
tion ofhis very' creditable undertaking. Full length figures are given of
17 species, and the heads are figured of 23 other species. A plate is also
given of the nest and eggs of Mimocickla ardesiaca , and also a map of
the Island. About no species are treated, of which 32 are peculiar to
San Domingo. In the introduction (p. 16) attention is called to the
change of the generic name Ligea , as originally published, to Microligea
(see Auk, I, p. 290). The author also calls attention, in the same con¬
nection'. to the fact that some of the San Domingo forms of species which
have a wide extralimital range differ from their representatives obtained
elsewhere, as is especially' seen in the genera Speotyfo, Corvus, Ortyx,
etc., but he abstains from naming them as new, preferring “ to err in
being rather too conservative than otherwise.” — J. A. A.

Minor Ornithological Publications.- — ‘Forest and Stream,’ Vols. XXII
and XXIII, Jan. 31, 1884-Jan. 15, 1885, contains, besides reprints, the follow¬
ing (Nos. 846-963) : —

S46. The Ramble of a Naturalist. By Judge John G. Henderson.
Forest and Stream , Vol. XXII, Jan. 31, pp. 6, 7.— Chiefly ornithological
notes of more or less interest.

847. An Albino [Green-winged] Teal. By' W. N. B[yers]. Ibid.,
P- 7-

848. California Quail in Confinement. By Nemo (of Texas). Ibid.,

p. 7.

849. A fine Rough-leg. Byr W. A. Stearns. Ibid., p. 7. — A black ex¬
ample of A’rckibuteo lagopus sancti-johannis, taken at Northampton,
Mass.

* The Birds of Haiti and San Domingo. By Charles B. Cory . Estes and

Lauriat, Boston, U. S. A., 1885. yto, pp. 1-198.pl!. 23.— Pt. 1, pp. 17-56, pll. 6, March,
1884 ; Pt. 2, pp. 57-112, f>ll. 6, July, 1884; Pt. 3, pp. 113-160, pll. 6, Dec., 1884 ; Pt. 4, pp.
i-6, 160-198, pll. 5, March, 1885.

296

Recent Literature.

[July

850. The Least Bittern. By T. B. A. Ibid., Feb. 7, p. 25. — Its abun*
dance in New Jersey.

851. Picoides arcticus in New England. By Louis A. Zerega. Ibid.,
p. 25.

852. Birds and Electric Lights. By H. B. Chubb. Ibid., p. 26. —
List of species picked up at the foot of electric light masts in Cincin¬
nati, O.

853. The Egret [in New Jersey]. By T. B. A. Ibid., Feb. 14, p. 44.

854. The Corn Crake [Cm fratensis ] in New York. By Austin F.
Park. Ibid., p. 44. — Taken opposite Troy, Nov. 6, 1S83.

855. Bird Migration. By W. W. Cooke. Ibid., p. 46. — A call for cor¬
respondents in the Mississippi Valley District.

856. Screech Owls in a Chimney. By J. L. D[avidson], Ibid., p. 46.

S57. The English Sparrow. By Dr. J. B. Holder. Ibid.., Feb. 21, p.

66. — Circular of the A. O. U. Committee on the status of this bird in
America.

858. Protect the Small Birds. By Merlin. Ibid., Feb. ?8, p. 83. —
Against the ‘mania’ “for possession of immense series of birds’ eggs and
skins.”

859. Winter Bird Notes. Ibid., p. 83. — Short notes on various species
from nine contributors.

560. Some Arizona Quails. By Adios. Ibid., March 6, p. 103.

561. [ Winter ] Bird Notes. Ibid., p. 103. — Short notes from seven

contributors. *

862. Ez>e?iing Grosbeak in Iowa. By Violet S. Williams. Ibid., p.
104. — A small flock observed at Coralville, Feb. Sand following days,
1SS4.

563. Ortyx Virginianus in Arizona. Ibid., p. 104. — Short extract from
Tucson ‘Weekly Citizen.’

564. Ortyx Virginianus not in Arizona. By Robert Ridgway. Ibid.,
March 13, p. 124. — Relates to the preceding (No. 863).

S6v [ Winter ] Bird Notes. Ibid., p. 124. — Three short notes from dif¬
ferent contributors, one recording a Woodcock at Glenville, Conn., on
Feb. 22, 1884.

866. [ Winter] Bird Notes. Ibid., March 20, p. 144. — One and a half
columns, from various contributors, but chiefly from J. L. D[avidson] of
Lockport, N. Y.

867. Crows. By Violet S. Williams. Ibid., p. 144. — Novel mode of
capture.

565. Early Breeding of the Horned Lark. By Bar Lock. Ibid., p.
145. — At Virgil, N. Y. — a young bird taken March 13.

869. Bird Notes. Ibid., March 27, p. 165. — March arrivals reported
by three observers.

870. Preservation of Song Birds. Ibid., April 3, p. 183. — Two articles
— the longer one by ‘Sialia,’ in defence of collecting for scientific purposes.

S71. Stearns's Natural History of Labrador. By C. Hart Merriam,
M. D. Ibid. , p. 1S4. — A criticism of Mr. Stearns’s ‘Notes on the Natural

Recent Literature.

1SS5.]

297

History of Labrador’ in Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., 1883, PP- III'I37 (See also
Auk, I, p. 284.)

S72. An Interesting Relic. By P. Bryson Wood, M. D. Ibid., p. 184.

— An arrow-head (figured) from the breast of a Swan.

873. Bird Notes. Ibid., p. 1S5. — Short notes of early arrivals from
nine contributors.

874. Bird Notes. Ibid., April 10, p. 203.— ■ Short notes from nine
contributors.

875. Protecting Song Birds. By J. C. Cahoon. Ibid., p. 203. — In
defence of collecting for scientific purposes. Under the same heading is
a protest by ‘H. W. C.’ against indiscriminate egg-collecting by boys, ‘as
a business,’ but in favor of collecting for ‘scientific purposes.’

876. Shrikes' Catch Mice when Thrown iti the Air. By J. L. D[avid-
son]. Ibid., p. 203.

877. Stearns's Natural History of Labrador. By W. A. Stearns.
Ibid., April 17, pp. 223, 224. — A reply to Dr. Merriam’s criticisms (see
above, No. 871).

S78. Southern Limit of Quail and Grouse. By Forked Deer. Ibid.,
p. 224.

879. A Quail New to the United States Fauna. By Geo. Bird Grin¬
ned. Ibid., April 24, p. 243. — Ortyx graysoni, “common in Southern
Arizona.” (See above, Nos. 860, 863, 864, which relate to this species.)

880. Southern limit of Quail and Grouse. By Robert Ridgway.
Ibid., p. 243. — Relates to No. 878, in which reference is made to the sup¬
posed occurrence of Ortyx virginiana and Bonasa umbella in Costa Rica.

8S1. Congratulations and Speculations. By' B. Horsford. Ibid., pp.
244, 245. — In part ornithological.

882. Application of Trinomial Nomenclature to Zoology. By Dr.
Elliott Coues. Ibid., Mayr 1, p. 264. — A paper on this subject “Spoken
before the National Academy of Sciences at the stated session held in
Washington, April 15-18, 1884, and stenographically reported . . . .”

883. Bird Arrivals at Cleveland , Ohio. By Sri [= S. R. Ingersoll].
Ibid., p. 265. — Observations extending from Feb. 19 to April 23, 1881.

884. Upland Plover in Minnesota. By W. L. Tiffany. Ibid., May 8,
pp. 2S4-2S5. — Detailed and interesting account of its habits.

8S5. The Arrow-Head in the Swan. By E. W. Nelson. Ibid., p. 285.

— The arrow-head (see above, No. 872) identified with those in use by'
Indians on the Upper Yukon.

886. The Catbird. ( Mimus Carolincnsis. ) By Wilmot. Ibid., May
15, p. 302. — On its habits.

S87. Crossbills in New Jersey. By C. B. Riker. Ibid., p. 302.

888. Decrease of Song Birds. Ibid., p. 303. — Two notes, relating re¬
spectively to Boston and Philadelphia.

8S9. Corn Crake ( Crex pratensis) . By' J. Matthew Jones. Ibid., p.
303. — Relates to a specimen taken in 1859 ’n Newfoundland, and another
in the Bermudas in 1847.

890. Chimney Swallows. By' A. B. F. Ibid., p. 303.

Recent Literature.

[July

298

891. The Coucsian Period. By R. W. Shufeldt, Capt. Med. Corps U.
S. A., etc. Ibid., May 22, p. 323. (Continued in following issues.) — A
reprint of the ‘Historical Review’ in Dr. Coues’s ‘Key,’ Second Edition,
prefaced by a letter by Dr. Shufeldt, proposing an additional ‘Period,’ to
be called the ‘Couesian Period,’ in recognition of Dr. Coues’s work on
North American ornithology.

592. The Brown Thrush. ( Harporhynchus Rufus. ) By Wilmot.

pp. 323, 324. — On its habits.

593. Bird Migration. By J. L Davidson. Ibid., p.324. — Record for
Lockport, N. Y., from April 6 to 30, 1SS4.

894. The Baltimore Oriole. ( Icterus Galbula.) By Wilmot. Ibid.,
May 29, pp. 342, 343. — On its habits.

S95. The Willet [ Sy/nf hernia semipalmata ] Breeding in Delaware
Bay. By Cbas. E. Bellows, Ph.G. Ibid., June 5, p. 364.

896. The Coucsian Period? By Amicus Socrates, amicus Plato, magis
arnica veritas. Ibid., June 19, p. 3S4. — The recognition of a ‘Couesian
Period’ deemed premature.

S97. Bird Notes. Ibid., p. 3S4. — Three articles, giving reports of
arrivals for May, 1SS4 ; viz., (1) Onondaga, N. Y. , by G. Albert Knapp ; (2)
Spencerport, N. Y. , by L. F. Spencer; (3) Lockport, N. Y., by J. L.
D[avidson].

898. A Bit of a Sermon. By Onondaga. Ibid., June 19, p. 402. —
Breeding of Woodcock in New York in July, etc.

S99. North American Birds. Editorial. Ibid. , p. 403. — Review of the
first volume of the ‘Water Birds of North America’ by Baird, Brewer, and
Ridgway.

900. Seasons and Birds of the Prairie. By H. S. Williams, M. D.
Ibid., pp. 403, 404. — An interesting account of the characteristic birds of
the prairies.

901. The Couesian Period. By R. W. Shufeldt. Ibid., p. 404. — Brief
reply to ‘Amicus Socrates,’ etc. (See above, No. 896.)

902. '■‘'The Couesian Period?" By Amicus Socrates, amicus Plato,
magis arnica veritas. Ibid., June 26, p. 423.— Rejoinder to the last-cited
paper (No. 901).

903. Birds and the Electric Light. Ibid., p.424. — Extract from the
Winona (Minn.) ‘Republican’ of May 23, 1SS4, giving account of the de¬
struction of large numbers of birds, killed by striking against electric
lights during two nights. May 20 and 21, at Winona, Minn.

904. Utility of the Crow. By C. E. B. Ibid., p. 424.

905. Owl and Steel Trap. By A. H. G. Ibid., p. 424. — Bubo virgin-
ianus with a steel trap attached to its claws.

906. Painted Finch on Long Island. By A. L Townsend. Ibid.,
p. 424.

907. The Use of Field Glasses [in Ornithological Studies], By Bitter¬
sweet. Ibid., July 3, p. 443.

90S. Under Water. By W. D. Z. Ibid., p. 444. — Tringoidcs macu-
larins swimming under water.

1 SSs - ]

Recent Literature.

299

909. Rose-breasted Grosbeaks Abundant [at Taunton , Mass. ] . By

J. C. Cahoon. Ibid ., p. 444.

910. Orioles in Massachusetts. By C. I. Goodale. Ibid., p. 444- — Not
decreasing in numbers, etc.

91 1. Birds of the Gulf of St. Lawrence. Editorial. Ibid., July 10,
p. 465. — Review of Mr. William Brewster’s ‘ Notes on Birds Observed
during a Summer Cruise in the Gulf of St. Lawrence.’ (See also Auk, I,
P- 379-)

912. Destruction of Sea fowl. Editorial. Ibid., July 10, p. 461. — Ex¬
tracts relating to the subject from Mr. Brewster’s paper (see last title), and
comment thereon.

913. Notes on [ Massachusetts ] Shore Birds. By Raymond Lee New¬
comb. Ibid., July 17, pp. 483, 484. — Valuable notes on the Grallre.

914. How Young Birds Are fed. By O. Widmann. Ibid., p. 484. —
Minute observations on the feeding of young Purple Martins ( Progne
subis ) by their parents.

915. The Arizona Quail. By Adios. Ibid., p. 4S4. — An offer to send
living Arizona Quail to parties in the East desiring to introduce them
there.

916. The Oak Woods Sparrow ( Puccea (Estiva /is illinoensis) . By
G. H. Ragsdale. Ibid., p. 4S4. — As observed near Gainesville, Texas.

917. A Visit to a Heronry. By Curtis. Ibid. , July 24, p. 506. — Lo¬
cality, Massachusetts; species, ‘ Nyctiardea gardeni.'

'91S. Domesticating Quail. By J. B. B. Ibid., p. 506. — Experiments
with Ortyx virginiana .

919. Strange Antics of an Owl. By C. Hart Merriam, M. D. Ibid.,
P- 507-

920. The Humming Bird ( Trochilus Colnbris). By Wilmot. Ibid.,
Vol. XXIII, July 31, p. 3. — Its nesting habits.

921. The Sacrifice of Song Birds [for Millinery Purposes]. Editorial.
Ibid., Aug. 7, p. 21.

922. The Destruction of Small Birds. Editorial- Ibid., p. 24. — Sta¬
tistics relating to the appalling magnitude of the millinery trade in bird-
skins.

923. Fruit-eating Birds. By Byrne. Ibid., p. 24. — Arraignment of
the Robin and Catbird.

924. Grouse of the Pacific Slope. By Mesatchie. Ibid., p. 24. —
Species of, and their distribution.

925. Rare Birds on Long Island. By Geo. Bird Grinnell. Ibid., p.
24. — Porzana jamaicensis, Rhynchops nigra, Hcrodtas alba egretta,
and Garzctta candidissima.

926. Our Birds in their Haunts. Editorial. Ibid., Aug. 14, pp. 44,
45. — Review of the work.

927. The Catbird. By Wilmot. Ibid., p. 45. — Its defence, against
‘ Byrne.’ (See above, No. 923)

928. The Greene Smith Ornithological Collection. Editorial. Ibid.,
P- 45-

3°o

Recent Literature.

IJuiy

930. The Crow. Bj R. S. Tarr. Ibid., Aug. 21, p. 63. — As observed
at Gloucester, Mass.

931. California [Mountain] Quail in Nebraska. Ibid., p. 63. — Extract
from the Sacramento ‘Capital.’ Notice of their successful introduction.

932. Fruit-eating Birds. By Picket. Ibid., Aug. 28, p. 83. — Statisti¬
cal table showing contents of stomachs of various species.

933- Our Birds in their Haunts.” By J. H. Langille. Ibid., pp. 83,
84. — The author’s reply to his critic. (See above, No. 926.)

934. The Robin as a Game Bird. By R. T. Ibid., Sept. 4, p. 105.

935. Fruit-eating Birds. Ibid., p. 105. — Two articles — (1) by
‘ Wilmot’ against 1 Picket,’ and (2) by Wakeman Holberton in defence of
the Catbird.

936. Small Bird Destruction. By Special. Ibid., Sept. 11, p. 123. —
40,000 Tern skins, taken in Massachusetts, sent during the past year to
Liverpool for millinery purposes ! Comment also on the destruction of
Woodpeckers and other small birds, which fall victims to the ‘gunning
craze.’

937. A Humming Bird Combat. By Chas. C. Truesdell, Jr. Ibid.,
Sept. 18, p. 143.

938. The Birds Again. By Picket. Ibid., pp. 143, 144. — Includes
an article by T. FI. Hoskins, M. D., from the New York ‘Examiner,’
against fruit-eating birds, and also covers a note by ‘ Mergus’ in reply to
‘ Wilmot.’

939. Cardinal Rcdbird on Long Island. By Robert B. Lawrence.
Ibid., p. 144. — A male, taken Sept. 7, 1884.

940. Robins and Strawberries. By Nessmuk. Ibid., Sept, 25, p. 164.
— Verdict heavily against the Robin.

941. Domesticating Quail. By J. B. B. Ibid., p. 164. — Success¬
ful attempts detailed.

942. The Catbird. By Wilmot. Ibid., p. 165. — In its defence. In¬
cidentally Passer domesticus is arraigned as ‘ simply immense’ on grapes,
exceeding in its destruction of this fruit ‘ anything that wears feathers.’

943. Where the [Purple] Martins Roost. By O. Widmann. Ibid.,
Oct. 2, p. 183. — Many thousands, late in August, roost in the willows
below St. Louis, Mo. The article forms a very interesting chapter in this
bird’s history, hitherto unwritten.

944. Quail [Breeding] in Confinement. Ibid., p. 184. — Extract from
Hagerstown, Md., ‘ News,’ detailing further successful attempts at rearing
Quail in captivity.

945. American Ornithologists' Union. R eport of Proceedings [of Sec¬
ond Congress]. Ibid., Oct 5 and 16, pp. 204, 205, 223, 224.

946. Note on the Ruffed Grouse. By Manly Hardy. Ibid., p. 208. —
A specimen with twenty tail-feathers.

947. “ Key to North American Birds.” Editorial. Ibid., Oct. 23, p.
28S. — Review of the work.

948. Arizona Quail in Confinement. By J. B. B. Ibid., Oct. 30, p.

'88S-]

Recent Literature.

3OT

264. — Two pairs of Lophortyx gambeli received by the writer at Toledo,
Ohio.

929. Nesting of the Yellow-bellied Woodpecker in Northern New
York. By S. I. Ingersoll. Ibid., p. 45.

949. Swainson’s Warbler Rediscovered ( He l m in t her us Swainsotii).
By Elliott Coues. Ibid., Nov. 6, pp. 285, 286. — Account of its habits,
based on notes supplied by Arthur T. Wayne, as observed near Charles¬
ton, S. C.

950. Domesticating Wildfowl. By Fred Mather. Ibid., Nov. 6 and
Dec. 4, pp. 286, 366. — Wood Duck, Teal, Widgeon, Pintail, etc.

951. Black Brant [/» Washington Territory ]. By Alki. Ibid., Nov.
l3> P- 304-

952. Bird [. Nuthatch] in a Mouse Trap. By A. H. G. Ibid., Nov. 37,
P- 344-

953. Notes on the Capture of Sea Birds. By Capt. J. W. Collins.
Ibid., Dec. 4 and 11, pp. 364-366, 383-385. — Reprinted from Ann. Rep.
Comm. Fish and Fisheries, 1882. (For notice of the original paper see
Auk, I, p. 380.)

954. Acclimation of Foreign Birds [in the United States]. By J. S.
Prout. Ibid. , p. 364. — In view of the unsuccessful attempts with the
European Quail, Skylark, etc., it is suggested that such birds should be
turned out in the South ( Florida, Louisiana, Mexico) instead of the
North.

955. Bird Notes. Ibid. , Dec. n, p. 385. Brief notes from three con¬
tributors, the most important item being the record of a Barn Owl captured
at Logan, O.

956. The Migratory Quail. By G. M. S. Ibid., p. 3S5. — Birds
turned out near Springfield, Mass., ‘ two years ago,’ have reared young
and are still there, and there ‘to stay.’

957. Sharp-Tailed and Sea-side Finches. By Everett Smith. Ibid.,
Dec. 18, p. 405. — The Sharp-tailed stated to be found as far north as the
Tantremar marshes, near the head of the Bay of Fundy. The Seaside is
added to the fauna of Maine on the basis of its recent capture at Shark
Island.

958. Quail in Cotifnement. By Tenny & Woodward. Ibid., Dec.
25, p. 426. — A brood of five and another of seventeen “hatched last
.season are still living and in fine condition.”

959. Bird Migration in the Mississippi Valley. Winter Birds of
Southern Illinois. By W. W. Oooke [= Cooke]. Ibid., Jan. 1, 8, 1885,
pp. 444,445, 463, 464. — A formal list of the species, with brief commen¬
tary.

960. Perhaps Nest atid Eggs of Regulus Satrapa. By W. T. Emmet.
Ibid., Jan. 1, 1885, p. 445. — Found near Lennoxville, Can., in spring of
1879, and doubtless correctly assigned.

961. North American Birds. Water Birds, Vol. II. Editorial.
Ibid., Jan. 8, p. 463. — Notice of the work.

302

Recent Literature.

[J“iy

962. The Birds of Michigan. By Dr. Morris Gibbs. Ibid . , Jan. 15,
pp. 483, 484. (Continued in following Nos.)

963. A Mule Bird. By W. E. D. Scott. Ibid., Jan. 15, p. 4S4. — A
cross between Colaftes mexicanus and C. chrysoides. (Originally pub-
ished in the ‘Arizona Daily Star,’ Tucson, De.c. 16, 1884.) — J. A. A.

Publications Received. — Aldrich, Charles. The Merciless War upon the
Birds. (Trans. Iowa State Hort. Soc., 1S84, pp. 146-152.)

Brown, J. A. Harvie. The Migration of Birds. A Paper read to the
Stirling Nat. Hist, and Archaeol. Soc., 24th March, 1885. Svo., pp. 24.

Cory, C. B. (1) The Birds of Haiti and San Domingo, Part IV, Boston,
1885, 4to, pp. 1-6, 161-198, pit. 5. (2) A List of the Birds of the West
Indies. Boston, 1885, 4to, pp. 34. »

Dubois, Alph. (1) Revue critique des Oiseaux de la fan.ille des
Bucerotides. (Bull, du Mus. Roy. d’Hist. Nat. de Belgique, III, 1884, pp.
187-222, pi 1. x, xi). (2) Remarques sur les Alouettes du genre Oto.
corys. ( Ibid . , pp. 223-230.) (3) Revue des Oiseaux observes en Belgique-
(Ibid., IV, 1885, pp. 3-24.)

Foster, L. S., Manual i Guia para el uso del Encargado del Faro en sus
Observaciones Ornitologicas. New York, 1884, sm. 462, pp. 16.

Henke, K. G. Ueber selten vorkommende Vogel. (Zeitsch. fur die
gesam. Orn., 1885, pp. 47-49, pH- iii, iv.)

Meyer, A. B. Notornis hochstetteri Meyer. (Zeitsch. fiir die gesam.
Orn., 18S5, pp. 45, 46, pk k)

Reichenow, Anton, and Herman Shalow. Compendium der neu be-
schriebenen Gattungen und Arten. XII Folge. Serie VII. (Journ. fiir
Orn., Jahr. 1S84, pp. 381-436.)

Shalow, Herman. (1) Zur Ornis der Mark Brandenburg. Ein dritter
Beitrag. (Zeitsch. fiir die gesam. Orn., 1SS5, pp. 1-44.) (2) Richard
Bohm. (Zeitsch. fiir Orn. u. proc. Gefliig., Jahr. 1885, No. 6.)

American Field, XXIII, 1885, Nos. 12-24.

American Naturalist, May, June, July, 1885.

Anzeiger, Zoologischer, Nos. 185-196, 1885.

Bulletin Brookville (Ind.) Soc. Nat. Hist., No. 1, 1885.

Canadian Science Monthly, III, Feb., March, 1885.

Exchanger and Collector, a Monthly Magazine, devoted to the interests
of Exchangers and Collectors, I, No. 3, Canajoharie, N. Y., March, 1SS5.

Forest and Stream, XXIV, Nos. 8-20, 1SS5.

Journal Cincinnati Soc. Nat. Hist., VIII, No. 1, April, 1S85.

Kansas City Review of Science and Industry, VIII, No. 12, April, 1885.

Museum. The, I, Nos. 1, 2, Philadelphia, Majq June, 1S85.

Naturalist, The, A Journ. of Nat. Hist, for the North of England, Nos.

1 17-1 19, April, May, June, 1885.

Ornithologist and Oologist, X, Nos. 5-7, April-June, 1885.

Our Birds, I, No. 1, Holyoke. Mass., May, 1885.

Proceedings Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, 1885, Part 1.

Proceedings, U. S. Nat. Mus., VII, pp. 625-661; VIII, 1885, Nos. 1-11.

1 SS5 - ]

General Notes.

3°3

Random Notes on Natural History, II, 1885, Nos. 4-6.

Sitzungs Protokolle des Ersten internationalen Ornithologen-Con-
gresses. Vienna, 1884, 4to.

Tidings from Nature, I, Nos. 7-10, March-June, 1S85.

Young Oologist, II, No. 1, Albion, N. Y., May, June, 1885.

Young Ornithologist, I, Nos. 1, 2, Boston, April, May, 1S85.

Western Oologist, I, No. 1, Milwaukee, May, 1885.

Zeitschrift fur die gesammte Ornithologie, II, Heft 1, 1SS5.

Zoologist, April, May, June, 1885.

GENERAL NOTES.

Abnormal Coloration in a Caged Robin. — In an account of an abnor¬
mally colored Robin given in ‘The Auk’ for January, 1884, p. 90, mention
was made of the softness of the bones. Such of these as were not neces¬
sary to the proper make-up of the skin were submitted to a careful chemical
analysis under the direction of Prof. W. O. Atwater, of Wesleyan Univer¬
sity, who found them to contain only about 25 per cent of mineral matter,
or about one-third the amount usually found in the bones of normal,
healthy birds. — W. B. Barrows, Middletown, Conn.

Another Black Robin. — Some time ago I heard of a second ‘ Black
Robin,’ and tried to find out the facts with regard to it, but failed to
get anything definite until to-day, when, by mere chance, I met the
owner of the abnormal bird and obtained from him the following facts
about it. The bird was taken from the nest here in Middletown while in
the ordinary first plumage, and for “two or three years” was like any other
caged Robin. The owner, Mr. H. S. Leonard, seemed principally struck with
the tremendous appetite of the bird, which he assured me ate “as much
as a goose” every day. Gradually the plumage became somewhat varie¬
gated with black and white, the black predominating above, though Mr.
Leonard thinks the bird became ultimately almost white.

There was no return to the normal plumage after the abnormal dress
was once assumed ; but the bird, which proved to be a female, always
seemed in perfect health and laid several sets of eggs while in captivity, of
course hatching none. She, however, adopted any young bird, of what¬
ever species, put into her cage, and in every case reared the young birds
successfully. She died when about five years old, through the carelessness
of the person left to feed her. Unfortunately her skin was not preserved.
The food was varied as much as possible, consisting largely of insects,
worms, fruit, etc., in summer, with a large proportion of meat,- bread, etc.,
in winter. — VV. B. Barrows, Middletown, Conn.

General Notes.

I July

3°4

Return of Robins to the same Nesting-places. — Mr. Charles S. Mason,
of Farmington, Conn., tells me that for the last three years a Robin
{Merula migrator ia') , with the back and wings mottled with white, has
bred on or near Miss Porter’s lawn in that village, and that a young bird
was seen last fall partially white. At the time of writing (May 20, 1885)
the birds had not appeared this season.

Mr. Charles A. Hewins, of West Roxbury, Mass., writes that “some
years ago a Robin built her nest five consecutive years in a woodbine that
was trained up and over a piazza. We knew her by a white mark on one
side of her head.” — Jno. H. Sage, Portland, Conn.

Abundance of Parus atricapillus near Washington. — This bird has been*
very abundant here during March and April, nineteen specimens having
been taken, while many others were seen. Owing probably to the severe
winter they were driven south, returning about the middle of March. The
first specimens were taken on March 15, and others were taken every week
until April 19, when six were shot and many others seen. The weather
during April was fine and warm, and the birds were singing and appeared
quite at home. But few P. carolinensis were seen until the last week in
April, showing that they too had been driven much further south. —
William Palmer, Smithsonian Institution , Washington , D. C.

Occurrence of Helminthophila leucobronchialis in Virginia. — I have to
announce the capture of this Warbler by myself on May 15, near Fort
Meyer, Arlington, Alexandria Co., Va. It was moving quickly in the
underbrush in a low wet wood, and at the moment when shot was hanging
back downwards, in the manner of H. chrysoptera. I heard no note, as I
shot it as soon as possible, thinking it was a Golden-winged Warbler,
which is very rare here. This is, I believe, the fourteenth specimen that
has been taken, but the first south of New York. The specimen, which is
a male, agrees closely with the description of the type as given in No. I,
Vol. I, of the ‘ Bulletin of the Nuttall Ornithological Club,’ except that it
has more olive mixed with the yellow on the crown. The specimen is now-
in the National Museum Collection, No. 104,684, and is the first one that
it has received. — William Palmer, Smithsonian Institution , Washing-
ion, D. C.

Another Example of Helminthophila leucobronchialis from Connecti¬
cut. — Mr. Harry W. Flint has kindly presented me with a specimen of this
Warbler which he killed at New Haven, Conn., May 19, 1885. It is a
male, and shows a slight suffusion of yellow under each eye and on the
chin, as well as a light bar of the same color across the breast; rest of
underparts white. The wing bars are very much restricted, and the white
is tinged with yellow, and there is a spot of the same color on the back. —
Jno. H. Sage, Portland, Conn.

*sss.]

General Notes.

3°5

Nesting of the Worm-eating Warbler ( Helminthotherus vertnivorus')
in Southern Connecticut. — One of our most trustworthy collectors, Mr.
Harry W. Flint, formerly of Deep River, but now of New Haven, Conn.,
took a nest of this rare species at New Haven, June 7, 1885, containing five
eggs. He writes that “the nest was on the ground, and composed almost
wholly of leaves, and lined with red rootlets ; it was not roofed over, but
the leaves of the Kalmia, near the roots of which it was placed, almost hid
it from sight. Indeed, it was so clearly hidden that when I took my eyes
off it to follow the bird, it required fully a minute to find the nest again,
although I had not moved.” It was on a hill-side, in a very secluded and
dark spot in deep woods.

The nesting of this species at New Haven was noticed by Mr. George
Woolsey in ‘Bulletin N. O. C.,’ Vol. V, p. 1 16. — Jno. II. Sage, Portland ,
Conn.

Probable Breeding of the Wheatear ( Saxicola oenanthe) on the North
Shore of the Gulf of St. Lawrence. — I have befoi’e me three specimens of
Saxicola oenanthe, all of which were shot at Godbout, on the north shore
of the St. Lawrence, near the point where the river widens into the Gulf,
by Mr. Napoleon A. Comeau. Two others were seen, making five indi¬
viduals noted within thirteen months. Following is the complete record :
May 18, 1S84, one shot. Sept. 19, 1884, male shot. May 24, 18S5, one
seen. June 9, 1885. female shot and mate seen.

Mr. Comeau writes me that in the female shot June 9, “the eggs were
pretty well developed.” He adds, “I think there can be no question now
about the bird breeding on this coast.”

It is safe to infer that the five individuals seen were but a small portion
of those actually present along the coast; hence the species can no longer
be regarded as “an accidental straggler from Europe.” Moreover, the
finding of two birds (presumably a pair) at Godbout so late as the 9th of
June, taken in connection with the statement that the female contained
ova which “were pretty well developed,” point strongly to the conclusion
that they would have nested at no very great distance. And this conclu¬
sion is strengthened by the fact that the Wheatear is known to breed in
June at Disco, Greenland,* fifteen hundred miles north of Godbout. —
C. Hart Merriam, Locust Grove , N. T.

Nest and Eggs of the Philadelphia Vireo. The nest and eggs of the
Philadelphia Vireo ( Vireo pkiladelpkicus) have hitherto been unknown,
so far as I can find. But on the 9th of June, 1884, while camped near

* Fabricius says of it Nidificat mense Junio inter lapides majores, gramine arido
cum rnuscis et plumis raris intermixtis,” etc. (Fauna Groenlandica, 1780, p. 123) ; and
nearly a century later ( July 19, 1875), Sir George S. Nares found "several parties of

young Wheatears _ flying about the rocks near the shore" at Prouen, nearly two

hundred miles north of Disco (Narrative of a Voyage to the Polar Sea, Vol. I, 1878,
p. 29).

3°6

General Notes.

[July

Duck Mountain, I found a nest of this species. It was hung from a forked
twig about eight feet from the ground, in a willow which was the reverse
of dense, as it grew in the shade of a poplar grove. The nest was
pensile, as usual with the genus, formed of fine grass and birch bark. The
eggs were four in number, and presented no obvious difference from those
of the Red-eyed Vireo, but unfortunately they were destroyed by an acci¬
dent before they were measured.

Before shooting her I watched the bird for a week. She exhibited a
combination of shyness and fearlessness; but this is rather characteristic
of the Vireos. She would continue on the nest while I watched her from
just below, and when scared off' would quietly hop onto a twig and then
disappear in the foliage without uttering any complaint. Lying on the
ground just below the nest I found another nest of precisely similar con¬
struction. This I hung on a low twig, intending to take it to camp on my
return ; but coming back it was again found on the ground ; and though I
hung it several times in the willow, taking care to fasten is as securely
as the occupied nest, it was always pulled down. There is no doubt that
the Vireo was the agent, but the motive for the act I can scarcely under¬
stand.

The bird on being shot answered perfectly to Coues’s description, except
that on the breast it was of a much brighter yellow than I was led to
expect. — Ernest E. T. Seton, Toronto , Canada.

A White-winged Junco in Maryland. — On February i of this year, I
shot near Ilchester, Howard Co., Md., a male Junco hyemalis with very
distinct white wing-bars; quite as well-marked as in typical J. aikeni.
Although Juncos with traces of white on the wing-coverts are not very
uncommon, this particular specimen is believed to be unique as regards
the large amount of white. Several ‘experts’ who have examined it concur
in pronouncing it singular in this respect. Otherwise it agrees with ordi¬
nary hyemalis. It is now in the U. S. National Museum (No. 102,219),
where all ‘good things’ in the bird line should be. — C. W. Beckham,
Washington , D. C.

Junco annectens — A Correction — Owing to an unfortunate delay in the
transmission of proof sheets, mention of the occurrence of Junco annec¬
tens was omitted from my article, “Winter Notes from New Mexico,” in
the present number of ‘The Auk.’ I took three individuals on December 6
and 22. They were all in company with J. caniceps and J. oregonus,
and doubtless others passed unnoticed among the many flocks of Juncos
constantly met with. — Charles F. Batchelder, Cambridge , Mass.

Capture of Ammodramus caudacutus nelsoni in the Lower Hudson
Valley, New York. — For a short time in the autumn, included in the time
between the 25th of September and the 10th of October, Sharp-tailed
Finches are comparatively common over certain portions of the low

1 SSs • ]

General Notes.

307

meadows which border the Croton River near its mouth. Some dozen
or more specimens have been secured in the last four or five years, and
without exception all of them were of the smaller inland variety. They
are easily distinguished from the typical maritime species, by their
smaller size, shorter bill, and darker plumage. They are evidently
migrants, as none of them have been observed in this vicinity in summer.
— A. K. Fisher, M. I)., Sing Sing, N. T.

Swamp Sparrows and Yellow-rumps — A Question of Evidence. — It

seems well to caution collectors against the inference that a bird winters
in a given locality because it happens to be found there at some time during
the winter. The writers of two interesting notes, printed on page 216 of
the present volume of ‘ The Auk,’ make this hasty generalization. It is
hardly possible that Swamp Sparrows passed the winter in Massachusetts,
in a season so rigorous as was that of 1884-85 after the middle of January;
Mr. Chadbourne certainly does not produce sufficient evidence for the
conclusion that they did so. It is even less likely that Yellow-rumped
Warblers tarried in Maine throughout the same season ; no person who
kept a record of the weather during that remarkable winter will, I think,
draw such an inference from Mr. Goodale’s note. — Nathan Clifford
Brown, Portland , Me.

The Song of Cardinalis virginianus. — Mr. Bicknell’s note on the song
of the Cardinal Grosbeak reminds me that it sings at a much earlier date
in Kansas. It is a permanent resident, abundant at all seasons. Its
song may be heard from February 1 to August. Should the days be bright
and warm, its song begins even in January. If, during February, the
weather should become extremely cold, its song ceases for a time. Like
the Mockingbird {Mim-us polyglot lies), it sings at night. I have heard its
song in the ‘small hours’ of the night, during February, March, and April.
— 13. E. Lantz, Manhattan, Nans.

The Black-throated Bunting, Yellow-breasted Chat, and Connecticut
Warbler in Ontario. — On June 1, 1884, Mr. Wm. L. Bailey, collecting with
Mr. A. P. Saunders and the writer at Point Pelee, found several Black-
throated Buntings in a meadow about two miles from the end of the Point.
Knowing of no previous record in Canada, we were all much interested;
and subsequently, in extending our search, we found one or more pairs in
almost every field. All our efforts to discover a nest seemed doomed to
fail ; and even when we spent much time and care in watching the birds,
and marking down the place where the supposed nest was, we could never
succeed. The males spent much time in singing their monotonous ditty
from tree-tops and fence-posts, and even during the heat of the day our
presence was sufficient to start them going. This appeared to act as a
partial alarm to the female, and if we approached, the male would fly over
her and give an alarm-note, precisely after the manner of the Bobolink
under similar circumstances.

3°8

General Notes.

[ July

On June 6, in passing through one of the ‘Bunting fields’ on the return
trip, the writer flushed a female from a fresh set of five eggs of the usual
size and color. The nest, which is now before me, was placed on, not in
the ground, among the stems of a tuft of weeds, and is composed of leaves
externally, and lined with fine, dry grass. Its measurements are as fol¬
lows : outside diameter, ioo mm.; inside diameter, 63 mm.; height out¬
side, 63 mm.; depth inside, 45 mm. These birds were observed in every
suitable locality on the Point, and on the return drive they were heard
constantly till we had gone three miles into the mainland, when no more
were noticed.

On June 6, when about a mile farther up the Point, the writer heard a
strange note, and at every search for the author found an Orchard Oriole,
and, not being very familiar with that bird, attributed the note to it.
Shortly afterward Mr. Bailey arrived at the same place, and called out,
“ Did you hear the Chat? ” Instantly every one was on the qui vive, and
after some time a glimpse of the bird was obtained, but not the bird itself.
A hunt for it on the two following days was finally rewarded by the cap¬
ture of a fine female Yellow-breasted Chat, with ovaries as large a sa pea.
Further search resulted in nothing more than this, the first capture in
Canada; and though we looked carefully, we did not even find the begin¬
ning of a nest. Reference has already been made in ‘The Auk’ to the
remains of a specimen of this species that Mr. Thos. Mcllwraith picked
up at Hamilton, Ont. No doubt they are regular summer visitors at Pelee
Island, Point Pelee, and some places along the shore of Lake Erie.

On September 15, 1883, there flew into a store in this city a Connecticut
Warbler, which was, as far as I then knew, the first Canadian specimen.
In December of the same year, a consultation with Mr. Mclwraith disclosed
the fact that he had some specimens of the same species, which had never
been satisfactorily separated from the Mourning Warbler. These have
been in his possession for years. Again in May, 1884, attracted by a new
note, after spending some time in a swampy thicket, I succeeded in captur¬
ing another of this species near London ; and since knowing their note
have found them tolerably common, but quite shy here as swamp birds,
and/juite common at Point Pelee, for a few days in June, as ground feeders
in dry places, where, on the above trip, several were procured. — W. E.
Saunders, London , Out.

A Belated Bird. — The Chewink ( Pifiilo erytkrophthalmus) returns
to this region in limited numbers every spring. It is not usual to see
very many of them, a pair at most together, and oftener one alone. Thev
depart as regularly every autumn, and we see no more of them until some
pleasant day in spring, when the weather has become quite warm. But
very curiously to me, one of these birds did not depart with its associates
in the fall, and is still here (Dec. 21, 1884). During the past ten days the
mercury has ranged from io° to 310 beloiv zero, and yet my Chewink stays
about the barnyard, as bright and lively as though we were in the midst
of warm, bud-swelling spring days ! On the coldest morning, I found him

iS8S.J

General Notes.

3°9

in a little close shed, from which he escaped through a broken window-pane.
He alighted on a limb of a tree only three or four feet from the window, and
I had a good look at him. He seemed to be shivering with cold, but still
active. He is quite tame, and very freely goes about among the cattle and
hogs searching for food. If we could only get hold of him we would give
him better quarters within doors, for it seems scarcely possible that he can
long survive such temperature. He evidently hgot left’ when the autumn
migration took place, and his ‘inherited experience’ was too limited to
prompt him to attempt the journey alone.

P.S. — Jan. 2, 1885. The Chewink is still here. This afternoon I caught
him in an out-building. We looked him over and let him go. He is in
good condition — sound and plump — despite our — 40° temperature! He is
solitary and alone, no birds of any species being about. — Charles
Aldrich, Webster City , Ioxva.

Cowbird Wintering in Western New York. — A few weeks ago my
attention was called to a strange bird which was feeding on the street
with Passer domesticus. On getting a good view I saw it was Molothrus
ater. The egg from which it was hatched was probably laid and
hatched in a Sparrow’s nest, and the bird, reared by the Sparrows, failed
to mingle with the rest of its species. I have seen it a number of times
since, and a young man told me last week that he saw it nearly every
day. I am quite anxious to know if it will survive through the winter
with its foster parents. Being itself a vagabond, it is a fit companion for
Passer domesticus. — J. L. Damon, Lockport, N. V.

Nest and Eggs of Calypte costae. — In a paper read before the January
meeting of the Ridgway Ornithological Club, descriptive of the Californian
Trochilidae, reference was made to the finding of a nest and eggs of Calypte
costce. Considering the rarity of the nests and eggs of Costa’s Hummer,
perhaps a description of them may not fail of interest to the readers of
‘The Auk.’

Three nests of this bird were found by the writer at Arrow-head Hot
Springs, San Bernardino County, Cal., May 15, 1883; but unfortunately
but one set of eggs was secured. One set was accidentally shaken from
the nest; the other nest was out of reach.

Finding no account of the breeding habits of the bird in question in
such books as are at my disposal, I wrote to Mr. H. W. Henshaw for
information, who regretted that he could not enlighten me, not having
met with the bird in any of his wanderings ; but he was of the opinion that
nothing had been recorded respecting the nest and eggs of this species.
He, however, kindly forwarded my letter to his friend Mr. L. Belding, of
Stockton, Cal., with request to send what information he could bearing
on the subject. Mr. Belding writes concerning Calypte costa as follows : —

“I have met it at various places, — Guaymas, on the east side of the
Gulf of California, at La Paz, Cape St. Lucas, Cerros Islands, and other
localities on the west side of the Gulf, but never recorded much concerning

3IG

Gc?ieral Notes.

[July

it, as its manners were quite similar to those of other Hummingbirds of
my acquaintance.” He also says, ‘‘You will find two nests described by
Mr. Ridgway (Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., Vol. V, p. 542). These nests,
like all I have seen, were in shrubs or small trees, the highest only about
six feet from the ground, in a palo-verde, or gum tree. Each of the nests
described held two eggs; but I lost or broke one from each nest.”

So it would seem from this that Mr. Belding met with mishaps as
well as myself.

Arrow-head Hot Springs are distant about five miles from the town of
San Bernardino, lying a mile or so up the side of the San Bernardino
Mountains. In the neighborhood of the Springs are several small canons,
running back into the mountains, the sides of which are clothed with
such trees as alder, sycamore, and mountain laurel. Among these the
Black-chinned Hummer ( Trochilus alexandri ), as well as the Costa, were
breeding quite abundantly, and building their nests in close proximity to,
or overhanging, a beautiful mountain stream, which wound its way down
between and over the mighty boulders. The locality was extremely pic¬
turesque. These Hummers constituted about all of the bird life of the
canon.

Speaking of one set of eggs of C. costce being accidentally shaken out
of the nest recalls to mind an incident which I also find in my field note¬
book, viz : —

“We had been noting how persistent the females were in occupying
their nests, even after they had been frightened away from them several
times. In one case I held my hand about a foot from one while she was
on the nest, without any fear being evinced on her part, until an attempt
was made to catch her; this manceuver was repeated a number of times,
when she would always return to the nest and sit there as unconcernedly
as possible. Finally my companion struck at her with his hat and hit
her, at the saane time striking the bough that the nest was on, precipitat¬
ing her and the eggs into the stream below.” A most tragic end, indeed,
to such a peaceful existence !

Incubation was very far advanced in this set, as was proven by one of the
eggs dropping upon a flat stone near the water’s edge, on which a well-
formed chick was deposited, which would have hatched in a day or two.

The nest containing the two eggs saved, which is now before me, meas¬
ures 1.60 inches in diameter externally; 1 inch in internal diameter;
and .60 of an inch deep on the inside. In make-up it is altogether different
from any Hummer’s nest that I ever saw, being destitute of all cottony and
downy substances usually employed by Hummingbirds in constructing
their dwellings.

In this case the main body of the nest has the appearance of a mass of
spider webs, small bits of dried leaves, and leaf-bud scales, interwoven
in a compact mass. By examination, I also find that the birds have util¬
ized the remains of an old nest in forming the foundation for this one,
which was built partly in the fork of one of the lower branches of an alder
tree, and situated between five and six feet from the ground. A few feath¬
ers line its interior.

ISSS.]

General Notes.

3”

The eggs were in a somewhat advanced stage of incubation, and some
difficulty was experienced in blowing them. They are a trifle smaller than
the eggs of T. alexandri , and considerably smaller than those of T. colu-
bris. Their color strikes me as being not so pure a white as the eggs of
the latter. As the male bird was not observed in the vicinity of the nest,
I may add that the female was shot and afterwards identified by Mr. Ridg-
way, which fact should be sufficient garrantee of the correct identification
of the specimens. — B. T. Gault, Chicago , 111.

Curious Food for the Kingfisher ( Ceryle alcyoii). — A few years ago I
examined the contents of the stomachs of two young Kingfishers ( Ceryle
alcyon), and found, to my surprise, instead of the usual remains of fish,
fragments of various beetles (Coleoptera) belonging to the families Cara-
bidre, Dytiscidse, and Scarabasidas, the Carabidas and Scarabzeidae being
exclusively inhabitants of the land. Among the Scarabaeidae an almost
perfect specimen of Apkodius fumetarius was recognized.

Mr. A. P. Chadbourne, of Cambridge, Mass., who shot both the birds
in question, has furnished me with the following information. He says :
“The Kingfishers were shot at Kennebunksport, Me., on July 14, 1S81.
They were both young birds, and were shot in the nest with a collecting
pistol. I observed one of the adults on the ground in a ploughed field
near the river side, but did not shoot it. The young were fully feathered
and able to fly.”

I am ignorant as to whether the food of the young of this species has
been studied by any one else or not, but is it not possible that they may be fed
regularly by their parents upon insects? — R. Hayward, Cambridge , A lass.

Occurrence of the Sharp-shinned Hawk in New Hampshire in Winter. —

Mr. Wm. Little, of Manchester, N. H., writes me that a specimen of Acci-
piter fuscus was killed there Jan. 24, 1885, by Geo. H. Walker, and mounted
by Hiram P. Young. This is, I believe, the first recorded instance of its
capture so far north in winter. — Jno. H. Sage, Portland, Conn.

[It may be of interest to add that a female Sharp-shinned Hawk was
taken in Cambridge, Mass., Dec. 15, 1884, by Mr. Joseph L. Goodale, who
has the specimen in his collection. — J. A. Allen.]

Early and Accidental Occurrence of Catharista atrata and Tantalus
loculator in Kansas. — Dr. Louis Watson, of Ellis, Kansas, wrote me April
14, 1885, of the capture on the 27th of March, of a Black Vulture, a species
not before noticed there. Also that “A Wood Ibis barely escaped capture
March 26. It had been about the Creek (Big Creek) on my premises for
several days ; but after receiving a charge of No. 6 shot at short range rose
over the bank with a drooping leg, and has not been seen since. It is
almost incredible that it should be here, or anywhere else so far north, so
early.” — N. S. Goss, Topeka, Kansas.

The Glossy Ibis and Avocet at San Diego, Cal. — On January 1, while
on my way to the Santa Margarita Valley duck-shooting, I noticed a small

3 1 2

General Notes.

[July

flock of Avocets from the cars. They were amongst other Waders in a
slough adjoining the ocean. Again, whilst lying behind cover in the
valley awaiting Ducks, I noted a solitary individual, but could not get a
shot. The same day a companion with me killed two from a flock of
about twenty Ibises. A few days previous a market hunter in the town
brought me one, and later two individuals of the same bird. He told me
that with the exception of one killed in the same vicinity (Mission Valley)
last year, they were the first he had met with or heard of in several years’
hunting. The Avocet he had never seen, although I know of an authentic
capture of seven on the Bay shores a few years since. Both birds are of
sufficient rarity here to warrant notice of their unusual presence this year,
and the size ot the flock of Ibises seen in the Santa Margarita is especially
unusual, as previous records have only been of, at most, six or seven indi¬
viduals. — Godfrey Holterhoff, Jr., Satt Diego, Cal.

The Eggs of the Knot ( Tringa canutus ) found at last! — No fact is
more generally recognized among ornithologists than the different de¬
grees of distinction, so to speak, attaching to the discovery of the eggs
of different birds. The nests of some species have been found early, or
by accident; others before their absence from collections has excited
much notice'; while others still have long been the object of special and
diligent search, and the failure to find them has been commented upon
by many distinguished writers. Of this latter category no more marked
example can be found than the Knot ( Tringa canutus L.). Seebohm,
in his entertaining ‘Siberia in Europe,’ tells us that when he and Harvie-
Brown started for the Petchora, the birds “to the discovery of whose
eggs special interest seemed to attach, were the Grey Plover, the Little
Stint, the Sanderling, the Curlew Sandpiper, the Knot, and Bewick’s
Swan.”* And in a foot note he adds : “The Knot ( Tringa canutus , Linn.)
was the only one of these six species of birds which we did not meet
with in the valley of the Petchora. It probably breeds on the shores of
the Polar basin in both hemispheres, but its eggs are absolutely un¬
known.”

Major Henry W. Feilden, .naturalist to the Nares Arctic Expedition of
1875-76, says : “I was not so fortunate as to obtain the eggs of the Knot
during our stay in the Polar regions, though it breeds in some numbers
along the shores of Smith Sound and the north coast of Grinnell Land.
.... During the month of July my companions and I often endeavored to
discover the nest of this bird ; but none of us were successful. How¬
ever, on July 30, 1876, the day before we broke out of our winter-quarters,
where we had been frozen in eleven months, three of our seamen, walk¬
ing by the border of a small lake, not far from the ship, came upon an
old bird accompanied by three nestlings, which they brought to me.”f
These young I have seen in the British Museum at South Kensington,

* Siberia in Europe. By Henry Seebohm, London, 1880, p. 2.
t Narrative of a voyage to the Polar Sea. By Capt. Sir G. S. Nares, London, Vol.
II, 1878, pp. 211-212.

iSSs-J

General Notes.

3X3

where, in company with a pair of the old birds, they constitute one of
the most attractive of the many ‘natural groups’ which adorn Mr. Sharpe’s
department.

Lieut. A. W. Greely, U. S. A., Commander of the late Expedition to
Lady Franklin Sound, succeeded in obtaining the long-sought-for egg of
this species; and has had the extreme kindness to ask me to publish the
first account of it.

Lieut. Greely writes me : “The specimen of bird and egg were ob¬
tained in the vicinity of Fort Conger, latitude 81° 44' N. The egg was
1. 10 inch [28 mm.] in the longer axis, and 1 inch [25.40 mm.] in the
shorter. Color, light pea green, closely spotted with brown in small
specks about the size of a pin-head.” — C. Hart Merriam, Locust Grove ,

n. r.

Southern Range of Rissa tridactyla kotzbuei. — In the last number of ‘The
Auk’ (Vol. II, p. 222), Mr. N. S. Goss mentions the capture of Itissa tridac¬
tyla kotzbuei in Washington Territory, and thinks it to be its most south¬
ern record. We have, however, received it from Mr. Charles A. Allen,
taken at Nicasio, Cal. — Southwick & Jencks, Providence , R. I.

The Relationship of Podiceps occidentalis and P. clarkii. — About four
years ago Mr. Henshaw * discussed the relationship of Podiceps occiden¬
talis and P. clarkii , as shown by a series of eleven skins collected by me
in San Francisco Bay, Cal. Owing to lack of specimens from different
localities, and from the breeding grounds of these forms, I am unable to
give a definite opinion respecting the conclusion arrived at by Mr. Hen¬
shaw, but will leave the now generally accepted belief of the specific iden¬
tity of the two forms until they can be studied from fresh specimens on
the breeding grounds. From my own investigations I decidedly incline to
the opinion that the differences which, prior to Mr. Henshaw’s investiga¬
tions, were supposed to characterize different species or varieties, are in
reality only sexual.

Of the twenty skins of this bird which I have prepared fifteen are
females, and can easily be distinguished from the males, the female differ¬
ing from the male in size and in the general appearance of the bill. In
fact, I find no difficulty in distinguishing the sexes in the fresh bird before
skinning. The color and curvature of the bill as seen in skins are of little
aid, as the bill so warps in drying that a bill slightly recurved in life may
become very much recurved in the dried skin. The color of the bill, also,
soon changes after death, especially if the bird be suspended by the legs
for a time before skinning. Through the courtesy of the authorities of
the National Museum I was kindly afforded an opportunity to examine
twenty-five specimens of these Grebes in the collection of the Museum,
and with one exception I correctly determined the sex at sight by the

* On Podiceps occidentalis and P. clarkii. By H. W. Henshaw. Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club,
VI, pp. 214-216.

General Notes.

[ July

31 4

appearance df the bill alone. I have found that birds of 24.50 inches in
length or less are females, and those 25.50 inches or more in length are
males. No. 199, a female, which in Mr. Henshaw’s article is given as 26.25
inches in length, is an apparent exception. The longest bill I have meas¬
ured was 3.20 (chord of culmen), and the shortest 2.13, the average being
2.50. The lores vary in tint from white to the color of the head, in both
sexes ; and I have seen January specimens with white lores, and June birds
with dark lores, and the reverse. — Walter E. Bryant, Oakland. Cal.

The Western Grebe in Manitoba. — In Coues’s ‘Key’ I find the Western
Grebe (. Podiceps occidentalis') described as a bird of the Pacific Slope.
Itwillthenbe not a little surprising to readers of ‘The Auk’ when an¬
nouncement is made that this bird is common in Northern Manitoba*
After I had made the discovery for myself I was a little disappointed to
read the following in Professor Macoun’s ‘Report’: “This bird [the
Western Grebe] seems to be altogether unknown in the interior, and yet
it has bred in thousands at Water Hen River. From time immemorial up
to the present it has only been known from the Pacific Coast.”

I examined specimens taken at Long Lake, Winnipeg, where it is com¬
mon, and others from Shoal Lake, further north, where it is abundant.
Thus it will be seen that its numbers increase as we go north towards the
Saskatchewan Valley, for Water Hen River is much farther north still.

The following completes my list of Manitoba Grebes : —

Podicipes griseigena holbcelli. Red-necked Grebe. — Scarce.

Podicipes cornutus. Horned Grebe. — Very common.

Podilymbus podiceps. Dab-chick. — common. — Ernest E. T. Seton,
Toronto , Canada.

Capture of Escaped Cage-birds.— Mr. Forrest Ball, of San Bernardino,
Cal., writes that on Jan. 12, 18S4, he took at that place “a Cockatoo Par¬
oquet ( Nympkicus novce-hollandice). It was resting on a tall cottonwood
tree, basking in the sunshine, and was apparently perfectly at home in
its strange surroundings. As it is an Australian species, it was no doubt
an escaped cage-bird, but from its perfect condition it had, I surmise,
been out of captivity a considerable time. The specimen is now in my
collection.”

Mr. Joseph L. Goodale also writes me that on Nov. 2, 18S4, he shot,
in the Belmont (Mass.) orchards, a Java Sparrow, “which was lively and
in good condition.” The capture of exotic, even tropical, species of birds,
more or less common as cage-birds, in various parts of the United States,
has been from time to time recorded, while other instances that have
never been published have come to my knowledge. Generally the birds
thus taken, even when captured in the colder parts of the year, are re¬
ported as found in good condition, and as showing rarely any trace of
previous confinement. The fact that their natural habitat is generally
very remote — not unfrequently south of the equator — and that they are
species often met with in confinement, seems sufficient evidence that they
are in reality ‘escapes,’ and therefore not to be counted as stragglers to
our fauna. Yet it is of interest to know that such species are so well

•885.]

General Notes.

3*5

able to maintain an apparently comfortable existence, unaided by man,
under, to them, such strange environment. — J. A. Allen, American
Museum of Natural History , Central Park , New York City.

Introduced Game Birds in Oregon and Idaho. — Several years since
our consul to Japan sent over quite a number of Japanese Pheasants—
exact species to me unknown. The birds were liberated below Portland,
Oregon, on Sanvie’s Island, and are known to have bred. While on duty
at Vancouver Barracks I met a gentleman who informed me that he had
seen, not long before (the summer of 1883), an old bird with several young
near where the Pheasants were first liberated. In the autumn of 1883 a
female was killed just below Vancouver. I saw this one, and the skin is •
now in the possession of Mr. John Jaggyat. The bird killed was one of
a pair seen flying across the Columbia from the Oregon side to Washing¬
ton Territory. The river at this point is nearly a mile wide, and the
point of crossing was at least fifteen miles above the place of planting.
By this it appears that the ‘plant’ has been established. The bird is a
strong flie * and bids fair to be a valuable acquisition. Oregon and Wash¬
ington Territory have passed laws protecting these birds.

The Bob White ( Ortyx virginiana ) has been successfully introduced to
the Boise Valley, Idaho. Three years since I found a covey on the west
side of the Snake River, fifty miles below Boise City, where they were
first liberated. I never saw coveys so large or numerous as I found them
about Boise. Cover and food, as well as climate, are all favorable. —
Timothy E. Wilcox, Assist. Surg , U. S. A.

Fourth Addendum to List of Birds Ascertained to Occur within ten
miles from Point de Monts, Province of Quebec, Canada ; based chiefly
upon the notes of Napoleon A. Comeau. — (For original List and previous
Addenda see Bull. Nutt. Ornith. Club, Vol. VII, No. 4, Oct. 18S2, pp. 233-
242 ; Vol. VIII, No. 4, Oct. 1883, p. 244; and The Auk, Vol. I, No. 3, July

1554, p. 295; Vol. II, No. 1, Jan. 1885, p. 113.)

Mr. Comeau has recently sent me skins of the five following species :

174. Dendrceca castanea. — $ shot at Godbout the last week in May,
1885.

175. Dendrceca palmarum hypochrysea. — $ shot at Godbout, May 21,

1555.

176. Cotile riparia. — Shot at Godbout, June 8, 1885.

177. Pocecetes gramineus. — Shot at Godbout, April 24, 1885. Others
were seen the same day and the next, and on May 10.

178. Falco islandus.* — Avery handsome $ shot at Point de Monts,
Jan. 7, 1SS5. Another was seen at Godbout, March 23, 1885.

179. Bartramia longicauda. — $ shot at Godbout, May 7, 1885.

180. Lobipes hyperboreus. — Shot at Godbout, May 27, 1885. — C. Hart
Merriam, Locust Grove , New York.

* For authority for the name Falco islandus Briinn., see Stejneger in ‘The Auk,’ Vol.
II, No. 2, April 1885, pp. 184-187.

Correspondence.

[J»'y

3 1 6

CORRESPONDENCE.

[' Correspondents arc requested to write briefly and to the point. No attention will
be paid to anonymous communications.']

The Popular Names of Birds.

To the Editors of The Auk : —

Sirs: The ‘p°wers that be,’ I understand, are preparing a ‘Check List,’
and revising the scientific and popular names of our birds.

There is no doubt that scientific names are entirely in the hands of
scientists, but it seems to be overlooked that popular names are just as
completely in the hands of the people. Scientists may advise, but not
dictate on this point. A short analysis of the principle of common
names may place the matter in a new light.

A bird’s name, to be popular, must be distinctive, and in accordance
with the genius of our language. Examples of such are Thrush, Rail,
Heron, Hawk, Crane, Night-Jar, and many others. These are truly
popular names, evolved originally out of a description, handed down and
condensed and changed until they have assumed their present terse,
abrupt, and, to a foreign ear, uncouth forms, but, nevertheless, forms in
accordance with the pervading spirit of the Saxon tongue; or, in other
words, they are really popular.

On the other hand, look at the so-called popular, but really translated,
scientific or spurious English names given to our birds, taking as ex¬
amples the following: Baird’s Bunting, Leconte’s Sparrow, Wilson’s
Green Black-capped Flvcatching Warbler, Bartram’s Sandpiper, Sprague’s
Lark, Wilson’s Thrush, Black Ptilogonys, Semipalmated Tattler, Fasci-
ated Tit, Florida Gallinule, etc.

Surely, the gentlemen whose names are applied to these birds have
not so slight a hold on fame as to require such aids as these to attain it,
if indeed aids they be, which I question; for such nomenclature cannot
stand the test of time.

If you show to an • ‘out-wester’ the two birds mentioned above as
Baird’s Bunting and Leconte’s Sparrow, and tell him that these are their
names, he will probably correct you, and say one is a ‘Scrub Sparrow,’
the other a ‘Yellow Sparrow.’ Convince him that he is wrong, and in a
month he will have forgotten all but the names he formerly gave them ;
they are so thoroughly appropriate and natural that they cannot be for¬
gotten The next name in the list above given is clumsy enough to
strangle itself with its own tail. A lad on the Plains once brought me a
Neocorys spraguei , and asked its name. I replied that it was Sprague’s
Lark. Soon afterward he came again; he could not remember that
name; sol told him it was a ‘Skylark,’ and he never forgot that. On the
Big Plain that seed was sown, and not all the scientists in America can
make, or ever could have made, the settlers there call that bird anything
but ‘Skylark.’ And I consider that lad precisely represented the English-
speaking race; he rejected the false name, and readily remembered the

■SSS-]

Notes and News.

3X7

true one, and was aided by that which was apt and natural. No better
illustration could he given of the fact, that phraseology may be the life
or death of a cause, according as it is happy or unfortunate.

A similar instance is the case of ‘Bartram’s Sandpiper.’ Ever since
Wilson’s time this name has been continually thrust into the face of the
public, only to be as continually rejected; ‘Upland Plover’ it continues to
he in the east, and ‘Quaily’ on the Assiniboine, in spite of Bartram and
Wilson, and will continue so until some name, answering all conditions,
is brought forward; for here, as elsewhere, the law of the survival of the
fittest rigidly prevails. As an example of the fit ousting the false, note
how, in spite of scientists, ‘Veery’ is supplanting ‘Wilson’s Thrush’
throughout the length and breadth of the land.

The spurious English names scarcely need comment, they so evidently
contain in themselves the elements of their own destruction. Imagine a
western farmer being told that a certain songster was a ‘Ptilogonys.’
In spite of the books, the other three examples cannot hold ground against
‘Willet,’ ‘Ground Wren,’ and ‘Waterhen,’ respectively.

The purpose of a Check List that includes English names is, I take it,
not to attempt the impossible feat of dictating to our woodmen what names
they shall give their feathered friends, but rather to preserve and publish
such names as are evolved in the natural way, — names which are the out¬
come of circumstances. Only in case of egregious error is a common
name to be superseded ; and in doing this it must be remembered that
no name can be popular unless true to the principles of the English
tongue. It must be short, distinctive, and, if possible, descriptive. Of
this class are Veery, Junco, and Vireo. These are the only successful
artificial names that I can at present recollect. Among natural English
names for American birds are Bobolink, Chewink, Kingbird, and many
others. Such as these not only more than hold their own, but are as
great aids to the spread of knowledge as the Ptilogonys kind are hin¬
drances ; while such as Wilson’s Thrush can only be accepted as provi¬
sional, until the better knowledge of the bird and its surroundings shall
result in the evolution of an English name founded on true principles.

Ernest E. T. Seton,

Glen Cottage, Howard Street. °f Manitoba.

Toronto , March 21, 1815.

NOTES AND NEWS.

The determination of the place and date ol the next meeting of the
American Ornithologists’ Union having been referred by the Union to
the Council, the Council has decided upon New \ ork as the place, and
the third Tuesday in November (Nov. 17) ns the date, of the meeting for
1SS5.

Notes and News.

[July

3l8

At a meeting of the Council of the A. O. U., held in Washington,
April 21, the Committee on the Revision of the Nomenclature and
Classification of North American Birds presented its final report, which
was accepted, and ordered printed with as little delay as possible,
under the supervision of the Committee. The Report, as previously
stated in the pages of 'The Auk’ (I, pp. 371, 372), consists of a code of
nomenclatural rules, adopted by the Committee for its guidance in its
work, and a new Check List of North American Birds. It may now be
announced that the first part of the report, the ‘Code,’ is already in type,
and the printing ofthe Check List will proceed as rapidly as practicable,
and the publication of the whole Report may be expected during the
coming autumn.

As announced in the April number of ‘The Auk’ (II, p. 223), an ap¬
propriation of $5000 was granted by the last Congress, through the
Department of Agriculture, in aid of the work of the Committee on Mi¬
gration. This fund, which becomes available on July 1, is to be expended
through the officers of the Department of Agriculture, in behalf of
‘Economic Ornithology,’ which will not only embrace the migration and
distribution of our birds, but also their food habits in 1-elation to agricul¬
ture. In recognition of the action taken by the A. O. U. in securing the
appropriation, the Department of Agriculture invited the Council of the
A. O. U. to select a superintendent to carry on the contemplated work,
already so earnestly begun under the auspices of the Union. The Coun¬
cil, at its meeting held April 21, in Washington, unanimously appointed
Dr. C. Hart Merriam, Chairman of the Committee on Migration, as its
representative. Dr. Merriam will enter upon the duties of the position
July 1, having his official headquarters in the Department of Agriculture
at Washington. As his first assistant he has been fortunate in securing
the services of Dr. A. K. Fisher of Sing Sing, Superintendent of the
•Atlantic District,' in the work of the Migration Committee.

Mr. William Brewster returned recently from the mountain region
of Western North Carolina, where he spent portions of May and June
in ornithological exploration. Although failing to discover any ‘lost
species’ (such as Bachman’s Warbler and the like), he was enabled to
obtain a great deal of information about the summer bird-life of this
interesting and hitherto ornithologically unexplored region. A detailed
report of Mr. Brewster’s interesting discoveries may be expected in a
future number of ‘The Auk.’

Mr. H. B. Bailey’s well-known oological collection — one of the largest
and finest private collections in the United States — has recently been
purchased by the American Museum of Natural History, in New York
City, to which it has already been transferred. This collection in¬
cludes the nests and eggs of many foreign birds, particularly European,

ISSS-J

Notes and News.

3l9

as well as those of nearly all of the known North American species, many
of which are represented by extensive series. Mr. Bailey is .still en¬
gaged upon its rearrangement, by whom it is to be put in order and duly
labelled.

Mr. George B. Sennett, having recently become a resident of New
York City, has placed his large ornithological collection on deposit in
the American Museum of Natural History in Central Park. As is well
known, Mr. Sennett’s collection is especially rich in Texas birds and
their nests and eggs, which it is his intention to enlarge and render com¬
plete by further explorations in that State. It already contains large
series, both of the skins and nests and eggs of many of the rarer species, and
thus forms a valuable addition to the available material for research in
ornithology contained in the American Museum.

Mr. William Brewster has been appointed -Assistant in Ornithology’
at the Museum of Comparative Zoology in Cambridge, taking the place
formerly held there by Mr. Allen. The Museum is to be congratuated
on having secured so capable and trustworthy a curator as Mr. Brewster
is well known to be.

At a meeting of the Ridgway Ornithological Club of Chicago, held
May 14, the following officers were elected for the ensuing year: Presi¬
dent, B. T. Gault; Vice-President and Treasurer, G. F. Morcom ; Secre¬
tary, H. K. Coale; Curator, H. L. Fulton; Librarian, J. G. Parker.
The papers read at recent meetings of the Club include ‘Notes on
Arizona Birds,’ by Mr. Coale, and ‘The Woodpeckers of Michigan, with
remarks on their Anatomy,’ by Dr. Gibbs.

Mr. Cory, having completed his work on the ‘Birds of Haiti . and San
Domingo,’ is now gathering material for a general work on the Birds of
the West Indies, “including the Bahama Islands, and the Greater and
Lesser Antilles, excepting the Islands of Tobago and Trinidad.” As pre¬
liminary thereto he has already published a list of the species, giving
their West Indian range.

Dr. L. Stejneger’s Report on his ornithological work in Kamtschatka is
rapidly passing through the press at the Government Printing Office,
and its publication may be expected at an early day. It forms ‘Bulletin
29’ of the U. S. National Museum, and is entitled ‘Results of Ornitholog¬
ical Explorations in Kamtschatka and in the Commander Islands.’ It
will make a volume of 300-350 pages, and be illustrated with 8 plates (7
of them colored), and numerous cuts in the text. About 150 species
will be treated in detail, besides which a list will be given of all the
species known to have been taken in Kamtschatka.

3 20

Notes and News.

I .My

Mr. John Murdoch’s Report on his ornithological work at Point
Harrow is already in type, and its early publication may be expected. It
forms a part of the general Report of the Point Barrow Expedition, and
is illustrated with two colored plates of Ross’s Gull ( Itodostcihia rosea).

We are informed that Mr. Thomas Mcllwraith, of Hamilton, Ontario,
is preparing a work on the birds of that Province, to be published early
in the fall. It will give not only a list of the species thus far recorded
from Ontario, with notes on their distribution and habits, but also in¬
clude descriptions of the species, thus forming a convenient hand-book
of the birds of Ontario.

Tiie present year continues prolific in new serials devoted to natural
history, most of which include notes and papers relating to ornithology.
Many of these serials are to be classed as juvenile and amateur, having
very little scientific importance, yet, as they claim to have a wide circu¬
lation, doubtless do much good in awakening and extending interest in
natural history subjects. The crudities and ignorance displayed by some
of them, however, scarcely make them very safe guides to the young
student, or give the publications a very creditable standing. In several
cases they are to be looked upon rather as the advertising adjuncts of
dealers in natural history material than as bona fide natural history
journals. Among the purely ornithological claimants upon our attention
is ‘Our Birds,’ an 8-page monthly, published at Holyoke, Mass., bv Frank
II. Metcalf, and edited by Richard S. Brooks. The first number is dated
May, i8S^. ‘The Western Odlogist,’ published hy Frank M. Sherin, at Mil¬
waukee, Wise., is another ornithological aspirant to fame, a 4-page ‘spec¬
imen number’ of which bears date, May, 1SS5. It is to be issued monthly,
and enlarged to eight pages per number. It is to be hoped that in future a
little more care will be bestowed upon the spelling of scientific names, and
that a higher grade of ornithological knowledge will be displayed in these
publications than is evinced by one of the papers under notice, which
describes a Pelican as “a wading bird standing six feet high in his bare
feet.” ‘The Museum,’ a 16-page monthly, of which the first number also
bears date May, 1S85, is an illustrated journal, published at Philadelphia,
“in the interests of Young Naturalists and Collectors of all Classes.’
Its list of contributors includes well-known writers in various depart¬
ments of natural history; it is edited with care, neatly printed, and
altogether presents an attractive appearance. Among the new serials
should also he mentioned the ‘Bulletin of the Brookvillc Society of Nat¬
ural Ilistorv,’ published hy the Society, the first number of which has
recently appeared, containing a paper in part ornithological by Mr. A.
W. Butler.

THE AUK:

A QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF

ORNITHOLOGY.

vol. ii. October, 1885. No. 4.

ON THE BREEDING HABITS OF SOME ARIZONA

BIRDS.

BY W. E. D. SCOTT.

Fourth Paper. Vireo vicinior.

The investigation of the bird fauna of the canon described in
detail in the first paper of this series proved so interesting that I
was rarely tempted outside of a very limited region during that
part of the year 1SS4 preceding October 1, and a number of
species that did not attract my attention at all during that period
proved not only to be abundant on the mesas and foot-hills of the
region immediately adjoining, but were of the greatest interest
on account of their heretofore supposed rarity. Chief among
these birds stands the Arizona or Gray Vireo ( Vireo vicinior) ,
of which, so far as I can learn, only about a dozen individuals
have been procured since its discovery and description by Dr.
Coues in 1S66. This species, on the San Pedro River foot¬
hills of Las Sierras de Santa Catalina, at an altitude ranging
from 2800 to 4000 feet (which is here the point of meeting of
the mesquite timber and the evergreen oaks) , is, excepting the
Least Vireo ( Vireo pusillus ), the commonest form of Vireo,
being fairly abundant, as the following notes will show.

The two altitudes mentioned seem to be about the limits of
the species while breeding, and most of the birds secured were

322

Scott on the Breeding Habits of Arizona Birds.

[October

obtained between 3000 and 3500 feet altitude. Once, during the
season of 1S84, on June 26, I met with the Arizona Yireo. This
one had probably strayed rather outside of the usual range, and
was at a considerably higher altitude — well within the oak belt —
than any since obtained. The locality where the species is most
abundant is where the mesquites terminate and the oaks begin ;
there being of course a sort of gradual transition and no well or
clearly defined line, the two forms of trees being mingled about
equally. I have found that the smooth flat mesas, and the broad
open bottoms of the wider canons are quite as much frequented
by them as the rough and broken hillsides, and it is difficult to
ride about anywhere between tjie altitudes above mentioned,
without hearing the very characteristic song of the species. In
the trees and bushes they rarely go higher than fifteen feet from
the ground, and though I have several times seen them on the
ground, yet the limbs about ten feet from it seem to be the most
frequented. The birds are exceedingly active, and, though not
very shy, are difficult to procure, for as soon as one tree or bush
has been well and very rapidly hunted over for food, a rather
long flight, not by any means to the nearest tree or bush, is made ;
and by the time the collector is in range again the song is very
likely to be heard at considerable distance.

This song is clear and liquid in character, and is kept up so
continually as to betray the presence of the male bird, which I
believe monopolizes it, even a quarter of a mile away, under
favorable circumstances. It is composed of single whistling
notes, generally delivered rather slowly, and seemingly with
hesitation, and in an abstracted way, as if the performer were
thinking the while of other affairs; and yet frequently this sort
of abstraction seems cast aside, and the same series of notes are
given with a precision and brilliancy that calls to mind a fine
performance of a Scarlet Tanager, or even of a Robin.

The first arrival in my neighborhood this year (1885) was on
April 1, when I took a male in full song. This was in a pretty
rolling grass country, where the trees are rather scattered, and at
an altitude of 3500 feet. The next day another male was secured,
and I think the arrival must have become general by the 10th to
1 2th. though, as I was called away about this time, I cannot be
positive. On my return I went to the pine woods of this vicinity,
and so my note book says nothing about Gray Vireos for more

iSS5.1

Scott on the Breeding Habits of Arizona Birds.

than a month ; for, on my return from the pines, about Mav i ,
I was fully occupied with looking after some of the rarer Hum¬
mingbirds.

My notes take up the story of this species again on May 19,
when I surprised myself by taking three males, and began to
realize that another rarity among my bird neighbors was possiblv
common. Of this I became sure in a few days, as I took four
more males on the 20th, and seven males again on the 26th of
May, though it was not until the 31st of the month that I secured
ai female of the species, although my series then included twenty-
four male birds. Among the seven individuals procured on the
26th of May were two young males that had just left the nest
and were under the care of the male parent bird. So the first
breeding -must begin very soon after the arrival of the species.

On this day, too, I found a nest, to be presently described,
which was just finished. I saw both parents, the female sitting
on the nest, and the male singing in the bushes close at hand.
The female was very tame, and in order to see the interior of the
nest I was obliged to touch her with my fingers before she would
leave her home. Several times afterwards, in watching the pro¬
gress of laying, I was obliged to repeat this action, and once had
to lift the bird out of the nest. On May 26, when I discovered
the. nest, then apparently finished, it contained no eggs, although
the female was sitting very close, as I have described. Daily
visits to the spot showed the same circumstances obtaining until
May 30, when the first egg was laid ; and then an egg was laid
daily until June 2, when the laying was completed, four eggs be¬
ing in this case the full set. Thus the female, after the nest was
apparently completed, was constantly sitting on the nest, it being
all the time empty, for four days. The habit of sitting on a fin¬
ished nest for a considerable time before any eggs are laid also
obtains among certain other species of this region, and seems,
from my experience, very characteristic of the Arizona Jay
( Aphclocoma sordida arizonce) ; but of this I shall have more to
say in detail in another place.

On the 2d of June I took this nest, then containing four eggs,'
as well as both the parent birds (Nos. 2714 9, and 2711 <J),
the female being taken from the nest in my hand. And also on
the same day, at a point about a mile distant, I obtained a second
nest containing young, three in number, about ready to leave the

3 2 4

Scott on the Breeding Habits of Arizona Birds. [October

nest. On June 4 I found a pair of these birds just starting to
build ; but this was the second brooding, as the female of the
pair, which I took before I discovered the nest, clearly showed.
And also on this day I found the first fully fledged young shift¬
ing for themselves. June 6 was the date on which I found a
second nest containing three eggs, slightly incubated, the female
of this nest being catalogued as No. 2757. On the same day I
also found a completed nest on which the female was sitting, as
before described, but which contained no eggs as yet, and it being
at rather a remote point I did not visit it again.

My notes as to time of nesting are concluded on June 11, when
I found a pair just beginning a nest, and another pair with a nest
about half finished, both nests being situated in mesquites about
seven feet from the ground, in smooth, flat country, at an altitude
of about 3500 feet.

From the nests obtained, which are before me as I write, and
from notes as to their location, etc., I append the following
details.

Nest of June 2. Built in a kind of thorn bush, almost at the
extremity of one of the upper and overhanging branches, six
feet from the ground. It is composed externally of the dry out¬
side skin or bark of a coarse kind of grass, rather loosely woven.
But immediately beneath this loose, external layer is a wall of
the same material, very closely and strongly woven. The lining
of the nest, which is very distinct from the walls, extends
throughout the interior. It is much thicker on the bottom of
the structure, but extends up to the rim, where, however, it is
thin. It is composed of fine dry grasses, arranged on the sides
of the nest in concentric layers, much as the horse-hairs are
placed in the nest of Spizella domestica. On the bottom this
arrangement does not obtain, but the grasses cross one another
seemingly at random, forming a soft mat. The walls are uni¬
formly about one-fourth of an inch in thickness, and the shape
of the entire structure is that of a half sphere. The external
diameter at the rim is two and three-fourths inches, and the diam¬
eter at the same point inside is two and one-quarter inches.
The depth outside is two inches, and inside one inch and three-
quarters. The nest is attached at the rim for almost the en¬
tire circumference very much like a Red-eyed Vireo’s nest, but
here the resemblance ceases, for it is not fastened to the many

*885-3

Scott on the Breeding Habits of Arizona Birds.

small twigs, on which it rests, that pass diagonally downward,
so that it is not even a semi-pensilestructure. The thorns of the
bush, which are from an inch and a half to two inches long and
very sharp, protect the nest in every direction, for the whole
is entirely surrounded by twigs and small branches. Its contents
are four eggs, rather rounded in general shape, though one end
is somewhat sharper than the other. The ground-color is rosy
when fresh, becoming a dead white when blown, rather sparsely
spotted with irregularly shaped dark umber brown dots, chiefly
at the larger end. One of the eggs is unfortunately too badly
broken to measure, but is not apparently very different from the
other three, which measure, respectively, .77 X .59, .78 X .58,
and .75 X .57 inches. This nest was obtained on the side of
a hill near the bottom of a rather broad canon, at an altitude of
3500 feet. The structure is, as a whole, very symmetrical, but
is widely different from that of other Vireos which breed in the
neighborhood.

The nest of June 2, which contained three young, was built in
a mesquite, growing on a little mesa in flat country, the altitude
being about 3500 feet. It was not quite six feet from the ground,
and is composed externally much like the last, with the addition
of some thin broad shreds of mesquite bark to the material al¬
ready described. It is not at all symmetrical, however, and pre¬
sents a rather careless appearance as a whole. It is built near
the centre of the tree, in a upright V, formed by two upright
limbs, the larger being an inch and the smaller five-eighths of an
inch in diameter. But the rim is attached for almost half an inch
of its circumference to a small twig, which, reaching out from
another branch at considerable distance, crosses the two upright
limbs forming the V at right angles. The attachment to this
small twig, it will be noticed, is very slight, and on the other
side of the nest the rim is attached for an inch to a twig which
makes out from the larger of the two upright limbs. The bottom
of the nest outside does not quite rest in the angle of the V,
but the sides rest firmly against the limbs forming it, and the
result is a Vireo’s nest resting in a crotch, and in no degree pen¬
sile. The largest external diameter is three and the smallest two
and a half inches ; the walls are exceedingly thin except at the
rim and bottom, and loosely constructed. The largest interior
diameter is two and five-eighths and the smallest two and one-

326

Henshaw on Birds observed in Nero Mexico.

[October

eighth inches. The exterior depth is two inches and a quarter
and the interior depth one inch and three quarters.

The nest of June 6, which will complete the present series,
was found in a locality similar to the nest first described, at an
altitude of 3000 feet. It was built in a ‘catclaw’ — a kind of small
mesquite — four feet from the ground. The situation was at the
extremity of a branch in a horizontal V-shaped fork, to which
two-thirds of the rim is fastened, the other third being free. But
considerable support was afforded, directly underneath the nest,
by a small twig, which is fastened into the structure. The ma¬
terials do not vary from those of the first nest of June 2 already
described, either inside or out, except that a few downy feathers
are added to the lining. The whole is a symmetrical half-sphere
in shape. External diameter, two and three-fourths inches ; in¬
terior diameter, two and one-fourth inches. Exterior depth, two
inches ; interior depth, one inch and three-quarters. It contained
three slightly incubated eggs, which do not vary in color from
those already described, except that the spots are of a slightly
redder brown, and they are more concentrated at the larger end.
The eggs are rather smaller and even more rounded in general
shape than the other set spoken of, being but little more pointed
at one end than at the other. They measure .72 X .53, .70 X .55,
and .68 X .53 inches, respectively.

My series of this species at present numbers fifty-four speci¬
mens — forty-two males and twelve females — all taken, with the
one exception noted above, between Apiil 1 and June 11 of the
present year. They present very little variation in size or color,
and the young in first plumage do not differ materially from the
adult birds.

LIST OF BIRDS OBSERVED IN SUMMER AND
FALL ON THE UPPER PECOS RIVER,

NEW MEXICO.

BY H. W. HENSHAW.

The observations embodied in the following list were made
during the interval between July 18 and October 28, 1SS3, by

1SS5-] IIenshaw on Birds observed in New Mexico. 3^7

Mr. E. W. Nelson and the writer, in the mountains about forty
miles east of Santa F6, New Mexico. As faunal lists of the birds
of New Mexico are yet by no means as numerous as is desirable,
and as the summer avifauna of the region embraced in our observa¬
tions is almost or quite unknown, I have thought it worth while
to present them to the consideration of the readers of ‘The Auk.’

For the time above indicated, and for an area of country of say
five square miles, it is believed our examination was extremely
thorough, and it is doubtful if a single species breeding within that
area escaped notice. Although equal attention was paid to the
fall migrants, it is not impossible that by rapid movements a few
species which chanced to occur in small numbers may have
passed by unheeded.

At first sight the list will appear to be remarkable for what
it does not contain rather than for what it does, and there are few
traces in it of the richness usually associated with Arizona and
New Mexican bird lists. That the cause of its meagreness in
species, and the absence of southern forms may be clearly under¬
stood, it is necessary that the nature of the country be thoroughly
comprehended.

The Pecos River winds the greater part of its long and tortuous
course through the state of Texas, emptying into the Rio Grande.
Rising, as it does, in the mountains of New Mexico, it might
be thought that its course would furnish a readily travelled high¬
way from the Rio Grande Valley for Texan and possibly for Mex¬
ican species. Possibly in the lower part of its course it may
afford such a highway, but the list will show that no intrusion
of Texas birds towards its sources takes place, and — so far as the
mountain part of its course is concerned — the reason is readily
apparent; for, in following its windings, no sooner do we reach
the mountains than we find a new climate and an entirely new
character of country, and one of forbidding aspect to lowland-lov¬
ing. species. For the greater part of its course, especially in
Texas, it flows a sluggish stream confined between low banks, the
vegetation of which is limited to low willows and scrub, with
here and there groves of cottonwoods. As it nears the mountains
the scene changes, as if by magic. First come foot-hills, thickly
clothed with pinons and cedars — typical home of the Pinon and
Woodhouse Jays. Ere many miles the stream begins to canon,
and thence on the pines and spruces begin to put in an appear-

328

Henshaw on Birds observed in New Mexico.

[October

ance, until, fifteen miles above the foot-hills, it cuts its way
through a deep course, with extremely picturesque walls of rock,
and with every element of the wild mountain scenery which ac¬
companies its canons to its sources. The water, when undis¬
turbed by the frequent summer rains, is clear and cold, and, like
most similar mountain streams, harbors great numbers of fine
trout. Even in midsummer the temperature of the region is cool
and refreshing, the natural effect of low latitude being counteracted
by the altitude, and even more by frequent prolonged rains and
thunder showers, which latter are often accompanied by hail.
These showers are of almost daily occurrence (or were in 1883)
from about the middle of July till the first of October.

The focus of our operations was at the junction of a small trib¬
utary — Willow Creek — with the main stream, some twenty
miles from Glorietta, on the Atchison, Topeka, and Santa F6
Railroad. Glorietta may be taken as representing the foot-hill
region, with which the present paper has nothing to do.

The character of the vegetation that clothes the mountain ridges
is essentially sub-alpine. The elevation at the mouth of Willow
Creek is about 7800 feet, but the ascent from this point is ex¬
tremely rapid, whether the main stream be followed or any of the
side canons, which form beds for the numerous rivulets that make
their way on all sides from the heights above.

The highest mountain in the vicinity is Mt. Baldy, which is
distant some twenty miles from the mouth of Willow Creek, and
12,661 feet above sea level. This peak we were not able to visit,
though it is not probable that any very marked change takes
place in the character of the avifauna in so short a distance.

At the height of our camp (7S00 feet) a luxuriant growth of
pines covers the hills, giving way, a thousand feet higher, though
not wholly, to the spruces. On many of the gentle slopes, the
pines are thinly dispersed, and are so scattered, or gathered in
picturesque groups, as to convey the idea of artificially arranged
parks — a suggestion still further heightened by the sward of
green grass, enlivened with patches of bright flowers. The sum¬
mits of many of the smaller heights are almost entirely bare of
trees and shrubbery, and are covered with a luxuriant growth of
grasses, affording the finest sort of pasturage. The sides of many
of the ridges and canons are heavily clothed with brush, mainly
of scrub oak. At a height of about 75°° feet, scattered aspens be-

Hensiiaw on Birds observed in New Mexico.

329

iSSs.]

gin to put in an appearance, and soon assert a place for themselves
in the shape of large groves. Wherever fire has devastated the pine
tracts the fire-cleared space is immediately occupied by aspens,
which spring up in the shape of extremely dense thickets — so
dense that in them the vision is limited to the space of a very few
feet. These are the favorite haunts of deer and bear. Every¬
where the streams are densely fringed with brush of various sorts,
chiefly, however, willows and alders, and it is these thickets that
form the chief resort for the smaller birds. Flowers of many
kinds and of various hues are visible on all sides, and no sooner
is one species through flowering than another takes its place. In
short, the flora is of the character usually pertaining to mountain
areas of low latitude where a deep and fertile soil, added to a
copious rainfall, combine to produce an abundant vegetation.

Our observations began sufficiently early (July 18) to make
sure of all the summer residents, and they were continued until the
close, or near the close, of the fall migration, the first indications
of which were noticed about August i.

I was particularly interested in ascertaining the exact time of
the beginning of the fall migration, but it is a matter of no little
difficulty to determine, in the case of a given locality, just when
the first movement southward begins ; nor is it less difficult in the
case of a given species of bird. Among the smaller birds, the
first act in the final drama of migration is the assemblage of indi¬
viduals into flocks, either of one or of many species. But this
gathering begins as soon as the young are fairly on the wing, and,
in the instance of many species, before the young are strong
enough to travel. It is quite certain that the small birds generally
do not undertake the fall journey until the old ones have some¬
what recuperated from the effects of family cares, and until the
young have gained their full strength. But, so far as obser¬
vation of these flocks goes, there is little to be learned, since it
is pi'actically impossible to determine whether the flocks under
observation from day to day consist of the same individuals, or are
fresh arrivals from farther north. For instance, on our arrival,
July tS, many of the Nuthatches and Audubon’s Warblers had
already gathered into flocks of old and young, and while in flocks
the young passed from the nestling into fall plumage, and the adults
donned their fall dress. There was thus an interval of probably
three weeks before any of them migrated, if indeed the Nut-

33°

Henshaw on Birds observed in Nero Mexico.

[October

hatches migrated at all. The observer is conscious of a general
movement among the small birds, but it is difficult to tell whether
it is actual migration or not until certain evidence presents itself
in the arrival of species previously unnoticed. So, at least, it
was in the present case ; and the first supposed migrating visitor
was seen August 8 — a single Wilson’s Flycatcher ( Myiodioctes
pusillus). Previous to this, however, there had been a move¬
ment on the part of the Hummingbirds, which was disclosed by
the sudden departure of the males of Selasphorus platycercus ,
which took place about August i, and constituted the first positive
evidence of the fall migration.

After August 8 the tokens of a general movement on the part of
the birds became perfectly evident ; and soon flocks of birds from
farther north put in an appearance. At this time the birds, instead
of being scattered through the woods, according to the exigencies
of nesting, were gathered into large flocks, composed of the most
heterogeneous elements. Bluebirds, Nuthatches, Titmice, War¬
blers, Creepers, Snowbirds, and Woodpeckers, all trooped through
the forest together, and where one moment reigned perfect silence,
the next was enlivened by a chorus of chirps and call-notes, the
signals by which the motley throng is held together in an ever
moving but united band. As the fall advanced, these flocks were
of less frequent occurrence and contained a smaller number of
species, as well as of individuals, until towards the end of October,
when they were composed mainly of Snowbirds, Nuthatches, and
such species as intended to winter not far away.

The list pretends to be nothing but a record of our own obser¬
vations, and whatever value it may possess will be derived mainly
from the fact that it contains no species but those actually seen, and
leaves those which were not seen to be added by the labors of
future investigators.

1. Hylocichla ustulata swainsoni. Swainson’s Thrush. Fairly nu¬
merous in fall. First appeared September 13.

2. Hylocichla unalascae. Dwarf Thrush. — Rare; in fall only. A
single specimen secured October 12.

2 a. Hylocichla unalascae auduboni. Rocky Mountain Hermit
Thrush. — Numerous as a summer resident. The young were out of
the nest July 18.

3. Merula migratoria propinqua. Western Robin. — Was not de¬
tected breeding, although it probably summers here. Common in fall.

4. Cinclus mexicanus. American Water Ouzel. — Numerous all
along the upper Pecos. By July 18, the time of our arrival, young birds

1885.] Henshaw on Birds observed in Nezv Mexico. 33^

were able to care for themselves, though not yet fully divested of the
nestling plumage. Abandoned nests were seen on ledges of rock over¬
hanging the stream, and one pair had built on a stringer beneath a
bridge.

5. Sialia mexicana. California Bluebird. — A numerous summer
resident. Apparently the S. arctica does not breed here.

6. Myiadestes townsendi. Townsend’s Solitaire. — Numerous.
Families of young birds in the curious mottled plumage, resembling
young Thrushes, were being led through the pines by the old birds during
the last half of July. The season of song had entirely passed.

7. Regulus calendula. Ruby-crowned Kinglet. — Young birds in
nestling plumage were taken August 17 to September 11. This was the first
intimation received that the species was present. It doubtless nested
among the spruces, well up on the ridges. Abundant in fall.

8. Parus montanus. Mountain Chickadee. — Numerous summer
resident; mainly confined to the evergreens.

9. Parus atricapillus septentrionalis. Long-tailed Chickadee. — Also
numerous. Much more frequently seen among deciduous trees than the
preceding. Both were conspicuous in fall among the gatherings of small
birds.

10. Sitta carolinensis aculeata. Slender-billed Nuthatch. — Abun¬
dant summer resident among the pines.

11. Sitta pygmaea. Pigmy Nuthatch. — Extremely abundant. As
soon as the young are out, the different families come together, and birds
of various hatchings may be shot from the same flock. I was unaware
how much time this species spends on the ground. In a large flock there
are always more or less of its members searching on the ground for insects.

12. Helminthophaga celata. Orange-crowned Warbler. — Fairly
numerous in the breeding season, but more so during the fall migration.
It seems a little curious that the H. Virginia, which breeds abundantly in
middle Colorado, was not detected here at all. It may possibly summer
in the foothills, and it doubtless occurs among them in the migrations.

13. Dendroeca aestiva. Yellow Warbler. — The presence of this
species was detected — that was all. Farther down the river it was
doubtless more common.

14. Dendroeca graciae. Grace’s Warbler. — This species was one I
confidently expected to find as a summer resident. Nevertheless, it was
not discovered until after the fall flight had commenced, and the assump¬
tion is that all the specimens taken, perhaps half a dozen, came from
farther north.

15. Dendroeca auduboni. Audubon’s Warbler. — This Warbler
breeds abundantly through the pine woods. Young birds were out of
the nest July 18, and we saw them gradually assume the fall plumage, as
well as the old change to their winter dress.

16. Dendroeca townsendi. Townsend’s Warbler. — This is well
known as a Pacific coast species, and one not ascertained to breed any¬
where in the Rocky Mountain Region. It made its appearance from the

332

Henshaw on Birds observed in Nezv Mexico.

[October

north in considerable numbers about August 25. By September 20 it be¬
gan to be uncommon. The last individual was seen September 28. It
was always found associated with flocks of various other birds, and
chiefly frequented the pines. The disproportionate number of young
birds over old ones was very noticeable, not more than half a dozen
of the latter being seen.

It would be interesting to know from just what source these Rocky
Mountain migrants are derived, and why if, as seems probable, they come
from the Sierras, they select this route instead of taking a due southern
course. The species is unknown in the Rocky Mountains in spring, ex¬
cept along the southern border.

17. Geothlypis macgillivrayi. Macgillivray’s Warbler. — This is
another species which, as a summer resident, was to be expected. Not
one was seen, however, until the bird appeared from the north, which it
did the last days of August. In early September it became fairly common
in the thickets along the streams.

18. Myiodioctes pusillus. Wilson’s Blackcap. — So far as we could
ascertain, this bird did not breed in the locality. The first one was seen
August 8. It soon became exti'emely numerous; nowhere, in fact, have I
ever seen it so abundant. It was found in every flock of migrants, and also
in companies of half a dozen or more among the alders and willows of the
streams.

19. Vireo gilvus swainsoni. Swainson’s Vireo. — Fairly numerous
as a summer resident, though by no means so common as it is farther
north. This locality may be, in fact, near the extremity of its southern
limit in summer.

20. Vireo solitarius plumbeus. Plumbeus Vireo. — Rather common
in summer, but not nearly so numerous as the bird is at this season in
Colorado and other points to the northward. Almost exclusively restricted
to the pines.

21. Vireo solitarius cassini. Cassin’s Vireo. — This is another Pacific
coast form, many individuals of which, for some unexplained reason,
choose to reach their southern winter quarters by way of the Rocky Moun'
tains rather than to follow the Sierras, where alone it is known to breed.
It also is not known to occur in the Rocky Mountains in spring, except in
the extreme southern portion of the range. It was first seen September 2
and soon became fairly numerous. It was found in the pines moving
about with the Warblers and other migrating birds, but it also frequented
the aspens and oak brush. It was a noticeable fact that while this bird
was quite silent, the Plumbeous Vireo, which was now moulting its worn
summer plumage, prior to moving south, was frequently in song, being,
in fact, the only species that was so.

22. Lanius ludovicianus excubitoroides. White-rumped Shrike. —
A single bird was shot among some dead timber well up on a mountain
ridge. The bird seemed to be quite out of place among its surroundings,
and was, I presume, nothing but a straggler from the lower regions east¬
ward.

■ 8SS.J

Henshaw on Birds observed in Ne-w Mexico.

333

23. Tachycineta thalassina. Violet-green Swallow. — This, the
only Swallow spending the summer in this locality, or in fact occurring
at all. was extremely numerous all through the pine woods, where it finds
every convenience for nesting in the multitude of perforated stubs. After
the young were on the wing, the birds left the pine woods and resorted to
the tops of the ridges and the open valleys where, high in mid-air, they
were seen busily hunting for insects. September 8 they were still to be
noticed, though the majority had departed some time before. A few days
later and the last had disappeared.

24. Pyranga ludoviciana. Louisiana Tanager. — Not common; a
few breed. Apparently the bulk of the species spend the summer farther
north, as in Colorado, and northwards it is numerous.

25- Carpodacus cassini. Cassin’s Purple Finch. — Not common ;
but few apparently pass the summer here, and we saw but few in the
fall.

26. Loxia curvirostra americana. Red Crossbill. — I saw but one
Crossbill, October 20. As I failed to secure it, its identity cannot be fully
established. It was, however, presumably not the var. mexicana, but the
Common Crossbill, which in 1873 I found to breed in the mountains near
Fort Garland, in Southern Colorado.

27. Chrysomitris pinus. Pine Finch. — Abundant in early fall, and
doubtless breeding, though not detected by us in summer.

28. Centrophanes ornatus. Chestnut-collared Longspur. — A
single specimen was shot by Mr. Nelson, September 12. This individual
was probably the one seen by me a few days previously. The occurrence
of this plain-inhabiting species, in a narrow valley in the midst of the pine
woods, was of course accidental.

29. Centronyx bairdi. Baird’s Sparrow. — Two specimens of this
Sparrow were secured. Both were in extremely worn plumage, and in
this respect were similar to the many specimens secured by me in Arizona
in 1873. I then interpreted this condition to indicate that they had passed
the summer not far away, believing that they could not have migrated any
distance in such dress. The two specimens secured here throw little ad¬
ditional light on the matter, since they may have straggled up the Pecos
from their breeding grounds in the open grassy plains below, or they may
have dropped in as migrants from the far north, from Montana or Da¬
kota. The latter supposition is perhaps the more probable. It is well-
known that the species migrates to the north along the foothills of Colorado
in spring, and there is no recorded evidence that it breeds either in Col¬
orado or elsewhere south of the Union Pacific Railroad. Still I am not
aware that any of our Sparrows migrate south in the excessively worn
condition that attends nesting. They usually spend some time in recu¬
perating, and the moult is usually well along before they migrate. Col¬
lectors in the region, south of the known summer habitat of this Sparrow,
will do well to keep a sharp lookout for it.

( To be concluded.)

334

Seton, Interesting Records from Toronto.

[October

INTERESTING RECORDS FROM TORONTO,
CANADA.

BY ERNEST E. T. SETON.

As a result of the examination of numerous small collections
in the city of Toronto I am able to make the following more or
less extra-limital records. In every case I have examined the
bird myself, and though in most instances debarred by sealed cases
from taking measurements, etc., I am satisfied that the identifica¬
tions are correct. Several occurrences of doubtful authenticity
are omitted. Some of those given are specially interesting from
their showing the tendency of many species to push farther and
farther to the north. The nomenclature is that of Coues’s ‘Key,’
first edition.

I take this opportunity of thanking the gentlemen named below
for their courtesy in placing their specimens at my service.

Blue-gray Gnatcatcher. Polioptila coerulea. — A male in
full song was taken by myself at Toronto, May 9, 1885.

Evening Grosbeak. Hesperiphona vespertina. — The
Rev. John Doel, of Toronto, showed me a fine female specimen
of this rare bird, taken at Toronto on Christmas day, 1854. Mr.
Doel observed a flock of five or six feeding on the berries of the
mountain ash, on Yonge Street. Two of these he secured, but
one was too much mangled to be kept.

About Christmas, 1870, he observed ^mother small flock but
failed to secure any.

Lapland Longspur. Plectrophanes lapponicus. — Indi¬
viduals of this species have occurred in company with P. niva¬
lis almost every winter as far back as the records here extend.

Yellow-headed Blackbird. Xanthocephalus ictero-
cephalus. — This species has been taken a number of times, in
company with the Red-winged Blackbird, by Mr. Win. Loane,
who describes it as the Californian Blackbird. The specimen I
examined was taken by that gentleman ; it is now in the posses¬
sion of Mr. Jacobs of Centre Street, Toronto.

Common Crow. Corvus americanus. — Three albinos of
this species were observed in the country east of Toronto, about
three years ago. One of these was secured and is now in the

Seton, Interesting Records from Toronto.

iS8S.]

335

possession of Mr. C. A. Hirschfelder. It is pure white. No
data.

Canada Jay. Perisoreus canadensis. — In the winter of
1836 and the spring of 1837, according to Mr. Doel, this bird
appeared about Toronto in great numbers. It was previously
unknown in the district, and has not since been observed.

Yellow-billed Cuckoo. Coccyzus americanus. — I have
examined several specimens taken in the vicinity of Toronto.
It appears to be a rare but regular summer resident.

Red-bellied Woodpecker. Centurus carolinensis. — A
female was taken at Toronto, May 19, 1885.

Colaptes auratus (hybrid with C. mexicanus) . — This remark¬
able specimen was shot by Mr. Burton, just outside the City
of Toronto, in September, 1SS3. The following is its descrip¬
tion.

Sex? Length, 34 cm.; wing, 16.5: tail, t 1 . 5 ; bill, 3.5; tarsus, 3 ; middle
toe and claw, 3. Color: Above as in the male auratus, but darker and
more pronounced. The purplish-gray of the throat is very rich and has
a glaucous gloss. Pectoral crescent and black maxillary mark very large-
Spots on the breast large and unusually numerous. Breast and sides
tinged with yellow. First four primaries with shafts and under side red;
the next two shade into yellow in the terminal third. The last two sec¬
ondaries are as in mexicanus. The rest of the quills as in auratus. The
under coverts are pink. The tail-feathers are as in mexicanus , but towards
the middle are more and more tinged with yellow. Otherwise this speci¬
men resembles a large male auratus in very high plumage.

I have nothing but descriptions and my memory for making
comparisons with mexicanus , and suspect that the red on the
quills is not quite so deep as in the typical bird. Yet this need
not invalidate the description of the specimen, which is evidently
a fine hybrid, and Chiefly remarkable for having been taken at
Toronto. This specinlen is in the possession of Mr. Cross, taxi¬
dermist.

? Snowy Plover. i^Egialitis cantiana. — A specimen of this
bird was shot here by Mr. J. Forman, May, 1880, and is now in
the rooms of the Toronto Gun Club. It was at the time in com¬
pany with some Piping Plovers melodd). This specimen

(sex?) answers in general, to the description in Coues’s ‘Key’
and fully in regard to the bill ; it differs in being much lighter in
plumage. It is as follows : Pure white, with crown and back
slightly tinged with gray, and showing dusky touches ; the black

336

Seton, Interesting Records from Toronto.

[October

bar on the crown is strongly marked. No bar on the breast, but
there is a dark patch just before each wing-band, fading away
towards the back ; a dusky patch on each ear ; primaries dusky ;
the three central pairs of tail-feathers are touched with dusky near
the tip. I had no opportunity to make measurements, but in the
same case were meloda and scmipalmata , and comparison with
these makes me almost certain that it is cantiana. The bill is
noticeably long, black, and slender. I never met the bird before,
and have no material to aid me in settling the point.

American .Snipe. Gallinago wilsoni. — A white specimen
of this well-known bird was shot in Toronto marsh on the 3d of
May, 1SS4, by Mr. H. Townson, in whose possession the bird
now is. It was killed in company with two normal individuals
of the same species. It is pure white, with the ordinary mark¬
ings indicated in pale, creamy buff, the only dark shades being a
few dusky touches on the scapulars, flanks, and subterminal tail-
band. The legs and bill are yellowish flesh-color.

Ruff. Philomachus pugnax. — A specimen of this rare
straggler was shot on Toronto Island in the spring of 1882.
It is now in the possession of Mr. Young of Toi'onto. The bird
was mounted in a sealed case, so that accurate measurements
could not be made, but the general proportions and the large ruff’
were unmistakable. This specimen appears to agree with the
maximum dimensions given in Coues’s ‘Key.’ The ruff is not
fully developed, and the face is still feathered. The color is as
follows : Head, nape, hind-neck, and upper part of ruff gray with
black pencillings ; wing-coverts and scapulars black with light
edges ; chin, belly, crissum, and tail-coverts white ; quills dusky ;
tail-feathers gray with black bars ; throat, breast, and most of ruff
glossy, greenish black.

Great White Egret. Ardea egretta. — A, magnificent
specimen of this beautiful Heron was shot at Lake Nipissing in
1883. It is now in the museum of Mr. C. A. Hirschfelder.

Hybrid Mallard and Dusky Duck (?). — In the rooms of
the Gun Club there is also a supposed hybrid between these two
species. Certainly it answers the description of no Duck ever
found in this region, while it combines, in a remarkable degree,
the characters of the two mentioned. It is known to the sports¬
men here as a "Brewer.’ It was shot in this locality. No data.

Barrow’s Goldeneye. Bucephala islandica. — A fine male
specimen of this Duck was killed hereby Mr. Charles Pickering

»88$.]

Stejneger, Analecta Ornithologica.

337

on the 18th of April, 1885. This I examined in the flesh. It is
the only one ever taken in this locality.

Bufflehead Duck. Bucephala albeola. — An albino of
this species was killed about thirty miles east of here, and is now
to be seen in the possession of Mr. Jos. Taylor of Toronto.

Harlequin Duck. Histrionicus torquatus. — A female of
this species is now in the rooms of the Toronto Gun Club. It
was killed here in the fall of 1881, by Mr. Wm. Loane, who
claims also to have taken a pair in the spring of 1861.

Glaucus Gull. Larus glaucus. — A fine specimen of this
Gull was killed in Toronto Bay in the spring of 1884, by Mr.
George Guest of this city.

ANALECTA ORNITHOLOGICA.

Sixth Series.

BY LEONHARD STEJNEGER.

XXIX. Jacana contra Parra.

Linnaeus, basing his diagnosis upon Edward’s pi. 48, in the
10th edition (1758), p. 152, described a Fulica spinosa as “ F.
fronte carunculata, corpore variegato, humeris spinosis, digitis
simplicibus, ungue postico longissimo. Habitat in America
australi.” Description and plate apply with equal pertinency to
the young Brazilian Jagana, commonly called Parra jacana
Linn. The latter name, as we shall see presently, dates from 1766,
and spinosa will, therefore, have to stand, as already indicated
by Ridgway (Water Birds, I, p. 1 75 ) *

As will be remarked, Linnasus included the Jagana in 1758 in
the genus Fulica. Brisson, with his usual excellent judgment of
generic distinctions, made in 1760 a separate genus for this bird,
describing the different plumages as different species, however.
This genus, which he called Jacana , he characterized by the
extremely lengthened claws, thereby excluding all the Chara-
driidae with frontal lobes and wing-spurs, referring them to his

33^

Stejneger, Analecta Ornithologica.

[October

genus Vanellus , thus proving that he understood their true rela¬
tionship.

Thus was first established the genus which has since nearly
unanimously but wrongly been called Parra. Its proper name
is Jacana , and its only type is Jacana spinosa.

Parra was not invented before 177 6, when Linnaeus — fully
aware of Brisson’s older appellation, for he quotes the latter —
introduced as a genus a most heterogenous assemblage, the chief
characters of which were “ Frons carunculata ; carunculis loba-
tis ; Alulae spinosae,” ignoring not only Brisson’s appellation but
also his natural arrangement. Parra , therefore, includes not only
the Jayana, which Linnaeus described twice, as Parra jacana ,
and as Parra variabilis (the latter being only a new name for
Pulica spinosa) , but also two of Brisson’s Vanelli , which now
are usually referred to Chetttisia or Lobivanellus , and finally
the bird which is so well known as Chauna chavaria.

Starting our nomenclature from 1758, it is clear that Parra for
the Brazilian Jayana is entirely out of question. Consequently
the name of the family also should be changed, and will stand
as Jacanidae.

But even if we take 1766 for our starting-point, the result will
be the same, viz., that Parra is untenable for the Jayanas. Parra ,
as originally established, contained five nominal species, P. do-
minica and senegalla , which are Old World Charadriidae, P.
jacana and variabilis , which are the Brazilian Jayana, and P.
chavaria. Now, in 1774, Brisson’s faithful follower, Jacob
Schaffer, in his ‘ Elementa Ornithologica,’ re-established the
genus Jacana. He placed it next to Vanellus and gives the
comparative characters as follows :

“ Rostrum rectum ; apice crassius, breve. Vngvicvli breuis
simi. Vanellus.”

“ Rostrum rectum ; apice crassius, longiusculum. Vngvicvli
longissimi. Jacana,”

referring at the same time to pi. vii, figs, i and ii, where is given
colored representations of head and foot of Jayana, probably
copied from Edwards, pi. 48, and very recognizable. Not
before 1S11 was Chauna established by Illiger, leaving Parra for
the two ‘ Vanelli’ of Brisson.

1758-men may therefore tabulate the synonymy thus:

*885-]

339

Stejneger, Analecta Ornithologica.

Jacana Briss.

< 1758. — Fulica Linn., Syst. Nat. 10 ed., I, p. 152.

= 1760. — Jacana Briss., Ornith., V, p. 121.

< 1766. — Parra Linn., Syst. Nat., 12 ed., I, p. 259.

1766-men will have to register the synonyms as follows :

Jacana Schffaer.

<C 1766. — Parra Linn., Syst. Nat., 12 ed., I, p. 259.

= 1774. — Jacana Schaffer, Elem. Orn., fol. B, 2, pi. vii, figs, i, ii.

The name Parra should, therefore, be restricted to the genus
having for type P. dominica or P. senegalla , consequently
the genus Lobivanellus Strickland, 1S41, or more strictly to
the group designated by Gray in his Hand-list (III, p. 11) as
il- d — ?.” Here I may further remark that Lobivanellus
Stricld. really belongs to this latter group, being consequently
a strict synonym of Parra , while Gray’s group c should stand as
Sarcogrammus Reichb., thus:

Sarcogrammus Reichb.

> 1852. — Sarcogrammus Reichenbach, Syst. Av., p. xviii ( Sarco -

gramma in Jerdon, B. Ind. Ill, p. 648).

>1864. — ' u Vanello-cketusia Brandt” Jerdon, B. India, III, p. 646
(nec Brandt).

> 1871. — Lobivanellus Gray, Handl. Ill, p. 11 (nec Strickl. as re¬

stricted).

Parra Linn.

_> 1766. — Parra Linn., Syst. Nat., 12 ed., I, P 259.

1841. — Lobivanellus Strickland, P. Z. S., 1841, p. 33 (as restricted
by Reichenbach, 1852).

In regard to the synonym ‘‘ Vanello-chetusia Jerdon, nec
Brandt,” I may remark that I agree completely with Bonaparte in
referring S’, inornatus (and cincreus ) to the same genus as S.
indicus ( = as I can detect no structural difference of

any consequence.

Gray has noted the facts concerning Jacana and Parra as
specified above, calling the Jn^atias : k‘ Parra Lath. 1790, nec
Linn. 1766 ” ! But he made a strange mistake in placing “ Parra
L., 1766.” as a synonym of Sarcogrammus Reichb.

34°

Stejneger, Analecta Ornithologica.

[October

XXX. Colymbus nigricollis , not a North American Bird.

Colymbus nigricollis (Brehm) proper — that is to say, the
Palaearctic form — has crept into the lists of North American
birds by a mistake, caused by the uncertainty as to which form
authors meant by the name “ Podiceps anritus .”

“ Podiceps auritus ” was first introduced into the North
American fauna by Audubon — Orn. Biogr. V, 1839, (P- IOS,
pi. 404) ; Syn., 1839, (p- 35s) > B- Am., VII, 1844, p. 322,
pi. 4S2 — who described and figured specimens lent him by his
“ noble and kind friend the Right Honorable the Earl of Derby,
who received them from North America, where, as I am assured,
it is not uncommon, although it has not been my good fortune to
meet with it.” This is the black-necked or ‘ eared ’ species ; but,
judging from the plate and the description (“ the wings greyish-
brown with a broad patch of white, the secondary quills being
of that color”), in all probability the American race, P. calif or-
nicus Heerm., as already indicated by Dr. Coues, who puts the
i-eferences to Audubon in the synonymy of the latter form (B.
Northwest, p. 733).

Mr. Lawrence, in Baird’s ‘Birds of North America’ (1858,
pp. 896, 897), enumerates both cali fornicus and auritus as
American, the latter solely on Audubon’s authority, and copying
his description. Hence the two names appear again in the
Smithsonian ‘Catalogue,’ first octavo edition, 1859, as Nos. 707
and 708. It should be remarked, however, that at that time the
relation of the ‘ California Grebe’ to the black-necked or ‘ eared’
species was not suspected, as only winter specimens were known.
It was therefore compared with P. cor /tutus , the ‘ horned ’ Grebe,
and not with the ‘ eared ’ one.

More recently C. nigricollis has been regarded as North
American on account of the supposed occurrence of this form in
Greenland. Professor Newton has been quoted as the authority,
reference being made to his ‘ Notes on Birds which have been
found in Greenland’ (Arctic Manual, 1875, p, no). Here is
what he says :

“ (51.) Podiceps auritus. Horned Grebe.

“.A few immature specimens have been obtained in the southern part ot
Greenland."

*88 S-]

Stejneger, Analecta Ornithologica.

341

This statement, however, is based solely upon Professor Rein-
nardt’s ‘ List of the Birds hitherto observed in Greenland ’ (Ibis,
1S61, p, 15), where it is formulated thus :

“87.* Podiceps cornutus ( Gmel.).

“Only a few young birds, obtained in the southern part of Greenland.”

It is' evident from the above that it is the more northern spe¬
cies, “ C. auritus , the Horned Grebe,” that has been occasionally
obtained in Greenland, and not the black-necked southern spe¬
cies. The mistake evidently arose from the belief that Newton’s
'•auritus ’ was the same as the * auritus ’ of nearly all American
authors up to Ridgway’s ‘Nomenclature’ (1880), and still of
Hr. Coues’s publications (‘ Check-list,’ 1882, and ‘ Key,’ 1SS4).

Colymbus nigricollis ( auritus Auct. nec Linn., nec Newton,
nec Ridgw.) is a bird of rather southern distribution. In Europe
it breeds only in the central parts, being a straggler to the Scan¬
dinavian peninsula and Finland ; it is common in Central and
Southern Russia, and eastward through the southern parts of
temperate Asia as far east as Japan. Its alleged occurrence in
Greenland, 'therefore, aroused my suspicion, and the investiga¬
tion resulted as above in the expulsion of the typical C. nigri¬
collis from the list of North American birds.

XXXI. “ Simorhynchus Merrem, 1819.”

I quote the following from my ‘ Ornithological Explorations in
Kamtschatka and the Commander Islands,’ p. 38 :

“ Merrem is said to have established the genus Simorhynchus
( nec Keys, and Blas.. 1840, qui Terekia Bp.) upon A. cri-
statella Pall. As early as 186S Dr. Coups asked, ‘ Where is this
genus named?’ but nobody seems to have been able to give an
answer. Nor do I know whether Merrem included more species
than cristatella in his apocryphal genus. Anybody having the
opportunity of investigating the matter would gain the lasting
thanks of ornithologists by publishing the results — preferably a
full extract of Merrem’s paper as far as it relates to the present
question — in any of the standard ornithological periodicals.”

* "Those observed as yet in very few instances only, and the accidental stragglers, are
marked with an asterisk” (t. c. p. 4).

[October

3 A 2 Stejnegee, Analecta Ornithologica.

Now that 1 am in the position to elucidate the matter myself,
I ought, perhaps, modestly to give up my claims to “ the lasting
thanks of ornithologists,” but in view of the fact that I have
mostly earned anything but thanks for my ‘discoveries’ in old
names, I can hardly afford to part with my right to score this last
one to my credit.

In the article Alca of Ersch and Gruber’s Encyclopaedia * Mer-
rem urges the necessity of subdividing Linnaeus’s genus Alca ,
proposing the following genera: i, Alca; 2, Mormon; 3, Si-
morhynchus ; 4, Arctica .

In response to my own request above I shall give a full extract
of the article (pp. 405, 406) so far as it relates to the name in
question :

“3. Starike. Simorhynchus. Die Stariken, denen wir im Teutschen
ihren Russischen Namen lieszen, gesellte Pallas, durch den allein wir die
erste genauere Kentnisz haben den Aiken bei, obgleich er [page 406]
selbst die Unahnlichkeit anerkannte, und sie sich auch von den beiden
vorhergehenden Gattungen auftallend unterscheiden. Ihr Scbnabel steigt
namlich vorn aufwiirts, so dasz seine Spitze hoher liegt, wie der Mund-
winkel, er ist jederzeit glatt und ohne Wachshaut. Ihre Mundofnung ist
klein. Ihre Nasenlocher liegen von der Stirn entfernt, von einer Erho-
hung der Kant eingefaszt, welche gewissermaszen Nasenlocherfliigel bildet.
Ihre Fltigel bestehen aus 10 Schwungfedern der ersten und 16 der zweiten
Ordnung. Die zweite ist die langste. Ihre Fiisze sind wie bei den vorigen
und ihr kurzer Schwanz besteht aus 14 Ruderfedern. Man findet sie allein
im Meere zwischen Asien und Amerika, und sie legen ein einziges Ei auf
die kahlen Felsen.”

Merrem includes two species in the genus thus defined, viz., on
page 406, Simorhynchus cristatus , based upon Pallas’s Alca
cristatella , and on page 407, Simorhynchus Psittacula , based
upon the same author’s Alca psittactila .

It will be a relief to quote, in the future, “ Simorhynchus
Merrem in Ersch & Gruber’s Encycl., 1 sect., II, 1819, p. 405
(type Alca cristatella Pall.) ” instead of “ Syniorhynchus
‘Merrem iSiy' fide G. R. Gray, type, Alca cristatella Pall.,
fide Gray.”

* Allgemeine | Encyclopadie | der | Wissenschaften und Kiinste | in alphabeti-
scher Folge | von | genannten Schriftstellern bearbeitet | und herausgegeben von | J. S.
Ersch und J. G. Gruber | Professoren zu Halle. | ZweiterTheil | mit Kupfern und Char-
ten | — | Alga-Aldus | — | Leipzig, in Verlage von Johann Friedrich Gleditsch 1819.

I88S-]

Ridgway on a New Cardinal Grosbeak.

343

XXXII. Dendroica vigorsii (Aud.).

The rule “once a synomym, always a synonym” necessitates
the rejection of the specific name ‘ pinus ’ for the Pine Warbler,
as will be seen from the following account.

Linnaeus (S. N. 12 ed. I, p. 187), in 1766, described correctly
the Blue-winged Yellow Warbler as Certhia pinus basing it
upon Edwards’s plate 277, upper figure. Mislead by the latter
author he quotes as a synonym Catesby’s plate 61, which is a
poor representation of the Pine Warbler. Latham, in 1790, re¬
ferred the bird described by Linnaeus to the genus Sylvia calling
it Sylvia pinus , a name which was adopted by Vieillot, 1807, in
his Birds of North America.

Wilson, in 1811 (Am. Orn. Ill (p. 25)), demonstrated that
the birds figured by Edwards and by Catesbty are different spe¬
cies. Well aware of the term Sylvia pinus , he did not intend it
as a new name, but he simply restricted it to Catesby’s bird. In
this he was wrong, as we have seen above. He should have left
the name Sylvia pintis with the Blue-winged Yellow Warbler
and given a new name to the Pine Creeper, but, instead, he be¬
stowed the new name upon the former, calling it Sylvia soli-
taria. It should also be noted that the two birds were both in¬
cluded by him and subsequent writers in the genus Sylvia.

It is evident that Sylvia pinus Wilson 1S11, nec Latham 1790,
cannot stand under any circumstance. Another name being nec¬
essary we will have to take the one bestowed by Audubon, in
1832, viz.. Sylvia vigorsii. The species should in the future
be known as

Dendroica vigorsii (Aud.).

Smithsonian Institution.

Washington D. C., August , 1885.

DESCRIPTION OF A NEW CARDINAL GROSBEAK
FROM ARIZONA.

BY ROBERT RIDGWAY.

The Cardinal Grosbeak from Arizona, hitherto supposed to
be identical with C. igneus from Cape St. Lucas, proves, on
comparison of numerous specimens, to be easily distinguishable.

344

Ridgway on a Nezv Cardinal Grosbeak.

[October

I therefore propose for it the name Cardinalis cardinalis
superbus, with the following characters : —

Cardinalis cardinalis superbus, subsp. nov.

Subsp. char. — Similar to C. cardinalis igneus , but decidedly larger,
and the female more richly colored.

Adult $ in breeding season (No. 98,942; U. S. Nat. Mus., Fuller’s Ranch.
Arizona, May 30, 1SS4; E. W. Nelson) : Head, neck, and entire lower
parts, including lining of wing, pure, rich, scarlet-vermilion, becom¬
ing gradually but slightly paler posteriorly. Nape, back, scapulars, rump,
upper tail-coverts, wing, and tail, much duller, more brownish, red. the
dorsal region tinged or mixed with light grayish brown; terminal portion
of primaries clear grayish brown. Chin, upper part of throat, anterior
part of malar region, lores, and narrow line from latter to base of culmen,
black. Bill deep orange-red (bright vermilion in life) ; legs and feet
horn-brown. Wing, 4.15; tail, 5.00; culmen, .85; bill from nostril, .60,
depth at base, .70; tarsus, 1.10; middle toe, .72.

Adult $ in rv inter (No. 61,541, U. S. Nat. Mus., Colorado River. Ari¬
zona, Nov. 30, 1871 ; F. Bischoff) : Similar to summer plumage, but all
the feathers of the nape, back, scapulars, rump, and the upper tail-coverts
conspicuously bordered terminally with brownish gray, and those of the
lower parts similarly, but much more narrowly and indistinctly, bordered
with brownish white. Wing, 4.15; tail, 5.10; culmen, .90; bill from nos¬
tril, .60; depth at base, .70; tarsus, 1.08; middle toe, .75.

Adult $ (No 98,944, Tucson, Arizona, Jan. 30, 1S84) : Head (except
capistrum and crest), sides of neck, and lower parts in general, deep tawny
buff, the top and sides of the head, and middle of jugulum, much tinged
with dull vermilion; crest dull vermilion, the feathers tipped with light
brown, or deep grayish buff. Capistrum dull gray, becoming nearly white
on chin and upper throat. Lining of wing, including inner edges of
remiges, pure light vermilion; tibiae, crissum, and lower tail-coverts
strongly tinged with vermilion. Nape, back, scapulars, rump, and upper
tail-coverts uniform grayish broccoli-brown, lighter and more buffy on the
nape, all the feathers tinged with dull red beneath the surface. Wings and
tail dull brownish red, the greater coverts and tertials broadly edged with
the color of the back, the tips of primaries light grayish brown, and rec-
trices narrowly edged with the same. Bill, orange-red (bright vermilion
in life); legs and feet horn-brown. Wing, 3. So; tail, 470; culmen, .80;
bill from nostril, .52, depth at base, .65; tarsus, 1.00; middle toe, .65.

Another adult female (No. 98,945, Lowell, Arizona, April 2, 1884,
E. W. Nelson), has still more red than that described above, the entire top
and sides of the head being strongly tinged with this color, as are also the
lower throat, jugulum, breast, belly, and lower tail-coverts. The ochra-
ceous-buff of the lower parts is paler, the feathers being somewhat worn
and faded.

An adult female in Mr. Henshaw’s collection (No. 911, Coll. H. W. H.,
Gila Co., Arizona, Nov. 18, 1881), differs from either of the National Mu-

. igneus.

1SS5.]

Ridgway on a New Cardinal Grosbeak.

345

seum examples in having but a trace of red on the side of the head, and
much less of the same on the jugulum.

The adult males of the two forms which I have been able to examine
measure as follows : —

Depth
of bill
at base.

*(/dw viNimo
VO vO vO vO vO vO vO vG vO

Middle

toe

10 CO LO 10 ’ CO CO N Co CO
vo vq vq vq . vo vq vq vq . vq

v?

C/3

s

N N O C* . N U3O O »OtO

qqqo qqqqoq'

o

I M 0

Bill

from

nostril.

V)0 « N • ihO coCO

CO CO LO CO _ CO CO -t" CO CO -t-

co

c

CO N 0 N CO O CO loco to

CO CO CO CO T^CO X - t-'.CO X-

Ov

Culm

Tail.

00000000000
co co 10 vq co ro 10

4"4-ro4-4"4-4-4-4-4-4-

4-45 |

br

c

%

l

CO O O co O O lO lO CO O O
vq q*cq i-^vq vq t>.vo

rOrOrOcOrOrorOrOrOfOrO

O

rO

Date.

4 _ M H « «

. g • iL. . .

. Q

Average, |

Locality.

Lower Cal. (Cape St. Lucas).

“ (La. Paz).

“ (San Jose).

Sex

and

age

"b "0 "b "0 *b "0 *b "0 "0 "b "0

Collector.

Xantus.

Belding.

Museum and
No.

C/3 .

D ^

x^ O O 4-00 |CcO - <N top

CO O'-1 -* rO — — co Co co ~

O Cv»0 CO lO ro *-0 CO lO IOCO
NN'O'O'O'C'O r>» I’. 1^ c
-■ - N r>l CO CO 00 CO DO Qv

Depth

of bill

at base.

O 00 O 0 CO 10 10
X~» t^vo vo vo

: - ii

vq*

Middle

toe.

N N i/) ^ N O 1/)

rO

Tarsus.

2 2o 2 « 2 0

Ov

q

Bill

from

nostril.

10 10 O O co 10

CO »OG VO CO CO 10

co

Culm’n.

'O lO O co co x^. 10
COCO OVCOCOCOCO

9S‘

Tail.

*

8&2gvg22

10 CO CO Th CO CO

4-97

Wing.

O O CO CO O G 10

O O - - O ►-< O

4- 4- *+■ -+■ 4- 4- 4- 1

1

I irf

Date.

6 6 6 0 4 coco

H ro ro <-< M

■Ss i «I

03

bfj

rt

03

>

<

Locality.

zona (Camp Grant).

“ (Colorado River).

“ (Fuller’s).

“ (Lowell).

“ (Crittenden).

“ (Gila Co).

<

Sex

and

age

CS - - - * - ~

’b’b'bYj’b 'b'b

O

13

3

0

Palmer.

Bischoff.

Nelson.

Museum and
No.

ffi

C/3

£5

VO Nh 4 ro 1^—
iO iO -'t* ^ Gv •*
I'.X'.i^Cv GvvQ O

Ov Ov « CO CO Cv «

Tf rt-vO Cv Ov Ov Ov

Plumage very much worn.

346

Brewster on Swainson' s Warbler.

[October

ADDITIONAL NOTES ON THE NEST AND
EGGS OF SWAINSON’S WARBLER
( HE L IN A I A S WA INS ONI) .

BY WILLIAM BREWSTER.

Shortly after the publication of my first article on this subject*
Mr. Wayne sent me two more nests of Swainson’s Warbler,
taken respectively June 27 and June 30, 1885. The first was
built in a cane over a pool of stagnant water, at a height of about
five feet ; the second, also in a cane, was at a height of at least
eight feet, and over clear, running water. The females of both
nests were shot, thus rendering identification absolute.

The second nest was “found when the birds had just begun
work, and I watched them repeatedly at their labors. They
would fly up from the ground and, hovering like a Hawk or
Ki ngfisher, fix the leaves in place with their bills. The female
laid her first egg June 26, and one on each of the following two
days. I took the nest on the fifth day, when dissection of the
female showed that the set was complete.”

The nest taken June 27 contained two eggs, chipped and on
the point of * hatching. Unfortunately both were broken in
blowing, but Mr. Wayne describes them as “dead white without
spots.” He sends me the shells of one, which are quite immacu¬
late.

The set of three eggs just mentioned is also before me. The
specimens are in perfect condition and measure, respectively,
•75 x *58. -77 X .58, and .74 X .58. They are all oval, with
the smaller end decidedly blunt and rounded, and in general shape
closely resemble the smaller egg of the set described in • Forest
and Stream.’ Their ground-color is also similar — dull white,
with a faint but appreciable bluish tinge. One is perfectly plain ;
another, like the larger egg of the first set, has two or three
minute specks which may be genuine shell markings; while the
the third is unmistakably spotted and blotched with pale lilac.
Over most of the surface these markings are fine, faint, and
sparsely distributed, but about the larger end they become
coarser, thicker, and deeper-colored, forming a well-defined ring

Forest and Stream, Vol. XXIV, No. 24, July 9, 1885, p. 468.

1 88s.]

Brewster on S-wainson's Warbler. 347

or wreath. All three eggs have a slight polish, and the shells
look hard and thick for those of a Warbler’s eggs.

The nests are similar in general position and construction to
the specimen described by me in ‘Forest and Stream,’ but both
differ in certain important details. The one containing the set
of three eggs is composed almost entirely of bleached, straw-
colored cane leaves, with an interior lining of pine needles and a
few thread-like strands of black moss, apparently Tillandsict.
This nest is much the smallest of the four, measuring externally

3.50 in diameter by 3.00 in depth ; internally 1.150 in diameter by

1.50 in depth; the greatest thickness of the rim or outer wall
being 1.00. Unlike the specimen first described, it is firmly sup¬
ported on all sides by the fascicled branches among which it rests.
Its shape is nearly globular, and although the exterior is rather
loosely formed, the structure, as a whole, is neat and compact.

The nest taken June 27 is very much larger, in fact quite the
largest specimen that 1 have seen, measuring externally 5.00 in
diameter by 6.00 in depth ; internally 1.50 in diameter by 1.25 in
depth ; with the rim in places 1.75 thick. It is shaped like an
inverted cone, the apex extending down nearly to the point of
junction of the numerous fascicled stems which surround and
support its sides. In total bulk it fully equals the average nest
of our Crow Blackbird, while it is not nearly as finished a speci¬
men of bird architecture. Indeed it would be difficult to imagine
anything ruder than its outer walls, — composed of mud-soaked
leaves of the sweet gum, water oak, holly, and cane, thrown to¬
gether into a loose mass, bristling with rough stems, and wholly
devoid of symmetry or regularity of outline. The interior, how¬
ever, lined with pine needles, moss fibre, black rootlets, and a
little horse-hair, is not less smooth and rounded than in the other
specimens.

The acquisition of these additional nests is important as tend¬
ing to show that the position and construction of the first two
nests, and the character of the eggs which one or them contained,
were not exceptional. The total results of Mr. Wayne’s labors
may be summed as follows: Four nests, taken respectively June
5, 6, 27, and 30. contained, respectively, one young bird a few days
old, one young bird and two addled eggs, two eggs on the point
of hatching, and three perfectly fresh eggs. All four nests were
essentially similar, being bulky and loosely-formed, composed

Scott, Early Spring Notes from Southern Arizona. [October

mainly of dry leaves, lined with fine roots, moss fibres, pine nee¬
dles, and horse-hair, and placed in canes over water at heights
varying from four to eight feet. Of the seven eggs taken, four
were immaculate, two perhaps slightly spotted, and one unmis¬
takably spotted and blotched with lilac.

The inferences suggested by these facts are: (i) That Swain-
son’s Warbler nests usually, if not invariably, in canes over water ;
(2) that it lays from one to three eggs ; (3) that its eggs may be
either plain, slightly speckled, or rather thickly and distinctly
marked.

Another season’s work on the part of Mr. Wayne will doubtless
throw more light on all these points. Meanwhile ornithologists
may well rest satisfied with the knowledge thus far obtained.

EARLY SPRING NOTES FROM THE MOUNTAINS OF
SOUTHERN ARIZONA.

BY W. E. D. SCOTT.

The present article, based on observations made and material
collected in the pine region and neighborhood of Las Sierras de
Santa Catalina, Pima County, Arizona, is in reality a continua¬
tion of an article which appeared in ‘ The Auk ’ for April, 1883
(pp. 172-174). The locality visited is the one there described.
The duration of my stay was from April 19 to 24, inclusive.

The winter snow had almost melted from the ground and was
only to be seen in patches in the deeper part of the woods and
on the sides of hills and ravines, where the sun shone but little.
It was still cold, and ice formed at night on water standing in
pails, and on the edges of the mountain brooks where the current
was not too swift. Except on the morning of the 21st of April,
and throughout the entire day on the 24th of the month, the wind
blew incessantly and most of the time with great force. Oh the
20th, about daylight, a cold storm of rain and hail set in, and later
this changed into snow, which soon covered the ground to the
depth of nearly an inch. The storm, however, broke about noon,

iS85.]

Scott, Early Spring Notes from Southern Arizona.

349

and the sun coming out the wintry effect was speedily dispelled.
The other days were cloudless.

The collection of birds made during my stay embraces a hun¬
dred and fifty-one skins, the catalogue numbers of the same run¬
ning from Nos. 2174 to 2324, inclusive ; this I mention, as it will
be necessary to refer to certain birds obtained.* Birds on the
whole were much more abundant than during the former visit, but
certain species that were met with in November, 1SS4, I did not
detect during the present trip ; and the more noticeable among
these are Carpodacus cassini , Hesperiphona vespertina , and
Sphyropicus thyroideus. Others, then comparatively common,
were now apparently rare, as I only saw one Olive-headed War¬
bler ( Peucedratnus olivaceus). The species obtained are the
following :

Turdus unalascae auduboni. — On April 22, on the very
summit of the mountains, I observed a pair of Thrushes, appar¬
ently mated, and took the female (No. 2234), which, on dissec¬
tion, proved to be about to lay, the egg-yolks being some of them
nearly half developed. This was the only pair of Thrushes ob¬
served. f

Sialia mexicana. — A few pairs were noticed at a high altitude
in the pine region ; and being already apparently mated, they
doubtless breed early in May.

Polioptila caerulea.— A pair, taken on April 20, about fifteen
hundred feet below the summit, where the pines almost cease,
and where the evergreen and scrub oak are the principal trees.
Here this species was common.

Lophophanes wollweberi. — Not uncommon in the oak
belt, just reaching to the lower pine limit. It is in places abun¬
dant in the oak region, and in this range of mountains the first
set of eggs is laid by the 20th of April.

Sitta carolinensis aculeata. — Rather common, but by no
means so abundant as in the winter. A female (No. 2265),
taken April 22, had laid a full complement of eggs and had evi¬
dently begun sitting.

* [These specimens have been kindly forwarded to me for examination by Mr
Scott, with the request that I should add such remarks respecting them as seemed
called for. — J. A. ALLEN.]

f [This specimen is unusually light colored even for var. auduboni, it being the most
'bleached out’ specimen I have seen. — J. A. A.]

Scott, Early Spring Notes from Southern Arizona. [October

Sitta pygmaea. — Common, but not associated in large flocks
as in the winter. The}' were generally paired, and I rarely saw
more than two pairs together. From the dissection of the females
taken, and from the fact that throughout the day I frequently saw
the birds going in and out of holes in the dry pine stubs, I con¬
clude that in some cases the nesting sites had been selected, and
that eggs would have been laid, in some cases, by May i.

Certhia familiaris mexicana. — A single pair observed, and
the male taken (No. 2270), on April 23. They were creeping
about on a leafless ash tree, where the pines were rather scatter¬
ing, and near the point where these trees terminate, well down
on the northern slope of the mountains. I heard no song.*

Catherpes mexicanus conspersus.j — One pair was taken
just at the lower limit of the pine region. They had a nest in the
vicinity, but my search for it was unavailing. The female had
laid all the eggs of this, the first clutch, and possibly had even
then young, as the skin of the belly showed that incubation had
been going on for some time. Though much has been said
of the wonderfully beautiful song of this species I can not but
allude to it. For more than a year, two months in winter ex¬
cepted, this clear, delicious series of whistling notes has been

* [Mr. Ridgvvay, in his ‘ Critical Remarks on the Tree-Creepers ( Certhia ) of Europe
and North America’ (Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., V, 1882, pp. 111-116), says (p. 116) that
Certhia mexicana differs “conspicuously from all the others in the total absence of
light tips to the primary coverts.” In this character Mr. Scott’s specimen agrees per¬
fectly, there being no trace of white on the primary coverts. The lower parts are also
grayish, and the other features of coloration and size agree with the characters given
by Mr. Ridgvvay as distinctive of mexicana (wing, 2.60 ; tail, 2.65), whose habitat he
gives as “Guatemala and Southern Mexico.” Mr. Brewster has since, however, very
positively identified Arizona specimens with var. mexicana (Bull. N. O. C., VII, p. 81
April, 1882).

In his remarks on this species Mr. Ridgway observes that mexicayia “is by no means
smaller” than the northern races of Certhia, “thus affording another of the very
numerous ‘exceptions’ to the supposed law of smaller size to the southward of resident
species." He adds in a footnote that he has, "in perhaps a majority of cases [he
had recently tested] been unable to verify this supposed law of latitudinal variation
in size. He then gives the measurements of "the three specimens” of mexicana which
he had “been able to examine,” the sex of which, however, is not indicated. The
average falls considerably below the average for ?nales of the northern races rufa
and montana, as given on preceding pages of the same paper. Might it not be fairly
asked whether the generalization here reached has sufficient basis, in view of the
small number of specimens, and these unknown as to sex? — J. A. A.]

f [A series of five specimens of this species in Mr. Scott’s collection differ much from
average Colorado and California specimens, in the head and neck contrasting more
strongly with the back, the ground-color being darker and at the same time more pro¬
fusely spotted, giving a grayer general effect. — J. A. A.]

18850 Scott, Early Spring Notes from Southern Arizona. 3S^

constantly ringing in the air all about the canon where my
home is, and frequently the musician comes on a long piazza in
front of my house and, not at all afraid, perches on the rail and
creeps on every rafter, stopping constantly to pour out such a
flood of music that, familiar as it has become to me, I am always
astonished at its wonderful power and liquid sweetness. During
that portion of the year when we live with doors and windows
open (and this is for fully nine months), the little brown friend
with silvery throat is often in the rooms of the house, hopping
about and searching every “ nook and cranny ” for insect life, and
betimes singing as merrily as when on the faces of the perpen¬
dicular rocks in the canons, which are ever the favorite hunting
grounds he delights in. The female sings quite as much as the
male. Of the nest in detail I shall have more to say at another
time.

I heard a single bird singing one morning at a high altitude
among the pines, which was the only note made of its occurrence
well within this region.

Troglodytes aedon marianae, subsp. nov.

Much lighter colored and grayer throughout than either T. aedon or the
so-called var. farkmani , particularly on the anterior half of the upper sur¬
face, which is in strong contrast with the rest of the dorsal surface. A strik¬
ing feature is the hoary appearance of the dorsal aspect of the head, neck,
and anterior part of the back, caused by conspicuous gray edgings to the
feathers. The same hoariness also characterizes the wing-coverts. The
subterminal black bars on the feathers of the back are also unusually dis¬
tinct and heavy. In other respects similar to T. aedon and its varieties
parkmani and aztecus. Types, No. 2284 (f, April 23) and 2307 ($,
April 24), Coll. W. E. D. Scott. Named for my wife, Marian J.
Scott.*

* [Eleven specimens of this interesting form, collected April 19-24, are very uniform
in character, and are strikingly different from the usual form of House Wren found
throughout the West, which, as is well known, is scarcely, or often not at all distin¬
guishable from the Eastern bird, or aedon proper. While much paler throughout than
any western House Wrens I have before seen they are strikingly distinguished by the
decided hoariness of the anterior half of the dorsal surface. In size and proportions
careful measurements fail to show any differences from ordinary aedon. The wing
varies in length from 48 to 52 mm., and the tail from 42 to 49 mm. The tarsus varies
from 16 to 19 mm., averaging 17 mm., the culmen from 11 to 13 mm., averaging 12
mm. The first primary varies in length from 16 to 23 mm., or from less to more than
half the length of the second This shows how little reliance is to be placed upon this
character, which has been taken as a basis for separation of the eastern from the west¬
ern House Wrens, even by so late a writer as Mr. Sharpe (Cat. Bds. Brit. Mus. VI

}CJ2 Scott, Early Spring Notes from Southern Arizona. [October

Very common in the pines, and a few were noticed in the oaks
just without the pine limit. They were in all cases apparently
mated and the males were in full song. From the dissection of
females taken I should infer that they would lay eggs early in
May. Each pair had chosen, even when I noticed them, a partic¬
ular locality, generally about some fallen tree, or near some tan¬
gle of dead pine boughs, where they maintained their supremacy,
driving away any chance Warbler or Snowbird that dared to in¬
trude upon their particular domain. A series of eleven birds
collected are referable to this variety.

Helminthophila virginise. The only notes of the occurrence
of this bird are based on two taken during my stay — No. 22 76,
£ , April 23 and No. 2293, 9 1 April 24. Both were secured
near the summit of the mountain.

Helminthophila celata lutescens. Not observed until April
24, when two males and a female were taken. No others were
noticed.

Peucedramus olivaceus. A single male, noted on April
22, was the only one observed.

Dendroeca nigrescens. Ratber uncommon in the pines,
but more plentiful in the oaks on the lower borders of the pine
region. A female, taken in company with a male, apparently
her mate, is in no way appreciably different from the male in
coloring, though the latter is in as fully adult plumage as any I
have ever seen. The birds would breed here, I should think,
early in May.

Dendroeca auduboni. Rare. Only two taken in the pines,
both males, and no others seen. In this connection I may men¬
tion that at the point where I live, altitude about 4000 feet, and
distant from the region I am treating of not more than ten miles,
this species is referred to as follows in my note-book. “ General
arrival, March 30. 1SS5. Many males in full plumage, others
moulting.” And on my return from the pine region, the birds
were very abundant all about my house and in the surrounding
country.

Dendroeca graciae. Rather rare. I secured seven individ¬
uals during my stay. (No. 2174, £ , April 19; No. 222S, £ ,

1881, p. 251). A good series of either aedon or parkmani will show an equal range of
variation, as an examination has proved.

It may be added that Mr. Scott also sends one specimen (No. 1075, cf , Oct. 8, 1884)
that agrees strictly with the usual style of Western House Wren. — [.A .A.]

■SSS-]

Scott, Early Spring Notes from Southern Arizona.

353

April, 22 ; No. 2229, $ , April 22 ; No. 2274, $ , April 23 ; No.
2275, $ , April 23 ; and No. 2290, ? , April 24). No. 2290, ? ,
proved on dissection to have the eggs so far developed that I
judge she would have laid at latest in two weeks.

This species seems to live well within the pine region, and to
affect the pines and hemlocks alone. Its movements are slow,
and much remind me of those of Dc.ndrceca pinus. I heard no
song, though the peculiar Warbler cheep was very pronounced.

Cardellina rubrifrons. Though not observed during the
first day, I obtained a male of this species in the oaks, far down
on the northern side of the mountains and almost out of the pine
region, on April 20. During the last two days of my stay I found
the species very common, in small companies of from four to six
individuals. They were very shy, and affected the thick pine
trees, though now and then descending into the oaks among the
pines. The males have a very clear whistling song, which is
rather prolonged, and which betrays their presence, as the}' move
about rather nervously in thick pines and hemlocks, where they
would otherwise hardly attract attention. That the main part of
the representatives were males, and that the arrival of females was
not yet general, seems clear from the series before me, which con¬
sists of eleven of the former and one of the latter. The female
(No. 2295, April 24) is in no way different in appearance from
the highest colored males that I have, and there is very little in¬
dividual variation apparent in the birds before me. I noticed
nothing of the Redstart, or Flycatching Warbler, in their motions,
but they reminded me of Titmice in their general movements.
As far as observed they did not associate with other species of
Warblers and small birds, except with Setophaga picta, as noted
below.

Setophaga picta. Common in the higher regions of the oak
belt and throughout the pine region. Mated and in some cases
already nesting or about to lay. A series of ten were secured
and many more seen. Found more plentifully near water. I
can see no difference between the highest state of plumage in the
sexes, but often the male, when carefully compared with the
average female, presents an appreciably brighter coloring, which
is not to be noticed, however, at the usual distance at which one
sees them when alive. They are not nearly as shy as Cardellina
rubrifrons , with which bird I noticed them in company twice.

Scott, Early Spring Notes from Southern Arizona. [Octobei

Pyranga ludoviciana. An adult male 'No. 2313) was taken
at a high altitude on April 24, and another male and a female, seen
the same day in a similar locality, completes my record. I think
these were the first spring arrivals of the species.

Tachycineta thalassina. Not uncommon in small flocks
at the veiy highest altitude and in the heaviest pine timber. They
frequently alighted on the upper limbs of dead trees, and doubt¬
less breed here in the deserted Woodpecker holes.

Vireo gilvus swainsoni. A single male in full song was
taken just within the pine limit on April 21, and another was
heard in the same locality on April 25.

Vireo huttoni stephensi. Took one in the scrub oaks just
within the lower pine limit on April 21 (No. 2212, £ ) , and
a second on April 22 (No. 2233, <J), in an oak at almost the
upper limit of the evergreen oaks where the principal part of the
forest is pine and about a thousand feet higher in altitude than
the former representative. These were the only ones observed.

Melopiza lincolni. One taken at the lower pine limit (No.
2227, $ , April 21), was the only one observed.

Peucaea ruficeps boucardi. Abundant just below the pine
region, and not uncommon well within the pines, as far up at
least as the limit of the evergreen oaks.

Junco cinereus [palliatus]. Common, particularly at the
higher altitudes in the depths of the pine forests. Generally mated.
A number of the females taken had laid part of the eggs of the first
clutch, and all the females dissected would have laid in a short
time. The male has an exceedingly pleasant song, not unlike
that of Pipilo ?>iaculatus megalonyx , which bird he also emu¬
lates, perching on some prominent dead twig or limb, often at a
very considerable height, whence his notes are heard perhaps most
frequently just after sunrise. This was the only species of Junco
observed. There are, among the series of thirty-five birds of this
species secured during my stay, eight that show so marked a
variation in regard to the extent of the reddish coloring and its
intensity, both of the interscapular region and of the wings that I
shall briefly notice them. The others* not specially mentioned
are very typical individuals.

* [These have been examined by Mr. Ridgway and found to represent his new sub¬
species palliatus, described (since the receipt of this paper from Mr. Scott) on a later
page of this number of ‘The Auk.' Those here described in detail by Mr. Scott
are var. dorsalis, variously intergrading with palliatus. — J. A. A.]

iSSs-]

Scott, Early Spring Notes from Southern Arizona.

355

No 2189, $ , April 19. General tint of the reddish coloring very dull
and almost restricted to the interscapular region. The amount of reddish
on the greater secondary coverts is much less than in average specimens.
Only the faintest traces of this color on the secondaries. Irides bright
lemon yellow. Upper mandible, black. Lower mandible blackish at
base and tips, and obscure yellowish between these points.

No. 22S7, $ , April 23. The red of the interscapular region is vei-y
bright, but on the secondaries scarcely perceptible, and distinct only on
two of the greater secondary coverts on each wing. Irides and bill nor¬
mal.

No. 2196, $ , April 19. Very similar to the last, except that the gen¬
eral tint of the red is very dull. Irides bright orange yellow. Bill
normal.

No. 2247, 5 > April 22. The red is restricted to the interscapular region,
there being no traces of this coloring any where on the wings. Otherwise
typical cinereus with bright lemon yellow irides, upper mandible black
and lower mandible clear yellow.

No. 2188, $, April 19. The red of the interscapular region dull in gen¬
eral tone. The only traces of red on the wings is to be faintly seen on two
of the greater secondary coverts on each wing. Irides bright orange yel¬
low. Bill normal.

No. 2190, ?, April 19. General tint of red of the interscapular region
very bright. The faintest traces of the same color on some of the greater
secondary coverts. Irides lemon yellow. Bill normal.

No. 2289, $ , April 23. The red, which is brighter in tint, absolutely
confined to the interscapular region, there being no trace of this color
anywhere on the wings. Irides lemon yellow. Upper mandible black ;
lower mandible dull yellow throughout, obscured by a blackish tinge.

No. 2285, $, April 23. Reddish of interscapular region rather dull.
No red on the wings anywhere. A few reddish feathers, of the same shade
as those of the interscapular region, mixed with the slate-colored feathers
of the crown. Irides bright lemon yellow. Bill normal.

In Jiuico cinereus caniceps , taken in the spring near my house, I have
not unfrequently seen the crown very perceptibly mixed with feathers of
the peculiar reddish of the interscapular region.

Pipilo maculatus megalonyx. Common, even at the high¬
est altitude, and becoming abundant in the mixed scrub oak and
scattered pines. The males were in full song and the birds ap¬
parently mated.

Icterus parisorum. Several times during my stay I heard
and saw this species in the oaks on the lower border of the pine
region, and they were abundant about one mile away in the oaks
where the yuccas are plenty.

Cyanocitta stelleri macrolopha. Rather common and gen¬
erally mated throughout the pine region.

Scott, Early Spring Notes from Southern Arizona. [October

Aphelocoma sordida arizonae. Abundant up to the lower
edge of the pines, in the evergreen oak region. Breeding gen¬
erally.

Contopus pertinax. Common in the pines, and also found
a little below in the adjoining oaks. All of the specimens pro¬
cured were males, and I do not think the females had arrived.
While the actions of the bird in a great measure resemble those
of Contopus borealis , in general appearance it is much more like
Contopus virens , and the song, which I heard continually during
my stay, is even more musical in tone than that of its last-named
smaller ally. I secured nine males during my stay and saw many
others. This was the only Flycatcher observed in the pine re¬
gion, though not more than three miles away, and at an altitude
probably two thousand feet lower, several others ( Tyrannus
vociferans T. verticalis , and Myiarchus cinerascens ) were
very common.

Phalaenoptilus nuttalli. Rather common throughout the
pine region, and abundant in the evergreen oak belt. I heard the
first birds of this year singing near my house on the evening of
February 27, and in a few days the birds were very common.

Selasphorus rufus. Though I observed four or five Hum¬
mingbirds, all of which I should refer to this species, well within
the pines, the only one in reality identified — a male in full plu¬
mage — was at the lower pine limit on April 24.

Picus villosus harrisi. Not common. Only a few noted
and a single male taken. Generally seen in pairs.

Melanerpes formicivorus bairdi. Rather common, and ap¬
parently mated or mating.

Asyndesmus torquatus. But two observed in the pines,
though the birds were noticed commonly in the oak region dur¬
ing the ascent and on the return.

Colaptes mexicanus. Rather uncommon in pairs. Males
in full song.

Buteo borealis calurus. The only Hawk observed, and not
common. Abundant at lower altitudes in the mesquite region,
where it begins to breed early in March.

Cathartes aura. One taken at a high altitude, in the pines.
The only one seen.

Lawrence oh New Species of Columbidce.

357

ISSS.]

DESCRIPTIONS OF NEW SPECIES OF BIRDS OF
THE FAMILY COLUMBIDyE.

BY GEORGE N. LAWRENCE,
i. Zenaida rubripes.

Female. The front is of a light brown tinged with vinaceous; the
upper plumage is olivaceous-brown, with a dull reddish tinge, which is
most observable on the back; the hind part and sides of the neck are
grayish, the latter glossed with golden changing to light violet; the two
central tail-feathers are olive brown; the outer web of the first lateral
feather is pale rufous; the bases of the four outer ones are brownish-cine¬
reous, with their ends largely pale rufous, the two colors separated by a
black bar; the other tail-feathers are dark cinereous with a subterminal
black bar, on the under side the color of the basal portion of the tail
feathers is blackish cinereous ; the primaries are dark umber-brown, the
secondaries brownish-black, both narrowly edged with white ; the tertials
are the color of the back, and are marked with four conspicuous oval spots
of black; the under wing-coverts are light bluish-ash, the flanks dark
ashy-blue; behind the eye is a small spot of black, and another below the
ears, sides of the head and the chin pale vinaceous, the latter lighter in
color; the under plumage is of a reddish cinnamon color, rather dull on
the throat and breast, but somewhat brighter on the abdomen and under
tail-coverts; bill black; tarsi and toes carmine red.

The color of the feet in the dried specimen is quite bright; in the living
bird it is doubtless much more so. The tail has fourteen rectrices.

Length, fresh, 9.50 inches; wing, 5.25; tail, 3.38; bill, .62; tarsus, .75

Habitat. The Island of Grenada, West Indies. Type in the National
Museum, Washington.

Remarks. — As it somewhat resembles the description of T.
vinriceo-rufa Ridg., I sent it to Mr. Ridgway requesting him to
make a comparison with the type of that species ; he writes that
it differs from it “in shorter tail, with the feathers much broader
and more rounded at the end ; decidedly smaller bill, much less
purplish crissum, and in having the tail-feathers much more gray,
with the terminal portion of the lateral ones much paler and of
a more uniform rufous.”

Mr. J. G. Wells of Grenada in his manuscript list of the
birds of that island, gives the name ‘Trinidad Dove’ to one of the
species. For a year or more I have been urging him to procure
a specimen that it might be identified. He wrote that his en¬
gagements would not admit of his going after it, as it was found

35y

Lawrence on New Species of Columbidee.

[October

only in a distant part of the island. A few days since I was
much pleased to receive a letter from him, together with a speci¬
men of the desired Dove.

He wrote as follows : “It is with great pleasure I now forward
to you by book post, a skin of the Dove known locally as the
Trinidad Ground Dove. This bird was shot on the eastern side
of the island and sent to me by a brother of mine, who knew I
was anxious to procure a specimen of it; it is not a common bird.
I have shot three or four of them on a small island off the south
coast called ‘Glover’s Island,’ where I believe they resort during
the nesting period, and I have also shot one in Carriacou, but
have never until this instance seen one taken on the island proper;
the present specimen is a 9 ? and I would have been very glad to
get a $ also, as (writing from memory) I believe the $ to have
a gray head ; however, I shall use every endeavor to procure one.”

2. Zenaida bogotensis.

Front and sides of the head vinaceous; under the ear a spot of black ;
vertex and occiput dull plumbeous; plumage above brownish-olive, red¬
dish on the back ; sides of the neck golden-violet; the two middle tail-
feathers are dark olive-brown, the next pair are brownish-ash, the others
are grayish-ash for two-thirds their length, ending with pale rufous,
brightest on the three outer feathers; all have a subterminal band of black
separating the two colors; the outer web of the first lateral feather is clear
light rufous; the tail-feathers underneath have their bases blackish; the
tail consists of fourteen rectrices ; the lesser wing-coverts are reddish-
brown, lighter in color than the back; the greater wing-coverts are grayish-
brown, the primary and secondary quills are blackish-brown, narrowly
edged with white, and have their shafts of a dark brownish-red ; the
tertiaries are reddish-brown, marked with three large oval spots of black;
under wing-coverts and axillars plumbeous-white; chin whitish, upper
part of throat pale vinaceous, lower part of throat and upper part of
breast of a dull chocolate cinnamon color; the breast below this is
pale cinnamon, the abdomen of the same color but brighter, and the
under tail-coverts of a still deeper and brighter cinnamon; the flanks
are ashy-blue; the bill is black; the feet, in the dried specimen, are yellow¬
ish.

Length, uncertain (the skin being made up very short) ; wing, 6. 13 ; tail,
4-ro; bill, .70; tarsus, .87.

Habitat. Bogota, New Grenada. Type in my collection.

Remarks. — I have had this specimen for several years,
supposing it to be L. ruficauda Bonap., but while investigating
the West India species, I find it to be distinct. In this opinion

i38S.]

Ridgway on Helminthophila leucobronchialis.

359

Mr. Ridway concurs, and says “it differs from T. vinctceo-ruf a
in much deeper general coloration, the very different color of the
crissum (rufous instead of purplish vinaceous), and much larger
size, especially the bill.”

T. rujicciuda seems to be a rare species, as there is no speci¬
men in the National Museum or in that of the American Museum
of Natural History, New York. It is described as being quite
dark above (“brunneo-ardesiaca”) , with the hind neck plumbe¬
ous ; below and on the neck rosy wine color ; a spot under the eye
and a line behind the eye, violet-black, bordered with white ; sides
of the neck golden-violet ; wing-coverts “ ardesiacis ” ; quills
blackish, tail short, outer tail-feathers “fusco-ardesiacis,” with a
black spot across the middle, the end broadly rufous.

New York, September 15, 1885.

HELMINTHOPHILA LEUCOBRONCHIALIS.

BY ROBERT RIDGWAY.

Without having any new evidence to present concerning this
perplexing bird in the way of additional specimens, I would like
to offer for consideration a hypothesis which it seems to me affords
a more plausible explanation of certain aspects of the case than
that which suggests hybridism between simply H. chrysoptera
and H. pimis as sufficient to account for the variable ‘aberrant’
series which has been referred to H. leucobronchialis , together
with those which represent the so-called H. Ia'ivrc7tcei ’.

It has been stated that H. leucobronchialis and H. lawrencei
possess no important original characters. This is certainly true
of the latter, which is very obviously a hybrid of the above-named
species ; but it is not true of the former, which in its pure white
throat, in very striking contradistinction to the deep gray or black
throat of one and bright yellow throat of the other alleged parent,
certainly does possess one very important original character, which
it is impossible to conceive can be derived from the crossing of the
two species in question.

Ridgway on Helminthophila leucobronchialis.

[October

360

A supposed strong point which has been urged against the
validity of II. leucobronchialis as a distinct species, is the circum¬
stance that typical specimens constitute a small proportion of all
those obtained, and the suspicious circumstance that each in¬
dividual of the aberrant majority inclined, in one respect or
another, toward II. pinus. Only seven of the twenty-two exam¬
ples which have been recorded (including those of 'II. lawrcncci ,’
which must be considered in this connection), or not quite one-
third, are true II. leucobronchialis; but when, instead of taking
two elements into consideration (i. e., II. pinus and II. chrysop-
tcra ) we add a third (//. leucobronchialis itself), the dispro¬
portion becomes far less significant.

In no other way than by assuming that II. leucobronchialis is a
distinct species, which itself hybridizes with its allies, can we
account for the origin of the puzzling series of specimens which
have so prejudiced the claims of the bird under consideration to
specific rank ; and I feel convinced that Mr. Brewster expressed
the exact truth when he stated ( cf '. Nuttall Bulletin, III, p. 99)
that “the validity of this distinctly characterized species must
now be regarded as established,” and I feel equally satisfied that
the hypothesis of hybridism which he subsequently advanced
fails to settle the case as affecting II. leucobronchialis itself,
however well it may answer for the ‘aberrant’ specimens which
have been wrongly referred to it.

Regarding the very close resemblance between certain speci¬
mens of II. leucobronchialis, Mr. Brewster observes : “Indeed, it
would be difficult to select three individuals of any species which
vary so little inter se." I have myself seen only the type and the
Virgina specimen in the National Museum collection ; but I can
affirm that the two are as nearly counterparts of one another,
so far as details of plumage are concerned, as any two specimens,
of any species, that have ever come under my observation.

The following classification of all the specimens* hitherto
recorded of both II. leucobronchialis (in its widest sense) and
'll. lawrcncci expresses my views as to their nature and origin.
The arrangement is of course purely hypothetical, but at the
same time admits of a much more satisfactory solution of the
problem which Mr. Brewster has so carefully discussed than

A few may possibly have been overlooked.

iSSs-J

Ridgway on llelminthophila leucobronchialis.

361

the theory which supposes the entire series to he hybrids of
H. chrys )ptera and H. pinus alone, or of their progeny inter se.

1. Typical Specimens of //. leucobronchialis.

Characters. — Throat and cheeks pure white; postocular black or
dusky streak very narrow, not involving the auriculars ; breast white, or
but very faintly tinged with yellow; wing-patch, or bands, yellow.

(1) The type, an adult $ from Newtonville, Mass., May 18, 1870. (Cf.
Brewster, Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, 1, p. 1, pi. i.)

(2) An adult $ shot by Christopher D. Wood, near Clifton, Delware

Co., Penn., May 12, 1S77. ( Cf. Trotter, Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, II, pp. 7 9,

So.)

(3) An adult $ in the collection of the Philadelphia Academy of
Natural Sciences, supposed to have been shot by J. G. Bell at Rockland,
N. Y.. in the spring of 1832. (Cf Trotter, Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, III,
p. 44; IV, p. 59.)

(4) An adult $ shot at Wauregan, Conn., May 25, 1875, by Charles
M. Carpenter. ( Cf Brewster, Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, III, p. 99.)

(5) An adult $ obtained at Suflleld, Conn., July 3, 1875, by E. I. Shores.
(Cf. Brewster, Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, III, p. 199.)

(6) An adult $ in collection of Williams College, Williamstown, Mass.,
obtained at Hudson, Mass., in May or June, 1858, by Samuel Jillson. (Cf.
Purdie. Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, IV, p. 1S4.)

(7) An adult $ shot near Arlington, Va., May 15, 1885, by William
Palmer, and by him presented to the National Museum (museum register
No. 104,684). (Cf. Palmer, Auk, II, p. 304.)

II. Presumed hybrids of II. leucobronchialis and II. pinus , or of
THE FORMER WITH THE CROSS BETWEEN II. pitlUS AND

« H. chrysoftera (= ‘//. lawrencei Herrick’).

Characters — Throat white, sometimes faintly tinged with yellow;
breast yellow ; gray of upper parts tinged with olive-green.

a. Wing-band , or patch, yellow.

(1) An adult $ taken at Portland, Conn., by William AV. Coe, May 22,
1875. Has “a broad band or blotch” of yellow on the breast, while “the
whole dorsal plumage, from the crown, is faintly washed with the same
tint.” (Cf. Purdie, Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, IV, p. 184.)

(2) An adult $ taken at Saybrook, Conn., May 30, 1879, byj. N. Clark.
Has “a patch of bright yellow across the breast from the bend of the
wings.” (Cf. Purdie, 1. c.)

(3) Ayoungbird (sex unknown) taken by Dr. E. A. Mearns at High¬
land Falls, N. Y., July 7, 1879 (Coll. W. Brewster, No. 4.668). Specimen
number 4 under H. lawrencei (No. 4,667, Coll. W. Brewster), said to

362

Ridgway on Helminthophila leucobronchialis.

[October

be the parent of this specimen. ( Cf. Brewster, Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club,
VI, p. 221.)

(4) An adult(?), sex not stated, obtained at Sing Sing, N. Y., August
3, tS8i, by Dr. A. K. Fisher. Resembles specimen No. 8 (No. 605, Coll.
A. K. Fisher), but has the wing-bands “yellow, not white.” {Cf. Fisher,
Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, VI, p. 245.)

(5) An adult $ (?) obtained in Ottawa Co., Mich.. May 25, 1879, by
W. A. Gunn. Whole breast bright gamboge yellow, with a sharply defined,
truncated anterior outline, but posteriorly extending farthest along the
median line, to the upper part of the abdomen; cheeks and chin tinged
with lightyellow ; upper part washed with olive-green. Type of “ H. gunni
Gibbs.” {Cf. Gibbs, ‘Daily Democrat,’ a newspaper of Grand Rapids,
Mich., June 1, 1S79. — Purdie, Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club. IV, p. 1S5. — Ridgw.
ib- , p. 233.)

(6) An adult $ taken at Sing Sing, N. Y., August 3, 18S1, by Dr. A.
K. Fisher (collector’s No. 1235). Has “a broad patch of pale yellow on
the breast.” ( Cf. Brewster, Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, VI p. 219.)

(7) An adult $ taken at Sing Sing, N. Y., July 24, 1SS1, by Dr. A. K.
Fisher (collector’s No. 1210). Entirely pale greenish yellow beneath;
the back is similar to that of pinus but the nape is decidedly ashy, and the
wing-bands as clearly yellow as in chrysoptera; the dusky brown eye-stripe
is restricted to the lores and post-orbital spot.” {Cf. Brewster, Bull. Nutt.
Orn. Club, VI, p. 220.)

b. Wing-bands -white.

(8) An adult $ collected at Sing Sing, N. Y., August 24, 1879, by Dr.

A. K. Fisher (collector’s No. 605). “Exhibits a faint wash of lemon yellow
on the throat, while a broad space across the breast is deep gamboge
yellow, and the wing-bands are pure white.” {Cf. Brewster, Bull. Nutt.
Orn. Club, VI, p. 219.) *

(9) An adult $ (?) collected at Nyack, N. J., in May, 1S7S, by Eugene
P. Bicknell ; No. 2620, Coll. W. Brewster. “Has the chin decidedly yellow;
the throat, cheeks, and a small space on the abdomen white; the remain¬
der of the lower parts gamboge yellow ; the wing-bands white; the nape
ashy tinged with green; the occiput, back, and wings as purely green as
in H. pinus." {Cf. Brewster l. c.)

c. Wing-bands mixed tv kite and yellow.

(10) An adult $ killed at New Haven, Conn., May 19, 1885, by Harry
W. Flint. It “shows a slight suffusion of yellow under each eye and on
the chin, as well as a light bar of the same color across the breast ....
the wing-bars are very much restricted, and the white is tinged with yel¬
low, and there is a spot of the same color on the back. {Cf. Sage, Auk, II,
P- 304-)

iSSS-J

Ridgway on Junco cinereus and its Geographical Races.

III. Presumed hybrids of H. leucobronchialis with II. chrysoptera.

Characters. — Entirely white beneath (except on sides), as in II
leucobronchialis , but with black auriculars of II. chrysoptera.

(1) An adult $ ( ?) obtained at Sing Sing, N. Y., July 24, 18S1, by Dr.
A. K. Fisher (collector’s No. 1208). Cf. Brewster, Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club,
VI, p. 219.)

(2) An adult $ (?) obtained at Sing Sing, N. Y., July 24, iSSi,byDr.
A. K. Fisher. ( Cf. Fisher, Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, VI, p. 245.)

IV. Presumed hybirds between H. chrysoptera and H. pinus
(— ‘//. laivrencei Herrick’).

Characters : Black or gray throat and auriculars of" chrysoptera. with
rest of head and the lower parts yellow, as in pinus; upper parts olive-green
as in pinus. Wing-bands yellow or white.

a. Wing-bands -white .

(1) The type, an adult J , obtained at Passaic, N. J., May, 1874, by
Harold Herrick. (Cf. Herrick, Pr. Phil. Ac. Nat. Sci. 1874, p. 220, pi. 15.)

(2) An adult $ from Hoboken, N. J., taken in the spring of 1876.
(Cf. Herrick, Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, II, p. 19.)

b. Wing-bands yellow.

(3) An adult 5 taken at Highland Falls, N. Y., July 7, 1879, by Dr.
Edgar A. Mearns (No. 4667, Coll. W. Brewster). This specimen presents
nearly the characters that would be looked for in the female of lawrencei ;
the throat and cheek-markings are those of chrysoptera (female), while
the remainder of the plumage is colored nearly as in pinus , the wing-
bands, however, are yellow, instead of white, and the back is not purely
olive-green.” (Cf. Brewster, Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, VI, p. 220.)

ON JUNCO CINEREUS (SWAINS.) AND ITS GEO¬
GRAPHICAL RACES.

BY ROBERT RIDGWAY.

An examination of a very large series (78 specimens) of this
species makes apparent some very interesting facts. It shows

464 Ridgway on Junco cinereus and its Geographical Races. [October

that jf. cinereus proper must be excluded from the list of North
American birds, all the specimens from within the borders of
the United States which have been referred to this form being
very different, belonging in reality to an unnamed geograph¬
ical race. It is with extreme reluctance that I venture to de¬
scribe an additional form of this difficult genus, but the facts
before me are so plain that I cannot well avoid doing so.

y. cinereus , as at present known, is divided into three strongly
marked races, between two of which (dorsalis and the new form)
we have evidence of intergradation in a small proportion of in¬
termediate specimens. In the case of the new form and true
cinereus intergradation is assumed, but is hardly less certain.

The geographical distribution of the three races is, in the main,
quite distinct : y. cinereus belonging to the eastern mountain
districts of Mexico (from the Sierra Madre of Chihuahua to the
high regions of Vera Cruz), y. ci?iereus dorsalis to the moun¬
tains of New Mexico and Eastern Arizona (White Mountains and
Willow Springs), while y. cinereus palliatus, as I propose to
name the new form, belongs exclusively, so far as known, to the
mountains of Central and Southern Arizona (Mt. Graham, the
Santa Rita range., etc.) , but probably extends southward along
the more western mountain ranges of Mexico.

The three races may be distinguished as follows : —

a. Outer -web of tertials and some of the wing-coverts rufous.

1. J. cinereus. Upper parts of head and neck, with rump, dark gray
inclining to state-color, the rump often tinged with olive ; lores deep
black.

2. J. cinereus palliatus. Upper parts of head and neck, with rump,
clear ash-gray; lores grayish black.

b. Outer surface of wings entirely ash-gray.

3. J. cinereus dorsalis. Upper parts of head and neck, with rump
clear ash-gray, and lores grayish black, as in J. cinereus palliatus.

The type of y. cinereus palliatus is No. 6S817: U. S. Nat.
Mus., $ ad., Mt. Graham, Arizona, Sept. 19, 1874; H. W.
Henshaw collector.

1SS5.]

Rece7it Literature.

365

RECENT LITERATURE.

Sharpe’s Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum — Volume X.*

— Ornithologists are under obligations to Mr. Sharpe for another exceed¬
ingly welcome volume of a pre-eminently useful series. Volume X con¬
siderably exceeds in size any of its predecessors, it containing nearly' 900
pages, and twelve colored plates. It treats of the following five families
of nine-primaried Oscines : the Flower-peckers (Dicaeidas), the Swallows
(Hirundinidae), the Waxwings and their allies (Ampelidfe), the Amer¬
ican Warblers (Mniotiltidae), and the Wagtails (Motacillidte). “In the
present volume 448 species are described, represented by 4590 specimens.’’
Only 52 of the species are still desiderata to the collection of the British
Museum, while 88 are represented by the original types. In addition to the
material in the British Museum, Mr. Sharpe has had the assistance of val¬
uable collections kindly loaned him by various eminent ornithologists for
use in the preparation of the present monographs. The British Museum
“ series of Neotropical birds has been rendered wonderfully complete by the
addition of the collections of Dr. Sclater and Messrs. Salvin and Godman” ;
and acknowledgment is also made of numerous North American birds
received from the United States National Museum. Mr. Sharpe’s facilities
for the preparation of his various monographs are enviably complete,
and without doubt elsewhere unequalled.

The Dicteidae, numbering 19 genera and 95 species of a strictly Old
World group, occupy the first 84 pages, and are illustrated by two beautiful
plates. To the Iiirundinidte, with 11 genera and 83 species ( plus 18 sub¬
species), are allotted 125 pages, and a single plate. The great family
Mniotiltidae, of such special interest to American ornithological collectors,
occupies nearly 250 pages, numbers 21 genera and 127 species, besides
numerous subspecies. Of the species 36 fall under Dendrceca , 32 under
Basileuterus, and 15 under Setop/iaga. Of the 64 species of Motacillidae,
33 are ranged under Anthus, and 23 under Motacilla.

In respect to subspecies, we regret to see that Mr. Sharpe has reverted
to his former practice of designating them simply by binominal appel¬
lations, with usually no further comment on their status than is implied
by the prefix ‘Subsp.,’ followed by a Greek letter.

We also regret to see our author so firmly opposed to “radical changes
in nomenclature” as to prefer to “follow custom” in cases where he is
convinced that the ‘radical changes’ are in accordance with strict nomen-
clatural rules, through fear that the “change is too great and the risk of
confusion too assured” (p. 85) for him to venture in the footsteps of the
rash reformers who persist in pointing out the narrow way which leads

* Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum, Volume X. Catalogue of the Pas¬
seriformes, or Perching Birds, in the collection of the British Museum. — Fringilliformes :
Part I. Containing the Families Dicaeidae, Hirundinidae, Ampelidae, Mniotiltidae, and
Motacillidae. By R. Bowdier Sharpe. London : Printed by order of the Trustees, 1885.
8vo, pp. xiii 4- 682, pll. xii.

366

Recent Literature.

[October

to stability and consistency in things nomenclatural. It is certainly poor
philosophy, and worse principle, to go wrong because the majority of
one’s associates or predecessors have missed the right path. While Mr.
Sharpe seems to have by no means warmly embraced the auctorum plu-
rimorum principle of one of his eminent confreres, he shows a tendency to
lapse in that direction. If rules of nomenclature are to be otherwise than
worse than useless, they must be followed systematically and on all occa¬
sions, whether their immediate results chance to be agreeable or the
reverse.

In monographs of such extended scope it is doubtless too much to expect
that the monographer’s rulings will be equally sound at all points, his con¬
clusions necessarily depending upon the amount of his material in each
particular case. Again, specialists having the same material before them
may reach different conclusions, consequent upon what may be termed
theoretical bias, which may lead to a different interpretation of the same
facts; although experience shows that experts working with the same
material, and particularly if working together and comparing notes as they
proceed, may frequently arrive at practically the same results. It is not,
therefore, on the whole surprising that Mr. Sharpe should differ now and
then from other authorities in the same field, even in cases where his
material is comparatively limited.

As some of Mr. Sharpe’s rulings respecting American birds may be
presumed to be of special interest to the the readers of ‘The Auk,’ they
are here presented. Our Barn Swallow ( Hirundo erythrogastra ) is
made a subspecies of the European Chimney Swallow ( Hirundo rustica
Linn.), the American form being found to extend across Asia to Lake
Baikal, and to winter in Burmah. Our bird would therefore stand, in a
trinomial system of nomenclature, as Hirundo rustica erythrogastra.
Mr. Sharpe recognizes four subspecies of Hirundo rustica , besides the H.
rustica proper. Our Cliff Swallow is Petrochelidon pyrrhonota (Vieill.),
Mr. Sharpe following Sclater and Salvin (1873) in identifying Vieillot’s
//. pyrrkonota (1817) with Say’s //. lunifrons (1823).

Passing to the Warblers, He l m in thofh i la lutescens is considered a thor¬
oughly good species, and surprise is expressed that the “trinomial name
of H. celata lutescens should be given to it”; but two possible explanations
are offered (p. 245). The ten specimens at Mr. Sharpe’s disposal are not
deemed by him sufficient to settle the alternatives raised, namely, whether
lutescens is a thoroughly good species or whether the bird breeds in the
yellow plumage of the first year. In respect to the generic name Parula ,
Mr. Sharpe observes that if the name Parula must be suppressed because
there is a previous genus Parulus, then '■'■Pica must be suppressed on
account of its resemblance to Picus." Panda and Parulus are known to
be the same word, with simply different terminations indicative merely of
gender. Pica and Picus may have the same relation, as some author¬
ities claim, while others maintain that the two words are etymologi¬
cally different. At all events the two cases are not quite parallel, Pica
and Picus having been long used in classical Latin to denote respectively

iSSs-J

Recent Literature.

367

Magpie and Woodpecker before they were introduced into technical zool-
ogy, whatever may have been primarily — a point doubtless impossible to
strictly determine — their etymological affinities.

Dendreeca dominica albilora is denied status, even as a subspecies,
since in many specimens Mr. Sharpe can “trace a tiny shade of yellow
in the eyebrow,” even in authentic specimens received from our National
Museum : yet the alleged differences pretty constantly characterize the birds
of a certain geographical area. The race hypochryscea of D. falmarum
is also not recognized. Peucedramus is admitted as a full genus (by the
way, subgenera seem a round in the ladder of classification Mr. Sharpe
does not appear to find use for!), while Helincea , a much more distinct
form, is referred to Helminthotherus. The substitution of Microligia
by Mr. Cory for his Ligea does not appear to be taken note of, even in the
‘Addenda,’ presumably printed nearly a year after the change was
published.

In Geothlypis trichas the male in winter is said to assume the dull
garb of the female, losing the black mask, and is thus figured (pi. ix,
fig. i), although in fact the male never loses the black mask after it has
once been acquired, and which it obtains at the second moult. Only
young males of the first year wear the garb of the female. But Mr.
Sharpe should not be too harshly dealt with for this lapse, since the same
mistake has been made by several of our own leading authorities, Messrs.
Maynard and Cory being apparently the only writers who have escaped
this error. This singular mistake seems to have originated with Baird
(Birds of N. Am., 1858, p. 241), who says the male in winter is “without
the black mask.” In the ‘History of North American Birds,’ by Baird,
Brewer, and Ridgway, it is said (I, p. 297) : “Male in winter, and the
female, without the black mask.” Coues, in ‘Birds of the Colorado Valley
(p. 31))’ says: “The adults, in fall and winter, are similar to each other,
.... as at that season the peculiar black and ashy markings of the head
are wanting.” The same statement is repeated in the second edition of
his ‘Key.’ Maynard, however, in 1874, in describing the adult male
(Birds of Florida, p. 66) says : “There is no change of plumage in autumn,
. . . . ” Mr. Cory in his ‘Birds of the Bahamas’ (1880, p. 72) says, in italics,
in describing the winter plumage of the male, “a broad black line passing
from the sides of the neck through the eye and over the forehead." The
older authors, as Wilson, Nuttall, and Audubon, are not explicit in their
statements on this point, but do not say that the adult male in winter
lacks the black mask, while the opposite is inferrible, at least in the case
of Nuttall, who, as well as Audubon, was familiar with the species in its
winter haunts. To any one who has collected the birds in winter in
Florida, or elsewhere in their winter haunts, the perpetuation of such a
o-ross error is almost incomprehensible, especially since the material in at
least several of our museums is sufficient to render it evident, even to
the ‘closet’ naturalist.

In the collection of the Museum of Comparative Zoology is a large
series of adult males taken in Florida by Messrs. Maynard, and Henshaw,

368

Recent Literature.

[October

and the writer of this review, at frequent intervals from early in December
till into March, which differ not in the least in respect to the black face-
markings from summer specimens. And similar examples are, to our
knowledge, in various collections, both public and private, notably in
those of Messrs. Brewster, Cory, and others, and that of Princeton
College.

Four beautiful plates illustrate Mr. Sharpe’s monograph of the Mnio-
tiltidre, in which are figured the heads of eight species of Geothlypis,
while full-length figures are given of G. speciosa, Parula pitiayumi ,
P. nigrilora , Teretristis fernandina , and T. fornsi.

The genus Polioptila (with 13 species) is noticed in an ‘Appendix to
the family Mniotiltidse’ (pp. 440-445), the group having been omitted by
Mr. Seebohm from the Sylviidte, where authors have generally placed it.
Mr. Sharpe believes that their most natural position is “in the vicinity of
the Muscicapine genus Stenostira.”

In the family Motacillidse, the Field Wagtails, usually separated as a
genus Budytes, are placed with the Water Wagtails under the single genus
Motacilla, there being “certain intermediate species .... which unite these
two supposed genera.” Yet he considers it expedient to continue the
generic separation of Anthus spraguei from Ant/ius proper, under the
genus Neocorys. As already noticed ( antea , p. 290, footnote), our Tit¬
lark is made a subspecies of the Old World Water Pipit, Anthus spipoletta,
( spinoletta Linn., and ‘auct. plur.’), under which it stands as “Subsp. a.
Anthus penusylvanicus.” A similar disposition of it was made previously
by Mr. Seebohm (llist. Brit. Bds., II, 1SS3, p. 248). The adoption of
‘radical changes’ in specific names, when called for by nomenclatural
rules does not seem to inspire in our author, we are glad to see, the same
degree of dread as ‘radical changes’ in generic names, though we fail to
trace any principle of consistency in such diverse action under similar
contingencies. — J. A. A.

Turner’s List of the Birds of Labrador.* — While Mr. Turner’s ‘List’
is very valuable, and will prove very useful, it is at the same time disap¬
pointing and unsatisfactory, owing largely to the faulty plan of its con¬
struction. Mr. Turner spent nearly two years and four months (from
July 15, 1SS2, to October 5, 1884) in Labrador; his investigations being
made chiefly “in the vicinity of Fort Chimo, situated about 27 miles up
the Koksoak River, flowing into Ungava Bay, which is an immense pocket
toward the eastern portion of the south side of Hudson Strait,” where he
“ remained from August 6, 1882, to September 4, 1SS4.” His list includes
about 207 species, only a few more than one-half of which appear to have
come under his own observation. Quite a number of the others are

* List of the Birds of Labrador, including Ungava, East Main, Moose, and Gulf
Districts of the Hudson Bay Company, together with the Island of Anticosti. By
Lucien M. Turner. Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., VIII, 1885, pp. 233-254. Published July 13.
1885.

iS8s-]

Recent Literature.

369

given apparently from specimens in the National Museum, collected bv
Mr. C. D rexler, mainly at Moose Factory, but some 70 or more rest on
the authority of previous authors, as Audubon, Richardson, Nuttall,
Coues, Kumlien, Stearns, and Brewster, including seven recorded only
from Anticosti, or other points south of Labrador. The area intended to
be covered by the List extends from Anticosti and the Gulf of Saint
Lawrence to Hudson Strait, and from the Atlantic coast westward to the
Sid meridian, or a region some six hundred miles in length by about one
thousand miles in breadth. It is apparently intended to be a complete
list of the birds hitherto observed in Labrador, although the only state¬
ment to this effect is that implied in the title of the paper.

Our first criticism relates to what we deem a radical fault in the con¬
struction of the List, namely, the omission of the author to divide the
species into two categories, the first to include only the species observed
by him within his own field of investigation about Fort Cliimo, the
second to consist of the additional species attributed to Labrador by
previous explorers. Respecting the species actually collected or observed
by the writer, we must confess to a feeling of disappointment that he tells
us so little about them, his remarks rarely exceeding a few lines to each,
while in many cases more detailed statements would have been of the
highest interest. This certainly was not due to any lack of opportunity
for observation, for the magnificent collection of material brought back
by him to the National Museum testifies alike to his success and great
industry in collecting. For instance, it is quite tantalizing to find species
like the Redpolls dismissed with less than two lines, merely stating that
the species is abundant and resident at Fort Chimo, that it breeds plenti¬
fully there, and that its nests and eggs were obtained. On the other
hand, his record of species observed by others is sufficiently explicit and
apparently has been very carefully compiled, although all are obviously
not included, as, for instance, Lams canns among the Gulls, and Sotna-
teria v-nigra among the Ducks.

Again, it is disappointing to find a writer who has had so much ex¬
perience as a collector in the country under notice giving these reports
and extracts without comment as to their character, in cases even where
the temptation to a little intelligent criticism must have been very strong,
as, for instance, where Dendroica ccerulea , Vtreo noveboracensis , Pipilo
erythrophthalmus , Tyrannies tyrannns, Sayornis phcebe , Contopus virens ,
and the two Cuckoos are given on the authority of Audubon, and Hyloci-
ckla mustelina and A ix sponsa on Stearns’s authority. While we would
not imply any sweeping discredit upon the observations of Audubon, we
can not help feeling that in writing out his biographies of birds he some¬
times trusted to memory rather than to carefully recorded field-notes.
While thus freely criticising the paper under notice, we do not lose sight
of the fact that it is a most important and welcome contribution to our
knowledge of the birds of a region Mr. Turner has been the first to ex¬
plore, and at the cost, too, of a long sojourn in a most inhospitable
country, necessarily entailing much hardship. — J. A. A.

Recent Literature.

| October

37°

Zeledon’s Catalogue of the Birds of Costa Rica. * — ThisWs simply an
enumeration of the birds of Costa Rica, without notes. The catalogue
numbers 692 species, about eight to nine tenths of them being indicated as
represented in the National Museum by Costa Rican specimens1. The iden¬
tification of the species is therefore doubtless beyond question. This list
is intended as preliminary to a work of a more extended character to con¬
tain descriptions of the genera and species, with notes on their habits and
geographical distribution, which the author has in contemplation, and for
which his long residence in the country, and his unrivalled experience
with the birds of Costa Rica eminently fit him to prepare. — J. A. A.

Ridgway on New American Birds. — Mr. Ridgway has separated the
Boat-billed Heron of Central America from that of Guiana and Brazil, un¬
der the name Cancroma zelcdoni.\ Twelve examples from southern and
western Mexico, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, and Veragua are
found to differ constantly from two South American specimens (British
Guiana and mouth of the Amazon) in having the upper parts much deeper
pearl-gray, the neck and breast deep buff instead of white, and the crest
less developed.

The same author has also described a new Hawk from Cozumel, under
the name Rupornis gracilis. % It is compared with R. ruficauda grisei-
cauda of Mexico, from which it differs in being decidedly smaller, with
the thighs and under wing-coverts nearly immaculate instead of barred
and spotted.

A re-examination of some specimens of Peuccea collected by Dr. J. C.
Merrill, and identified by Mr. Ridgway as Peuccea arizonce (Proc. U. S.
Nat. Mus., I, p. 127), in the light of additional material, shows that the
specimens represent Coturniculus mexicana of Lawrence, described from
Mexican specimens in 1867, and subsequently referred by Mr. Ridgway
(Ilist. N. Am. Birds, II, p. 38, footnote) to P. bolter ii. A second exami¬
nation of the Texas specimens, in comparison with the Mexican examples,
results in the addition of a new bird to the fauna of the United States,
which Mr. Ridgway calls Peuccea mexicana (Lawr.).

In a paper on the Golden Warblers§ Mr. Ridgway describes a new sub¬
species from Western Mexico and Cape St. Lucas as Dendroeca bryanti
castaneiceps. D. bryanti is now separated specifically from D. vieilloti ,
to which it was originally referred as a subspecies, and its habitat is
restricted to the “Atlantic coast, Belize to Northern Yucatan (Merida),”

* Catalogue of the Birds of Costa Rica, indicating those species of which the United
States National Museum possesses specimens from that Country. By Jos6 C. Zeledon,
of San Jos6, Costa Rica. Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., VIII, pp. 104-118. Published May 23,
1885.

t Description of a New Species of Boat-billed Heron from Central America. By
Robert Ridgway. Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., VIII, pp. 93, 94. Published May 20, 1885.

X Description of a New Hawk from Cozumel, Ibid., pp. 94, 95.

$ A Review of the “ Golden Warblers.” Ibid., pp. 348-350. Published Sept. 2, 1885'

i SSs . ]

Recent Literature.

37 1

the Lower California bird receiving the new name castaneicefs. Seven
species and ten subspecies of Golden Warblers are now recognized
only two of which (Zb (estiva and D. bryanti castaneiceps') pertain
to the fauna of North America, as defined in the new ‘ A- O. U. Check
List,’ the remainder being West Indian and Central American. — J. A. A.

Ridgway on the Type Specimen of Buteo oxypterus Cassin.* — A re¬
examination of the type specimens of Buteo oxypterus Cassin. preserved
in the Museum of the Philadelphia Academy of Natural Sciences, has led
Mi. Ridgway to refer />. oxypterus to B. swainsoni as a pure synonym,
the type of oxypterus proving to be unquestionably a young B. swainsoni.
‘■Upon the whole,” says Mr. Ridgway, “I cannot see the slightest reason
for recognizing ‘ B. oxypterus' even as a local race of swainsotii, . ”

Me also adds that the “ specimen described in ‘ History of North American
Birds’ (III, p. 266) as the melanistic adult of ‘ Buteo swainsoni var. oxyp¬
terus is not B. swainsoni at all, but B. fuliginosus Scl.” Comparative
diagnoses are given of these two species. — J. A. A.

Ridgway’s List of Emended Names of North American Birds, f — The

names “represent new or hitherto unpublished combinations” adopted by
the A. O. U. ‘Committee on Classification and Nomenclature of North
American Birds.’ “They are here presented in order that the first known
use of such combinations may be cited among the references which the
committee has decided to give under each species, viz., the first pertinent
binomial or trinomial appellation, and the first use of the name as adopted
in the new list now being prepared by the committee.” The changes,
some 77 in number, relate chiefly to the generic part of the name, and
result largely from the depression of formerly current genera to the rank of
subgenera, partly from the change of status of the form in question from
specific to subspecific rank, or the reverse, and in small part from actual
change of names, found necessary on synonymic grounds. Comparatively
few are therefore of a very ‘radical’ character, and are mainly the follow¬
ing, with which are given their current equivalents.

Purus cinctus obtectus (Cab.) = P. cincius.

Sylvania microcephala Ridgw. = Myiodioctes minutus.

Pyranga rubra cooperi — P. (estiva cooperi.

Loxia curvirostra stricklandi Ridgw. == L. c. mexicana.

Ammodramus savannarum passerinus = Coturniculus passerinus.

Mclospiza georgiana (Lath.) — M. palustris.

Corvus corax sinuatus (Wagl.) = C. c. carnivorus.

Aphelocoma sieberii arizonce ~ A. sordida arizonce.

Zenaidura macroura — Z. carolinensis.

* Remarks on the Type Specimen of Buteo oxypterus, Cassin. By Robert Ridgway,
Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., VIII, pp. 75-77. Published April 22, 1885.

f Some Emended Names of North American Birds. By Robert Ridgway, Proc.
U. S. Nat. Mus., VIII, pp, 354, 355. Published Sept. 2, 1885.

372

Recent Literature.

[October

Callipepla calif or nica vallicola Ridgw. = Lophortyx californica brun-
nescens Ridgw. = L. californica (Shaw).

Among the more striking changes of generic names are the substitution
of Sylvan i a for Myiodioctes , Dryobates for Picus, Dendragopus for Can-
ace, and Tympanuchus for Cupidonia, in addition to some others already
published in ‘The Auk.’— J. A. A.

Minor Ornithological Publications. — 964. Decorative Sentiment in Birds.
By James Carter Beard. Harper's New Monthly Magazine , LXXI, No.
423, Aug. 1SS5, pp. 405-416. — A popular paper, with illustrations, on bird
architecture.

965. Circular of the Public Museum of the City of Milwaukee. No. 1.
“Some Directions for Preparing, Labelling and Packing Skins of Ani¬
mals.” No. 2. “List of Mammals and Birds of Wisconsin desirable for
the above named Museum.” 8vo. No date (1884?), pp. 8 and 12. — No 1
contains excellent directions for the purpose in view.

966. Observe the Birds. By Samuel Wells Willard. Wisconsin fount .
of Education , XXV. No. 3, March, 1885, pp. 98-101. — Ornithology
recommended as offering a good field for the cultivation of the powers of
observation.

967. Our Observers — March. By F. H. King. Ibid., pp. ill, 112. — A
list of “Observations to make” respecting a few birds, beasts, insects, and
plants, etc.

968. The Migration of Birds. By Alexander O’Driscoll Taylor.
Proc. Netvport Nat. Hist. Soc., 1883-84, pp. 22-24. — Abstract of a paper
on this subject read before the Society on Jan. 3, 1SS4.

969. List of Birds shot near Newport [7?. /.]. By Col. John Hare
Powel. Ibid., pp. 42, 43. — A nominal list (under English names only) of
101 species.

970. Pigeons and the Pigeon Fancy. By Wm. G. Barton. Bull.
Essex Inst., XVI. 1SS4, pp. 59-82. — A very interesting summary of the
subject, giving a brief history of the ‘pigeon fancy,’ and describing briefly
the leading varieties of the domesticated bird. Several pages are devoted
to the ‘Homing Pigeon,’ or ‘Carrier’ Pigeon, and to ‘Pigeon-racing,’ giv ing
statistics of flights, etc.

971. Intelligence in Birds. By E. E. Fish. Bull. Buffalo Naturalists'
Field Club , I, No. 6,* 1884, pp. 129-138. — On change of habits in conse¬
quence of experience, with citation of various instances, and remarks on
instinct, the migration of birds, and various interesting anecdotes illus¬
trative of the general subject.

972. The Ducks of this Locality [ Ottawa , Canada ]. By W. P. Lett.
Trans. Ottawa Field-Naturalists' Club, No. 4, pp. 52-64. — The following
species are treated at length : Anas obscura, A. boschas, Aix sponsa,
Duerquedula carolinensis, f. discors, Dafila acuta , Fuligula ferina amer-
icana, Mergus merganser , M. serrator, M. cucullatus, and Clangula

* For index to ornithological articles in Nos. 1-5 of this publication see Auk, 1, pp.
184, 189, 190.

Recent Literature.

*88S.]

373

glaucium. Various other species are mentioned more briefly, the paper
altogether forming an important review of the Anatidse of Ottawa.

973- Report of the Ornithological and Oological Branch [of the Otta¬
wa Field Naturalists' Club ]. By George R. White and W. L. Scott.
Ibid . , pp. 81-87. — Thirteen species are added to the List of the Birds of
Ottawa by Messrs. White and Scott published in No. 3 of the ‘Transac¬
tions’ of the Club (see Bull. N. O. C., VIII, pp. 55 and 115), and there are
notes on a few species previously recorded, with dates of the arrival of
birds in the spring of 1882. Also a list of errata for the ‘List’ previously
published.

974. Report of the Ornithological and Oological Branch [of the Ottaxva
Field-Naturalists' Club\ for the season of 1883. By John Macoun, Geo.
R. White, and W. L. Scott. Ibid.. II, No. 1, 18S4, pp. 141-147. — Besides
interesting notes on several species of birds previously recorded, 17 species
are added. There is also a list of arrivals for the spring of 1883.

975. Washington Crows. Anon. Atlantic Monthly , Vol. LIII, No.
318, April, 1884, pp. 580, 581. — A graphic account of their flight in the
morning from their roosting-place to their feeding grounds, and their
return at night.

976. [ The Sense of Taste in Birds. ] By G. F. Waters. Proc. Boston
Soc. Nat. Hist.. XXII, 1883 (1884), pp. 433, 434. — In the common fowl
and some young Hawks.

977. On the Migration of Birds in the Spring and Autumn of 1884.
By J. A. Harvie Browne. F. R. S., F. Z. S. Bull. U. S. Fish Comm.. V,
No. 14, Aug. 7, 1885, pp. 221-224. — On the influencing causes of the ex¬
tensive migration of Gulls to the British coast in i884-’85.

978. Our Home Feathered Tribe. By B. H. Warren. West Chester ,
Pa., Local News (newspaper), Sept. 3, 1885. — A briefly annotated list of
the summer birds of Chester County, Pennsylvania. (See also an adden¬
dum to the list in the same newspaper of Sept. 10, 1885.)

• The Zoologist' (London), Vols. VI-IX (1SS2 to Sept. 1885), contains
the following (Nos. 979-1002) relating especially to North American
birds.

979. European Birds observed in North America. — By Percy E. Freke.
Zoologist, 3d Series, VI, Jan. 1882. p. 21. — Corrections to his article on
this subject in the ‘ Zoologist’ for Sept. 18S1 {cf. Bull. N. O. C., VIII, p.

1 15) Phylloscopus borealis and Par us cinctus found breeding in Alaska,
and Mareca penelope in the Aleutian Islands; the Iceland Falcon obtained
from Labrador.

980. Supposed Occurrence of the Hairy Woodpecker [ Pirns vi/losus]
in Oxfordshire. By Oliver V. Aplin. Ibid., Feb. 1882, p. 69. — A speci¬
men is mentioned alleged to have been killed about five years previously
near Chipping Norton, but doubt exists as to whether the skin examined
was not of foreign origin.

9S1. Rusty Grackle and Pallas's Gray Shrike in Wales. By Henry
Seebohm. Ibid., March, 1882, p. 109. — A specimen of Sco/ecophagus fer¬
ruginous killed at Cardiff, Oct. 4, 1881. recorded, forming the first British
record of the species.

374

Recent Literature.

[October

982. On the Occurrence of Sabine's Gull, for the first time, in Norfolk.
By Ilenry Stevenson. Ibid., pp. m-113. — Two specimens seen and one
killed at Yarmouth, Oct. 21 or 22, 1881.

9S3. Red-breasted Snipe in Northeast Lincolnshire. By John Cor-
deaux. Ibid., Oct. 1882, p. 392. — Record of a specimen of Macrorham-
plius griseus shot on the seacoast between Cleethorpes and Tetney Haven,
Aug. 15, 1882.

984. Totanus solitaries at Sc illy. By Thomas Cornish. Ibid. , Nov ■
18S2, p. 432. — Taken Sept. 21, 1882.

9S5. On Trinomial Nomeclature. By Joel Asaph Allen. Ibid., VII.
Feb. 1883, pp. 97-100.

986. Bonaparte's Gull at St. Leona rds-on-Sea. By Cecil Smith. Ibid.,
March, 1SS3, p. 120. — Lanes Philadelphia, shot “early in November,
1S70.”

987. Occurrences of the American Kestril i?i Yorkshire. By J. Back¬
house, Jr. Ibid., p. 126. — A female Falco sparverius shot near Helmsley,
Yorkshire, in May, 1882 ; believed to be “ the only one on record as having
been taken in Europe.”

988. Uncommon Birds near York. By C. D. Wolstenholme. Ibid . >
p. 128. — Records “ an American Bittern ( Botaurus lentiginosus), shot
at Welbury.”

989. Pectoral Sandpiper [Tringa macula ta~\ in Dumbartonshire. By
J. E. Harting. Ibid., April, 1883, p. 177. — A specimen killed Nov. 24,
1882.

990. American Bittern in Pembrokeshire. By Cecil Smith. Ibid.,
Aug. 1S83, p. 341. — Taken at St. David’s in October, 1872, and previously
recorded “ with doubt at the times,” in ‘ Land and Water,’ by Mr. Green¬
way.

991. The last Great Auk. By J. E. Harting. Ibid., Nov. 1883, p. 47°-
— A call for information respecting a specimen recorded by Mr. Ruthven
Deane (Am. Nat. VI, 1872, p. 369), on the authority of Mr. Alfred Leche-
vallier, as found dead on the coast of Labrador in 1870.

992. America /. Bittern in Siessex. By W. Barren. Ibid., VIII, Feb.
18S4, p. 68. — A female was taken near Amberly, Sussex, Engl., Nov.
30, 1SS3.

993. The last Great Auk. ByJ. E. Harting. Ibid., April, 18S4, pp.

1 4 1 , 142. — Relates to a discrepancy in letters of Mr. A. Lechevallier about
a specimen of the Great Auk alleged to have been found dead on the
coast of Labrador in November, 1870, and obtained by him, rec&rd of
which was made by Mr. Ruthven Deane in the ‘American Naturalist’ for
1872 (Vol. VI, p. 369). The validity of the record thus made on Mr.
Lechevallier’s authority appears to be hereby much impaired. (See above,
No. 991.)

994. Occurrence of the Swallow-tailed Kite in Rterope. By E. F.
Becher. Ibid., Apr. 1884, p. 145. — Taken on board a ship ‘several years
back,’ about 200 miles from Malta.

Recent Literature.

37 5

■S“5']

995. On the Application of Trinomial Nomenclature to Zoology. Bv
Dr. Elliot Coues. Ibid., July, 1884, pp. 241-247. — Dr. Coues’s address on
this subject before National Academy of Sciences in Washington, April,
1SS4.

996. Sabine’s Gull in Dublin Bay. Bv J. J. Dowling. Ibid.. Dec. 1S84,
p. 490. — A specimen in the first year’s plumage was taken at Cloutarf,
Nov. 5. 1SS4.

997. The American Killdeer Plover in Cornwall. By Thomas Cor¬
nish. Ibid., IX, March, 1885, p. 113. — A specimen of ZEgialitis vociferus
shot at Tresco, in the Scilly Islands, Jan. 15, 1S85.

998. Reported Occurrence of the Blue-winged Teal near Redcar.
By T. H. Nelson. Ibid., p. 113. — A specimen previously recorded (Zool¬
ogist, 1882, p. 92) by the same writer as iftierquedula discors proves to
have been a young Garganey circia ).

999. Notes on Birds of Manitoba. By Robert Miller Christey. Ibid.,
April, 1885, pp. 121-133. — Interesting field notes on about 45 species.

1000. Notes on the Zoology of Manitoba. By the late T. B. Wood.
(Communicated by J. H. Nelson.) Ibid. , June and July, 1885, pp. 224-
227, 241-247. — Extracts from letters to Mr. Nelson, giving various interest¬
ing notes.

1001. Bart ram's Sandpiper .... in Corn-wall. By H. E. Dresser.
Ibid., p. 232. — Record of a specimen shot “as already recorded in the
‘Zoologist,’” several years previously on the cliffs near Coverack.

1002. Discovery of the Eggs of the Knot , Tringa canutus. — By J. E-
Harting. Ibid., Sept. 1885, p. 344.— Referring to Dr. C. Hart Merriam’s
record in ‘The Auk’ (II, p. 312), and stating that “Sabine found the
Knot breeding in abundance on Melville Island” in 1820, and that “Capt.
Lyons found it breeding near Quilliam Creek, Melville Peninsula,” in
1S23. Reference is also made to Sir John Richardson’s reporting “the
Knot as breeding in Hudson's Bay, and down to the 55th Parallel, ’ etc.

Publications Received. — Bicknell, Eugene P. A Study of the Singing
of Our Birds. (Auk, 1884, 1885.)

Harvie-Brown, J. A., J. Cordeaux, R. M. Barrington, G. A. Ware, and
W. Eagle Clarke. Report on the Migration of Birds in the Spring and
Autumn of 1SS4. Sixth Report. (Vol. II, No 1.)

Merriam, C. Hart. Department of Agriculture, Division of Entomol-
ogy, Circular No. 20.

Riley, C. V. Department of Agriculture, Division of Entomology. Cir¬
cular No. iS.

Ridgway, Robert. Some Emended Names of North American Birds.
(Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus. VIII. No. 23, Sept. 2, 1SS5, pp. 354-356.)

Shufeldt, R. W. On the Coloration in Life of the Naked Skin-tracts on
the Head of Geococcyx californianus. (Ibis, 1885, pp. 286-288, pi. vi.)

Nelson, E. W. Counter-'Notes on some species of Birds attributed to
Point Barrow, Alaska.’ (Auk, II, pp. 239-241.

Stephens, F. Notes of an Ornithological trip in Arizona and Sonora.
(Auk, II. pp. 225-231.)

376

General Notes.

[October

Zeledon, Catalogue of the Birds of Costa Rica, indicating those Species
of which the United States National Museum possesses specimens from
that Country. (Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., VIII, Nos. 7, S, pp. 104-118,
May, 18S5.)

Agassiz Journal (Lynn, Mass.), I, No. 3. Aug. 1885.

American Field, XXIII, Nos. 25, 26, XXIV, Nos. 1-12.

American Naturalist, Aug. Sept. Oct. 1885.

Anzeiger, Zoologischer, Nos. 197-203, 1885.

Bulletin Des Moines Acad. Sci., I, No. 1, March, 1SS5.

Bulletin Essex Institute, XVII, Nos. 1-3, Jan. -Mar. 1SS5.

Bulletin U. S. Fish Commission, V, Nos. 7-21, 1885.

Canadian Science Monthly, III, June, July, 1885.

Forestand Stream, XXIV, Nos. 21-26, XXV, Nos. i-S, 18S5.

Hoosier Naturalist (Valparaiso, Ind.), I, Nos. 1, 2, Aug. Sept. 1885.
Journal Cincinnati Soc. Nat. Hist. VIII, No. 2, July 1885.

Kansas City Review, IX, No. 1, Aug 1S85.

Monatsschrift des Deutschen Vereins zum Schutze der Vogelwelt, IX,
Nos. 9-12, 18S4, X, Nos. 1-5, 18S5. (From H. Nehrling.)

Museum, The, I, No. 3, July, 18S5.

Naturalist, The, A Journ. Nat. Hist, for the North of England, Nos. 120-
122, July-Sept. 18S5.

Naturalists’ Companion (Brockport, N. Y.), I, Nos. 1, 2, July, Aug.
1885.

Ornithologist and Oologist, X, Nos. 8, 9.

Proceedings Biolog. Soc. Washington, II (July 1, 1882, to July 1, 1884),
1885.

Proceedings Nat. Hist. Soc. Glasgow, V, pt. 3, 1884,1 (New Series) pt.
1, 1885.

Random Notes on Natural History, II, Nos. 7-9, 1885.

Transactions Kansas Acad. Sci., IX, 1885.

Ward’s Nat. Sci. Bulletin, III, Nos. 1, 2, Jan. July 1SS4.

Zoologist. July, Aug. Sept. 1885.

GENERAL NOTES.

Kirtland’s Warbler from the Straits of Mackinac. — In a lot of birds
sent me by William Marshall, Esq., keeper of the light-house on Spec¬
tacle Reef, Michigan, is a male specimen of Kirtland’s Warbler (L>en-
droeca kirtlandi'). It killed itself by striking the light at that place on
the night of May 21, 1S85. Found with it, dead at the foot of the tower,
were Turdus mus/elinus, Dendrceca blackburnice, D. maculosa , Siur/es
auricapillus, Passerculns savanna, and Tringa minutilla. Spectacle Reef
is in the western part of Lake Huron near the Straits of Mackinac, mid¬
way between the north and south shores. — C. Hart Merriam. Locust
Grove , N. V.

<S8S.J

General Notes.

377

Odd Nesting Habits of the Blue Yellow-backed Warbler in Missouri. — •

Mr. Otto Widmann has kindly sent me a nest of the Blue Yellow-backed
Warbler ( Parula americana ) which he took near St. Louis, Mo.. June 8,
1885. It differs in every particular from the delicate pensile nest which
the species commonly builds in the East, where hanging lichens abound
on the trees. Mr. Widmann writes me : “It was situated in a bunch of
dead leaves and rubbish, such as is often found hanging from those
branches of trees which are reached by high water in creeks, freshets, etc.
The tree from which I took the nest is a birch, and the twig a long pendu¬
lous one, the terminal three feet of which had been immersed by the last
high water and had caught and retained a bulky conglomeration of straw,
sticks, and dry leaves. At the time of collection (June 8) the nest was
6-8 feet above the water (of Meramec River, St. Louis Co.), and contained
five young ones about ten days old.”

The nest itself is a small, open, cup-shaped affair, composed chiefly of
small rootlets, fine grass, and a moss, intermixed with a few tufted seeds
of some plant, and sparingly lined with horse hairs. It measures, ex¬
ternally, 70 mm. in diameter by 70 mm. in depth; internally, 45 mm. in
diameter by 40 mm. in depth. — C. Hart Merriam, Locust Grove , N. Y.

Swainson’s Warbler in Jamaica. — The following note is intended to
supplement the information already contributed to this Journal by Mr.
Brewster and others concerning the distribution of Swainson’s Warbler
( Helinaia sivainsoni ) .

In the Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London for 1879, Pr°f-
Alfred Newton of Cambridge, England, records the capture of a single
specimen of this species from Jamaica. He says : “It is an extremely rare
species and I douht whether a second example has ever been seen in this
country. The present was killed by my brother at Hope, in the parish of
St. Andrew, February 8, 1879, anc* was found by him to be a male. I
am indebted to the kindness of Mr. Ridgway, of the Smithsonian Institu¬
tion, for the determination of this specimen of a species I never saw
before” (p. 552).

The above example proved to be the first of a series of eight taken in
Jamaica by Mr. Edward Newton and now in the Museum of Zoology at
Cambridge, England. Through the kindness of Professor Newton, I
was permitted, last April, to .examine these specimens and transcribe the
following data concerning the dates and places of capture :

$ Feb. 8, 1879. Hope, St. Andrews Parish.

5 Feb. 18, 1879. Port Royal Mt., St. Thomas Parish.

9 April 8, 1879. Hermitage, St. Andrews Parish.

$ Oct. 1, 1S79. Mt. Elizabeth.

Oct. 7, 1879. Mt- Elizabeth.

$ Dec. 2 1 , 1881. Mt. Elizabeth.

§ March 16, 1882. Mt. Elizabeth.

$ March 16, 1SS2. Mt. Elizabeth. — C. Hart Merriam, M. D., Locust
Grove. Nexv York.

378

General Notes.

[ October

A Specimen of Helminthopila leucobronchialis in New Jersey. — A

fine male was shot on May u, 18S3, at Maplewood, Essex Co., N. J.,
feeding in tree-tops on the blossoms of the oak tree. This, I believe is
the first specimen for this State.

Not being able to satisfactorily identify the bird I sent it to Mr. E. P.
Bicktiell, whose remarks on the subject I give, as follows : “The specimen
of Helminthophila leucobronchialis from Maplewood, New Jersey, is similar
to an adult male taken by Dr. A. K. Fisher, at Sing Sing, N. Y., August
29, 1S79, and recorded in B. N. O. C., IV, 4, 234. As I recall Dr. Fisher’s
specimen, the present one differs chiefly in having the yellow breast-band
less pronounced, both in color and outline. The wing-bars are narrow,
conspicuously separated, and, as in Dr. Fisher’s example, whiter than in
many individuals of H. pinus. The specimen shows one peculiarity
which I do not remember to have observed in others, or to have seen
recorded, namely, a distinct bleaching of the ashy-blue of the dorsal
surface on the rump and proximal tail-coverts. Carried a few steps farther
this tendency would have given us a Hehninthophila with a white rump!
This bird is the first for New Jersey. Mr. Brewster alludes to a specimen
from Nyack, “New Jersey” (B. N. O. C., VI, 4, 2191). The specimen
referred to, however, was from Nyack, Rockland Co., New York, the error
in the record being obviously from some mishap in publishing. But
Nyack, N. Y-, is within a few miles of the New Jersey State line.” — C. B.
Ricker, New York City.

Capture of two more Specimens of Helminthophila leucobronchialis
at Sing Sing. New York. — On August n, 1883, I killed two specimens of
the so-called White-throated Warbler ( Helminthophila leucobronchialis').
The under parts of both specimens are much more deeply suffused with
yellow than is the case in any of my other three specimens; in fact, the
yellow on one is evenly distributed over the entire under surface, but is
not so deep as in Helminthophila pinus. — A. K. Fisher. M. D., Sing
Sing , New York.

Evidence Concerning the Interbreeding of Helminthophila chrysop-
tera and H. pinus. — On July 4, 1885, while collecting specimens in a piece
of woods underlaid by a scattering undergrowth, I came upon a female
Golden-winged Warbler busily engaged in collecting insects. As I stood
watching her she flew to a neighboring cedar tree and commenced to feed
a young bird. I immediately shot and killed the latter as the female flew
away. The noise of the discharge started another young bird from some
bushes nearby, and as it flew the female flew and alighted near it. Just as
I was on the point of firing they started, and I succeeded in wounding the
female only and had to follow and kill her with a second shot. On my
return to the place where I first shot at her, I could not find the young
one, nor did a careful search disclose it. In advancing for a nearer shot I
had a good opportunity of seeing the young bird : it closely resembled its
mother in appearance and had no vellow on the breast, whereas the one

General Notes.

1885.]

379

killed was the exact counterpart of the young of the Blue-winged Yellow
Warbler, with its yellow breast and white wing-bars.

In all probability the father of this interesting family was a specimen of
Helminthophila pinus. — A. K. Fisher, M. D., Sing Sing, Nciv York.

The Loggerhead Shrike in New Hampshire. — On the morning of the
16th of April of this year an unfamilar bird-note — as of a Robin with a
cleft tongue — attracted my attention to a clump of balsams (Abies bal-
samea ) in the yard of our nearest neighbor. Here, after a few moments
of hide and seek, I discovered the birds to be a pair of these Shrikes (La¬
nins ludovicianus ) although at first I quite naturally supposed them to be
Lanius borealis, with whose acquaintance I have been little favored.
For the next ten days the birds were seen continually as they boldly flew
about the houses gathering materials for their nest. This they built
close to the trunk of one of the balsams, at a distance of about 20 feet
from the ground and scarcely more than that from the upper windows of
the house. On the 27th one egg was found, and, to anticipate any pos'
sible unnatural actions on the part of the birds, was taken. The female,
however, soon resumed her oviparous duties so that on May 4 we secured
five more eggs. But meanwhile doubts had arisen as to the species; accord¬
ingly the birds were shot and have since been identified by the editor of
this Journal as Lanius ludovicianus.

The nest, which is large for the size of the birds, is composed outwardly
of twigs rather loosely joined together by wads of worsted and twine ; the
inner portion, however, is quite compact, being composed of dried grasses
and roots finely interwoven with feathers and soft bits of worsted. The
depth of the nest is two inches; its diameter is three inches.

The eggs are of a grayish-white ground-color, entirely covered with
small blotches of a sandy-brown of several shades, darkest at the large end.
The eggs measure (in inches) 1.01 X .70; .94 X .74; .98 X .70; .96 X
.70; .96 X 70; .98 X .66.

While under my observation the Shrikes did not evince a particularly
savage or quarrelsome disposition; when the nest was building they en¬
joyed driving away the Robins, whose customary abode they had pre¬
empted, yet neither in the trees near at hand, nor in an apple tree
about 300 yards distant which the male made his look-out, did we see any
evidences of impaled victims. They frequently alighted in the grass, ap
parently in search of grasshoppers and crickets. Their vocal range was
broad ; but to our ears disclosed a painful lack of culture ; save for an oc¬
casional liquid, far-away, tone, like a bitof blue sky seen through angry
clouds, — their notes were very harsh and discordant. In concluding I
will sav that another season will doubtless add further evidence, and suffi¬
cient, for the complete establishment of the fact that L. ludovicianus is a
regular resident in this locality. — Edwin Brant Frost, Hanover, N. II.

Breeding of Loxia americana in the District of Columbia. — In Vol. I
of ‘The Auk,’ p. 292. Mr Ridgway cites the occurrence of Loxia americana

380

General Notes.

[October

in the vicinity of Washington in May, 1S84, and, judging from the worn
condition of the plumage of one of the specimens shot — a female — he very
naturally surmises that this species, hitherto considered an extremely rare
and irregular winter visitant, breeds in this section. This season I was so
fortunate as to substantiate this view in a most satisfactory manner. On
the 17th of May an adult male and a young bird in the striped feather, bare¬
ly able to fly, were seen by me in a pine sapling, a short distance beyond
the city limits. Attracted to the spot by the call of the parent, uttered for
the encouragement of the young, I approached within a few feet, and
thoroughly identified the birds. — Hugh M. Smith, National Museum ,
Washington , D. C.

Non-appearance of Juncos at Montreal. — I am informed by Mr. Ernest
D. Wintle that he did not see a Junco in the vicinity of Montreal during the
spring migrations of the present year, a most unusual occurrence, as the
birds are generally very abundant at that season, although but few of them
remain there to breed. Mr. Wintle also writes to me that Mr. W. W.
Dunlop and Mr. Paul Kuetzing, also of Montreal, had remarked the
entire absence of this species. Mr. Wintle desires to know if anything
similar has been observed bv readers of ‘The Auk.’ — Montague Cham¬
berlain, St. John, N. B.

Familiar Chipping Sparrows. — Miss Katie Hine. of Vienna, Virginia,
has for several years past had Chipping Sparrows, Spizella socialis, visit
her home each summer. The first year it was noticed that one of the
pair had the claw missing' from the middle toe. This bird came with its
mate for three successive years and then ceased its visits. The second
year there came also with them another pair, one of which, at least, was
suspected to be the young of the first year. Now there are two pairs of
adults so familiar that I observed them fly to her feet and clamor for
crumbs of bread while we were at the dinner table. In the afternoon
they frequently alighted near her and even fed from her hand. They
know the window of her bedroom, and each morning they assail the
panes of glass, making quite a noise to arouse her for their accustomed
food. — L. M. Turner. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D. C.

Swamp Sparrows and Yellow Rumps. — As the “ Wintering of the
Swamp Sparrow in Eastern Massachusetts” has been made “a question ot
evidence.” it may be well to give that evidence somewhat more in detail
than was before thought necessary, and also to state the reasons for con¬
cluding that the birds did pass the winter in Cambridge.

On December 29, 1884, four Swamp Sparrows were seen by Mr. F. II.
Hitchcock in a small tangle of weeds and alders on the edge of a stream
which runs through the Fresh Pond marshes, but they were so shy and
hard to approach that only one of them was shot; this was stuffed by Mr.
C. J. Maynard of Boston, who told me that he had never before seen one
from Massachusetts in winter. While taking a short walk on the after-

rSS.v]

General Notes.

38l

noon o< January 31, 1885, I met Mr. Hitchcock, and together we went to
the place where he saw the Sparrows on December 29, and also to the one
in which they were found by Mr. Lamb in January, 1883.* Quite near
the latter locality were the fresh and only partly frozen remains of a Spar¬
row (an undoubted Melospiza pa l test r is, as I afterward made sure by
comparison) which had evidently been killed by a Shrike.

From the above it would appear almost certain that the birds were
present during the entire month of January, and it is very probable that
they might have escaped my notice when I looked for them later. If the
original flock consisted of only four there could not have been more than
two left for me to find, and in the tangled underbrush, which, in one
swampy place at least, extends over several acres, they might easily have
eluded me.

I have always considered that any species found here in January was
an undoubted winter resident, and its presence at any date during that
month sufficient proof of this. Mr. William Brewster tells me that he
considers the autumnal migration ended here by December 25, and Janu¬
ary, the one winter month when all birds (except such erratic species as
Crossbills. Pine Grosbeaks, etc.) are settled for a brief period. If Janu¬
ary is not accepted as the test month it will be almost impossible to de¬
termine our rarer winter residents, for early in February some of our
most hardy spring birds often begin to arrive.

It seems to me it is unsafe to say that “it is hardly possible that Swamp
Sparrows passed the winter in Massachusetts in a season so rigorous as
was that of i884-’85 after the middle of January,” for there are numerous
instances recorded of the wintering of certain birds far north of their
usual habitat at that season, even during exceptionally cold winters.!
The warm and open character of the winter of i884-’85 previous to Janu¬
ary i§ might also have caused the birds to establish themselves in a local¬
ity which they would have been unwilling or unable to leave later.

I think it is almost equally certain that the Yellow-rumped Warblers
were also wintering at Pine Point, Maine, as they do regularly at Milton,
Mass, (only about ninety miles south), where I have found them every
winter for a number of years. — Arthur P. Chadbourne. Cambridge,
Mass.

Note on the capture of Coturniculus lecontei and Dendrceca kirtlandi
within the city limits of St. Louis, Mo. — Leconte’s Sparrow, male, was
taken April 1. 1885. on dry ground in a prairie overgrown with coral-berry
bushes ( Symp h o rica rpus). The earliness of the date seems to be remark¬
able. Another specimen, in the collection of Mr. Hurter, was taken in

* Journ. Boston Zool. Soc., II (1883), p. 32.

f I find that the following southern species have been recorded from Eastern Massa¬
chusetts during the very cold winter of 1882-83 : — Flock of six Sialia stales ( Job, Bul¬
letin Nuttall Club, VIII, 1883, p. 149); two Molothrus a ter (Spelman, ibid., p. 121) ;
and a Dendrceca pinus (Brewster, ibid., p. 120). See also Auk, I, 1884, pp. 294, 295,
and Bulletin Nuttall Club, IV, 1879, p. 118.

382

General Notes.

[October

this vicinity November 10, 1878. These dates may serve to show that the
species is a pretty early spring- and a late fall-migrant. In regard to its
habits I can only repeat what others have said again and again, namely
that it is a great hider. My attention was called to the bird by a low call
not unlike the characteristic chirp of the Song Sparrow, but peculiarly
sharp and shrill. Going for the bird, it darted out from one bush into
another, a distance of about ten yards. I saw it alight in the middle of the
bush on the ground and determined to watch the little stranger. • I kept
my eyes fixed on him for fully ten minutes, but he remained motion¬
less and silent, and his patience seemed unimpaired when mine was all
gone.

The capture of Dendrceca kirtlandi , male, May 8, 1885, is worthy of
special mention, as it is the first record of its occurrence west of the Miss¬
issippi River. It may also be new to learn that this Warbler is in its gen¬
eral ways mostly like D. pahnarum. It flew up from the grouhd on the
River des Pires, a few yards from the water, and alighted behind a bush a
few feet from the ground. One glance at the bird was sufficient to tell me
that it was a Kirtland’s Warbler; such a peculiar looking bird it is. Con¬
cealing myself I watched the bird for a few minutes, and found that its
habits seem to be terrestrial, that it has the same -wagging motion of the
tail as the Yellow Redpole, but that in the carriage of its body and in the
manner of evading discovery by skilfully alighting behind a protecting
object it resembles Oporornis. — Otto Widmann, St. Louis , Mo.

On the Feeding Habits of Phalaenoptilus nuttalli. — Just without the
picket fence that encloses in part the parking of my present residence at
Fort Wingate, New Mexico, then runs a wide board-walk. Beyond this
is a broad, well-kept gravel road, standing between the former and an
open level plot of ground of about an acre’s extent. For a number of
evenings past my neighbors have tried to induce me to come out and see
a strange-acting bird that disported itself in this roadway, between twi¬
light and dark. I paid little heed to this, as from its description I believed
it to be the half-grown young of the Chordediles of this region,
which is very abundant in the neighborhood. Last night, however, the
bird having been described to me as a small Owl with a white throat, by
one of its observers, I took my cane-gun and made a search for it up and
down the road-way. I had not far to go, when, as well as I could see by
the light of a very young moon, I noticed a small, dark-brownish looking
bird apparently amusing himself by making short jumps of two feet or
more up in the air, then resting on the road to repeat the performance in
a moment or so. Another was going through similar capers on the broad
walk. They seemed to be perfectly oblivious to my presence, and, indeed,
some children further along were trying to catch them with their hands.
As I had never heard the note of the Poor-wills in the vicinity, it did not
strike me at first that it might be this bird ; moreover, its action was so
odd that I hardly knew what to make of it. At any rate one soon noise¬
lessly lit, like a great, gray moth, directly in front of me in the road, but
a few feet distant. It was extremely difficult to see him, and it was more

' ss5 • ]

General Notes.

383

by good luck than good shooting that the little pinch of shot from mv
cane-gun knocked him over, though the weapon rarely fails me in day¬
time. I immediately ran up to my study with my prize, where I discovered
that 1 had killed a line specimen of Nuttall’s Poor-will. As the skeleton
of this bird had long been among my desiderata, the skin and its beauti¬
ful plumage was soon stripped off, whereupon I was much surprised to
find in its mouth some four or five quite sizable moths, and the upper por¬
tion of the oesophagus filled with a wad of a dozen or fifteen more. Fully
half of these were yet alive, and two or three managed to fly away when
treed from the bodies of their more disabled companions. This, then, is
what the bird was up to; instead of flying about as a Nighthawk does,
taking his insect prey in a conspicuous manner upon the wing, he cap¬
tures it in the way I have described above.

To-night .the moon is twenty-four hours older, and the evening pro¬
portionately- brighter, but a careful search for over half an hour failed to
discover a single specimen of the bird on the same ground. I am not
aware that any of the other Caprimulgidae have similar habits. — Dr. R.
W. Shufeldt, Fort Wingate. New Mexico.

Colaptes auratus in California. — During the early part of January, 1885,
I took at this place a female of a species I at first thought to be C.
hybridus Baird, but which I soon became satisfied was C. auratus; and
upon consulting Mr. Robert Ridgwav, who examined the bird, I found
my conclusion correct. The bird had been observed for nearly a fort¬
night frequenting a house near by, and at last it paid with its life for its
persistency. Soon after I saw two others of this species, but as I had no
gun with me at the time they escaped, much to my regret. I am of the
opinion that this bird frequents California more than is supposed, and
is overlooked through being mistaken for C. mexicanus , which it much
resembles, and which is so common as not to be collected in great num¬
bers ; and hence the few scattered specimens of C. auratus which may
visit us are thus overlooked. We have at this place, and in fact all through
the southern part of the State, at regular intervals, and lasting generally
three daws, heavy wind storms, amounting at times almost to tornados.
The bird was first seen just after one of these wind storms, and it mav be
that this had something to do with the bird’s having wandered so far
from its accustomed haunts, but this seems very improbable. This, the
only specimen that I have ever heard of as taken on the Pacific coast south
of Sitka, is now the property of the National Museum, to which it was
contributed by me. — Forrest Ball, San Bernardino. Cal.

A Hawk Owl (Surnia alula capa roc//) at Chatham, Mass. — I am in¬
formed by Mr. Augustus W. Baker, of Chatham, Mass., that a Hawk Owl
was shot at Chatham during the winter of i883-’S4. The specimen was not
preserved, nor can the exact date be given, but Mr. Baker’s intelligent and
very accurate description of the bird, which he carefully examined, ren¬
ders the record otherwise satisfactory and not in the least open to doubt.
— J. A. Allen, American Museum of Natural History , New Fork City.

General Notes.

f October

384

Another Richardson’s Owl in Massachusetts. — As Nyctala tengmalmi
richardsoni has been so seldom taken so far south as this point (central
Eastern Massachusetts), it may be well to record an additional example.
I have in my collection a fine specimen obtained in this place on Jan i,
1885. It was approached without difficulty in broad daylight bv a wood-
chopper and killed with a stick.

This is about the southern limit of the range of the species as at present
determined. I find but three examples on record to the south of this,; the
early one of Dr. Wood for Connecticut in 1859, ar>d the two obtained in
18S1 and 1882 near Providence, R. I., as reported by Mr. Jencks in the
‘Nuttall Bulletin’ of April, 1881, and April, 1883.

The circumstances of this capture indicate the defective day-vision
characteristic of the strictly nocturnal species, in accordance with Richard¬
son’s statement: “It is so much dazzled by the light of the sun that it
becomes stupid and may easily be caught by hand.” — F. C. Browne,
Framingham , Mass.

The Oyster-catcher ( Hcematopus pallia fas') in Massachusetts. — Mr.
Warren Hapgood tells me that during the last week of April, 1885, he
received an Oyster-catcher in the flesh from Chatham, Mass. It was shot
on Monomoy Island by Alonzo Nye, the veteran gunner of Chatham. It
was in fine plumage, and is now preserved in Mr. Ilapgood’s collection.
If I remember rightly this is only the third specimen known to have been
taken in Massachusetts, the other two being the pair mentioned by Dr.
Brewer (Water Birds, Vol. I, p. 1 13), and now in the New England collection
of the Boston Society. — William Brewster, Cambridge. Mass.

The Baird’s Sandpiper ( Actodromas bairdii ) at Locust Grove, New
York. — August 18, 1885, while Dr. C. H. Merriam and the writer were
driving along a country road at the above locality we discovered a solitary
Baird’s Sandpiper on the edge of a small, temporary pool of water formed
by the recent rains. It was a female of the year in fine plumage, and
was evidently a straggling migrant which had dropped down hap-bazard
to feed and rest. Most of the eastern stragglers of this species; hitherto
recorded have been from the Atlantic coast, but undoubtedly the bird
occurs more or less commonly all the way across the interior country. —
H. W. Henshaw, Washington . D. C.

A Bird New to Massachusetts. — Among the Sandpipers collected by me
years ago in Massachusetts I find a single specimen of the Western
Sandpiper ( Ereunetes occidental is) , taken on Long Island, Boston Harbor,
Aug. 27, 1870. It was one of a number of 'Peeps’ shot on that day, and
it is by no means unlikely that the lot contained others of this species,
which were overlooked under the impression that they were all the com¬
mon species, E. pusillus. Like the Baird's Sandpiper, this species may
be expected to occur in small numbers along the Atlantic coast during the
migrations, especially in fall. — H. W. Henshaw, Washington, D. C.

General Notes.

385

1SS5.I

Ereunetes occidentalis on the Lower Potomac.— Respecting the occur¬
rence of the Western Sandpiper in the Eastern States, the only published
record is that of C. W. Beckham, of Washington, in ‘The Auk,’ Vol. II,
p. no. This gentleman speaks of several specimens shot at Virginia
Beach, Va., September 6-7, 1SS4. By way of throwing a little additional
light on the range of the species, it may not be wholly amiss to state that
during the last week of August of the present year I found the western
bird quite as common as the eastern, at Piney Point, Md., on the Potomac
River. If anything the former was the more numerous, for of eighteen
specimens of Ereunetes preserved, fourteen were identified by Mr. Ridg-
way as occidentalis , and these, too, were taken at random from a lot of
about twenty-five dead birds. — Hugh M. Smith, National Museum, Wash¬
ington. D. C.

The Great Marbled Godwit at Portland, Maine. — Late in May, 1884,
a specimen of the Great Marbled Godwit ( Lirnosa feed a ) was shot by a
Portland sportsman on Scarborough Marsh. The weather being warm
at the time the captor of the bird sent his trophy at once to a taxidermist
but I was given an opportunity of examining it as soon as its preserva¬
tion was secured. I make a note of this specimen because it is the only
one which I know to have been taken in the vicinity of Portland during
my observations there, or between the years 1870 and 1885. A generation
ago, in the days of the famous Maine sportsman, ‘Cale’ Loring, the
Marbled Godwit appears to have been at least an occasional visitor to the
Scarborough Marshes. In the journal which Loring left, there is. I am
told, not infrequent mention of this species, and no Portland sportsman
will question the authenticity of such records. Of late years, however,
the birds have evidently not looked with favor upon their old-time halting-
places. — Nathan Clifford Brown, Portland , Maine.

The Little Yellow Rail ( Porzana noveboracensis ) in Kansas. — Prof.
L. L. Dyche, Curator of Birds and Mammals, State University, Lawrence,
writes me that April 18, 1S85, he captured one of these birds (a female)
on low wet land, about five miles southeast of Lawrence. I have seen the
specimen, which is mounted and on exhibition in the fine collection under
his charge. — N. S. Goss, Topeka, Kans.

Harelda hyemalis in Maryland in Summer.-- On the 27th of July, 1885,
a Duck, which I supposed was Aix sponsa, was seen swimming in the
Potomac River near Piney Point, Md. After a time it came to the shore,
and approaching it rather cautiously I had no trouble in catching it, as
it made no attempt to use its wings. It proved to be a male Long-tailed
Duck, in slightly worn plumage. One wing showed signs of injury; the
upper coverts were gone, leaving bare the bases of the primary quills; and
there was an eminence on the humerus, indicating a fracture of that bone.
Without doubt the presence of the bird in these waters at this season was
due entirely to the diseased wing. The specimen has been mounted for
the National Museum, in the collection of which it bears the number
105,301. — Hugh M. Smith, National Museum. Washington . D. C.

^86

General Nolen.

[October

An Albino Surf Duck ( (Edemia perspicillata'). — Some time since Mr.
Alfred J. Leavitt, keeper of the Boon Island (Maine) light-house, sent me
drawings of a ‘curious Duck’ which was shot at that place October 13, 1S84,
bj Mr. H. Z. Ellis. After some correspondence Mr. Ellis has kindly sent
me the specimen for examination. It proves to be an Albino Surf Duck
{GEdemia perspicillata'). Mr. Ellis writes me that it “headed a flock of
Coots,” and that its eves were “jet black.” The bird is not pure white.
The throat, under parts, sides of head and neck, and part of the wing-cov-
erts and tail are soiled white. The top of the head, a line down the back
of the neck, and the wings are pale bleached brown. The markings are
symmetrical. — C. Hart Merriam, Locust Grove , N. 7".

On the Alleged Occurrence of the Pacific Eider in Labrador. — Mr. W.

A. Stearns, in a paper entitled ‘Notes on the Natural History of Labra¬
dor,’ published in the ‘Proceedings of the U. S. National Museum,’ Vol.
VI, 1SS3, says (p. 12 1) that the Somateria v-nigra , the Pacific Eider, is
“abundant in large flocks in spring,” and that he himself “obtained speci¬
mens that had the decided ‘V-shaped black mark’ on the chin.” The
statement has been doubted, and critics have considered it a mild ex¬
pression when saying that it “seems to require confirmation.” It is not
my intention to defend Mr. Stearns’s identification, but having found a
notice which seems to point in the same direction, I think it safer to post¬
pone a final decision in the matter. The notice to which I allude is
found in Degland and Gerbe’s ‘Ornithologie Europeenne’ (Paris, 1867),
II, p. 557, where, under the head of Somateria mollissima, Mr. Gerbe
writes: “Three or four specimens received from Newfoundland had under
the throat two black lines similar to those of Somateria spectabilis , but
of a color less deep. May they not be mules between the latter and the
female Eider?

“Mr. de Selys-Longchamps, in his second note on the hybrids of the
Anatidse,* in quoting this example, remarks that Prince Ch. Bonaparte
and Mr. W. Jardine consider these specimens as a distinct species, which
they name Somateria v-nigrum , but that there is occasion to wait for
new observations before deciding.” — Leonhard Stejneger, Smithsonian
Institution , Washington, D. C.

A New Petrel for North America. — On the 2d of September. 1S85, there
was captured on board the U. S. Fish Commission Steamer ‘Albatross’
(Capt. Z. L. Tanner, Commander), in lattitude 40° 34' 18" N., 66° 09' W.,
a specimen ofthe White-faced Stormy Petrel, Pelagodroma marina (Lath.).
Mr. James E. Benedict, resident naturalist of the ‘Albatross,’ writes me tha
it was “taken on the ship late in the evening of the 2d proximo,” and
that “it was in all probability attracted by the light and fell on the deck,
from which it seemed unable to rise.” He adds that no more of the same
species were seen during the cruise, though Petrels of other kinds were
numerous around the ship.

* Bull. Acad. Bruxelles, 1856, XXIII C; Naumannia, 1856, p. 397. — L. S.

iSSS.]

General Notes.

387

The capture of this specimen makes the second record, so far as the
writer is aware, for the Atlantic Ocean, the species belonging properly to
the ‘South Seas,’ especially in the neighborhood of Australia and New
Zealand. The two other Atlantic records are the Canary Islands {fide
Webb and Berthelot), and near the mouth of the Rio de la Plata. The
latter refers to the specimen upon which the species (. Procellaria marina
Lath.) was originally based, while the former is the basis of Procellaria
hypoleuca Webb and Berth. — Robert Ridgway, Washington , D. C.

Probable Occurrence of Diomedea exulans in Florida. — Mr. B. H. Bar¬
rett, writing from Jacksonville, Fla., under date of September 14, 1885,
says : “ Sometime during the month of May a great Wandering Albatross
was seen at the mouth of the St. John’s River twenty miles below this citv.
Knowing it to be a very rare occurrence, I questioned several who saw
the bird, and from their description I have no doubt of its authenticity.”
A later letter from Mr. Barrett relating to this occurrence is accompanied
by a letter from Mr. Alfred Ames Howlett. one of the fortunate observers
of the bird, from which I quote the following: “ In reply to your request
for a statement regarding an Albatross that I told you I had seen at the
mouth of the St. John’s River this year, I would say that I was in the pilot¬
house of my tug, the ‘J. E. Stevens,’ talking with Captain N. Broward,
when I discovered a large bird hovering near the surface of the water in
the channel near ‘ Ward’s Bank,’ and on coming nearer the bird arose and
circled within seventy-five yards of the tug, and I positively identified it
as an Albatross; and on the return of the tug I carried my gun with
me and, although seen again I was unable to get within shot. The last

seen of the bird it was winging its way seaward . I am positive of the

bird’s identity from mounted specimens I have seen and from ornitho¬
logical works I have read.” — Elliott Coles, Washington . D. C.

The Bill of the Horned Puffin ( Ceratorhina monoce.rata'). — While at
Santa Barbara and San Diego, Cal., in November and December. I had
the opportunity to examine a number of specimens of this species, prob-
ablv not fewer than twenty, old and young. Considering the abundance
of the bird off the California coast, and even in the harbors, its rarity in
collections is somewhat surprising. These Puffins are tame enough, as a
rule, to be approached and shot without difficulty, and even when they
dive they do not remain under long, and may be followed bv observing
their course and obtained with very little trouble. Enough specimens
may, however, be secured (or could in December, 1884) by a walk along
the beach of San Diego Bay, or anywhere on the coast, after a storm,
when considerable numbers are cast up by the waves in a state of perfect
preservation —apparently drowned, for they show no signs of violence,
either externally or internally.

It was interesting to observe that the curious upright horn-like append,
age of the bill, which writers appear to consider more or less peculiar to
the breeding season, was present in all specimens examined, in shape of

388

General Notes.

[October

a fleshy protuberance or knob near the base of the upper mandible.
Upon looking up Cassin’s description of the Cerorhina suckleyi , now
known to be the young of the present species, and Dr Coues’s account of
this bird in Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1S68, I find that the young
Horn-billed Puffin, just casting the downy plumage, is described as having
this same fleshy knob on the bill. As my specimens show that the knob
is present in winter, I am inclined to believe that the fleshy knob is really
entirely persistent, and is the matrix or core, so to speak, of the horny
excrescence, which latter is superimposed upon it only on the near ap¬
proach of the mating season, and shed at its end, leaving a ‘ horn’ behind,
though quite devoid of its horny sheath. In ordinary museum specimens
this tough membranous knob is not apparent, having so dried away and
shrunk to the bill as to have lost its distinctive character.

It is to be hoped that California collectors will be able to furnish a
series of notes on the bill of this species, showing its character at the
several seasons. At present the matter cannot be said to be fully under¬
stood. — H. W. Henshaw, Washington , D. C.

A Crested Auk on the Massachusetts Coast. — While on a recent collec¬
ting trip to Chatham, Mass., I was asked by Mr. A. W. Baker, an intelli¬
gent and trustworthy gunner and fisherman of that place, to give him the
name of a bird killed at Chatham during the winter of iSSq-’Sj, which he
described as being very much like the Little Auk or Dovekie in form and
color, though a little larger, and having a tuft of narrow, pointed feathers
on the front of the head, curving upward and forward. From his minute
description of the bird it was evidently one of the Little Crested Auks,
apparentl ySimorhynchus cristatellus — a bird he had otherwise never seen
or heard of, but which he very accurately described. That the bird was
one ofthe Little Crested Auks there can be no doubt.

The occurrence of such a bird on the Massachusetts coast is of course
entirely accidental and surprising. We have, however, the Tufted Puffin
( Lunda cirrhata ) recorded from Greenland and the coast of Maine, the
Black-throated Guillemot (, Syntkliborhamphus antiquus ) from Wisconsin
( cf. Sennett, Auk, I, p. 98), and the Paroquet Auk ( Cyclorrhynchus
psitfaculus) from Sweden, showing that these Northwest Coast species of
Alcidas are more or less given to wandering to points far remote from their
proper habitats. — J. A. Allen, American Museum of Natural History ,
New York City.

The Thick-billed Grebes ( Podily mbits podiceps) Breeding in Kansas. —
B. L. Bennett and V. L. Kellogg of Emporia, Kans., both report finding,
May 26, 1885, in a pond or slough near the city, quite a number of the
nests of this bird containing from five to ten eggs each.— N. S. Goss,
Topeka , Kans.

ISSS.]

Correspondence.

389

CORRESPONDENCE.

\Correspondents are requested to write briefly and to the point. No attention will
be paid to anonymous communications .]

Republication in ‘ The Auk ’ of Descriptions of New North American
Birds. — A Suggestion.

To the Editors of The Auk: —

Sirs: I would like to make a suggestion or two in relation to ‘The Auk
as the organ of the A. O..U. One is that in future descriptions of new
species or varieties of North American birds, unless originally published
in ‘ The Auk,’ be republished in that journal in the next succeeding
number, either verbatim or with sufficient fullness to give the diagnostic
points, habitat, etc., of the new forms. This may seem objectionable to
the (comparatively) few ornithologists to whom the original descriptions
are always promptly sent; but many first hear of the new forms by a brief
statement in ‘The Auk,’ announcing the fact of their description, long
after the original description appeared. Probably on an average less than
two pages of each number would suffice for such a purpose, and I do not
think they could be used in a more satisfactory way. I understand the
the reason for publishing certain descriptions in such a medium as, for in¬
stance, the ‘ Proceedings’ of the Biological Society of Washington, but
that does not make such place of publication any less inconvenient to
many readers of * The Auk.’

The second suggestion is that each new form, when described, if recog-
ized by the authority that is about to publish the standard list of North
American birds , be given a special number or designation by which it shall
be known in check lists, indicating its position among its allies, and the
official opinion of admitted authority as to its claims to recognition.

It seems to me that both these suggestions are practical and useful.

J. C. Merrill, U. S. A.

Columbus Barracks ,

Columbus Ohio , August, 1885.

NOTES AND NEWS.

As previously announced, the annual meeting of the American Ornithol¬
ogists’ Union will be held in New York City, beginning Tuesday, Novem¬
ber 17. The place of meeting will be, as previously, at the American
Museum of Natural History, 77th Street and 8th Avenue. In addition to
the reports of Committees, and the usual routine business of such an occa¬
sion, it is hoped that a good list of scientific papers will be presented, and
that the meeting will be fully attended.

39°

Notes and News.

[October

At the September meeting of the Ridgway Ornithological Club of
Chicago, Dr. Alfred Dahlberg was elected to membership, and a paper by
Mr. F. L. Grundvig, entitled ‘Notes on the Habits of the Birds of Outa¬
gamie County, Wis.,’ was read.

The A. O. U. Committee on the Classification and Nomenclature of
North American Birds are pleased to believe that the results of their labors
will soon be accessible to the public. Their report, the character of which
has already been indicated (see anted , pp. 318), will form an octavo vol¬
ume of about 300 pages, and will doubtless be on sale by December
1, and possibly at the time of the annual meeting of the Union in
November. Information as to price, etc., may be found in the advertise¬
ment pages of the present number of ‘The Auk.’

Under the title ‘A Nomenclature of Colors for the use of Naturalists,
and a Compendium of Useful Knowledge for Ornithologists,’ Mr. Robert
Ridgway has prepared a work, shortly to be published by Little, Brown
& Co., of Boston, that cannot fail to be of great convenience and useful¬
ness to naturalists in general, and ornithologists in particular. The
work will make an octavo volume of about 150 pages, illustrated by ten
colored plates, and several others of outline figures, uncolored. It con¬
sists, as the title indicates, of two parts; the first, ‘Nomenclature of
Colors,’ embracing a general dissertation on the principles of color, a
chapter of useful hints on the technique of the subject, and an extensive
vocabulary of colors, as designated in most of the current European lan¬
guages. The second part, or 4 Ornithologists’ Compendium,’ includes a
glossary of terms used in descriptive ornithology, a comparative scale of
standard systems of linear measurement, as the English and the decimal,
and tables showing the equivalent of the English inch and its subdivisions
in centimeters. The plates, besides representing, with their names, nearly
two hundred more or less distinct tints, give the outlines of the principal
forms of color-making, outline figures of egg-contours, and details of the
external anatomy of birds, with reference to the terms used in descriptive
ornithology. The work is the result of years of labor on the part of the
author, whose fitness for the task, both as an artist and an ornithologist,
is too well known to require comment. The need of a work of just this
unique and useful character has long been felt by all working naturalists,
and its appearance will doubtless be welcomed as a valuable boon.

The Smithsonian Institution has recently accepted for publication from
Dr. R. W. Shufeldt, U. S. A., a collection of memoirs on the osteology
of birds. They will make an octavo volume of some 300 pages, illustrated
with iS lithographic plates and nearly 200 cuts in the text, forming by far
the most extensive publication on this subject this country has yet pro¬
duced. Collectively these memoirs will be entitled 4 Contributions to the
Anatomy of North American Vertebrates.’ The first is on the osteology
of Circus, and is intended as an introduction to the osteology of the North

it -

iSS5.l

Notes and News.

39 1

American Falconidse. The second, entitled ’Osteological studies of the
Subfamily Ardeinje,’ presents a full account of the skeleton in Ardea , with
references to other genera of Herons. The third, and by far the most
important, is devoted to the ‘ Osteology of the North American Alcidse,’
and includes comparisons with several of the higher groups. Dr. Shufeldt
having had in his hands the entire collection of the skeletons of the Arctic
birds gathered by the Alaskan expeditions, his extensive material will
doubtless enable him to throw much light upon the affinities of the, groups
treated, so far as their osteology may serve to indicate them, since his
results, we understand, are to be given in great detail, in the form of care¬
fully prepared analytical tables.

Dr. William Wood, the well-known Connecticut ornithologist, died
suddenly at his residence in East Windsor Hill, Conn., on Sunday, August
9, at the age of 63 years. He was born at Somers, Conn., and was the son
of the Rev. Luke Wood of that town. In 1861 he published in the ‘ Hart¬
ford [Conn.,] Times’ a series of twenty-one original papers on the 1 Ra¬
pacious Birds of Connecticut,’ and since that date articles from his pen on
the same and a few other species have appeared, from time to time, in the
‘American Naturalist,’ ‘ Familiar Science and Fancier’s Journal,’ ‘Ornith¬
ologist and Oologist,’ and in the ‘ Hartford Times.’ His collection of birds
and eggs is quite extensive, being especially rich in examples represent¬
ing the different phases of plumage of the Hawks. We understand that an
effort is being made to have the entire collection, including his mammals
and numerous Indian curiosities, removed to Hartford, Conn., for perma¬
nent preservation.

Dr. H. A. Atkins, a wrell-known ornithologist of Michigan, died at his
home in Locke, Ingham Co., Mich., on the 19th of May, at the age of 63
years. Dr. Atkins wras a frequent contributor for many years to the
‘Ornithologist and Oologist.’ and occasional notes from his pen were
published in the ‘Bulletin’ of the Nuttall Ornithological Club, the ‘Amer¬
ican Naturalist,’ and elsewhere.

Several new natural history serials have appeared w ithin the last three
months which give more or less attention to ornithology, among which
are the following : ‘The Hoosier Naturalist,’ published monthly at Val¬
paraiso, Ind., of wdiich the first number is dated August, 1885; ‘The
Naturalists’ Companion,’ a monthly published at Brockport, N. Y., the
first number of which is dated July, 1885; and ‘The Agassiz Journal,’ a
monthly published at Lynn, Mass., of which three or four numbers have
already appeared. With this journal has been merged ‘The Young
Oologist,’ formerly published at Albion, N. Y-, and also the ‘Naturalists’
Advertiser and American Osprey.’ ‘The Museum,’ formerly published at
Philadelphia, has been merged with the ‘American Antiquarian,’ published
at Clinton, Wise.

Notes and News.

[October

39 2

During the present year the British Museum has received three espec¬
ially noteworthy accessions to its collection of birds. “The first is the
celebrated collection of American Passeres, formed by P. L. Sclater, Esq.,
F. R. S., in the course of the last thirty years. It contains most of the ma¬
terial on which the majority of the publications of this ornithologist were
based, and is, perhaps, the first collection of its kind that was made, at
least in this country, with a clear understanding of the great importance
of well-ascertained localities.” The second is the celebrated Salvin-
Godman collection. “Formed with the same care as the Sclater collection,
it surpasses this latter as regards the number of specimens, illustrating
more fully the geographical range and diversity of plumage of each species.
Besides the specimens obtained by the donors themselves during their
travels in Central America, or by collectors who worked for them, it con¬
tains a very complete series of South American birds.” The third is the
immense Hume collection of Asiatic birds, which has lately been trans¬
ferred from Simla under the personal superintendence of Mr. Sharpe
himself. This, doubtless the largest private collection of birds ever
formed, filled eighty-two large cases when packed for transportation, and
numbers about 63,000 skins, besides 300 nests, and 18,600 eggs. About
2000 species are included, so that in the average each species is represent¬
ed by a series of about thirty skins. Of the considerable number of
duplicates that will be eliminated, a complete set has to be transmitted,
bjr the wish of the donor, to the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Har¬
vard College.

INDEX TO VOLUME II.

Abbott, C. C., notice of his ‘A Nat
uralist’s Rambles about Home,’
86.

Acanthidops bairdi, 291.

Accipiter cooperi, 17, 284,

fuscus, 17, 174, 284, 31 1.
Actodromas bairdi, 18, 63, 273,

3S4-

fuscicollis, 63, 286.
maculata, 18, 286.
minutilla, 18, 63, 192, 268.
yEgialites, sp., 157.
cantianus, 335.
melodus, 37.

melodus circumcinctus, 285.
mongolicus, 240.
semipalmatus, 201, 241, 285.
vociferus, 375.

HSgiothus canescens exilipes, 63.

linaria, 16, 99, 200, 240, 279,
291.

yEsalon columbarius, 17, 285.

richardsoni, 17, 205, 285.
^Ethyia americana, 10, iS, 288.

vallisneria, 18, 288.

Agelaeus phoeniceus, 8. 16, 114, 142,
238, 249, 282.

Agersborg, G. S., the birds of South¬
eastern Dakota. 276.

Aix sponsa, 10, 18, 192, 288, 369,
372-

Alauda blakistoni, 95.

Albatross, Short-tailed, 175.

Wandering, 387.

Alca cristatella, 341, 342.
impennis, 115.
psittacula, 342.

Alcedo ispida, 95.

Aldrich, Charles, a belated bird,
308.

Alle nigricans, 211.

Allen, J. A, sexual selection and
the nesting of birds, 129; capture
of escaped cage-birds, 314; a
Hawk Owl at Chatham, Mass.,
383 ; a Crested Auk on the Massa-
chusetts-coast, 388.

Aluco flammeus americanus, 284.
flammeus pratincola, 192.

American Ornithologists’ Union,
notes respecting, 223, 317, 318,

389- '

Ammodramus caudacutus nelsoni,
216, 306.
maritimus, 272.
savanarum passerinus, 371.
Ampelis cedrorum, 15, 279.
garrulus, 15, 279.
phcenicopterum, 291.
Amphispiza belli, 16.

belli nevadensis, 16.
bilineata, 226, 228.

Anas americana, 158.

boschas, 18, 144, 158, 112,

288, 372..
carolinensis, 158.
nivalis, 207.
obscura, 18, 372.

Anorthura fumigata, 291.

troglodytes hyemalis, 15, 113.
Anser albifrons gambeli, 63, 158,

2S7.

hyperboreus nivalis, 207.
hutchinsi, 292.
leucopareia, 292.

Anthus japonicus, 290.

ludovicianus, 15, 209, 278,
290.

pennsylvanicus, 157, 290, 368.
spinoletta, 290, 368.
spipoletta, 290, 368.
spraguei, 368.

Antrostomus carolinensis, 220.
vociferus, 179.

Aphelocoma sieberi arizonae, 371.
sordida arizonae, 356, 371.
woodhousei, 16.

Aquila chrysaetus, 205.

chrysaetus canadensis, 10, 17,

157. 285. .

Archibuteo ferrugineus, 17.

lagopus sancti-johannis, 17,
2S5, 295.

Arctonetta fischeri, 158.

Ardea caerulea, 272.
egretta, 336.

herodias, 10, 17. x43> I9°> 2^7-
Arenaria interpres, 157.

394

Index.

[October

Asio accipitrinus, 9, 143, 157, 189,
201, 241, 284.
americanus, 17, 284.
wilsonianus, 192.

Astragalinus psaltria, 16, 141.
tristis, 16, 141, 279.

Astur atricapillus, 212, 284.

atricapillus striatulus, 205.

Asturina nitida plagiata, 205.

Asyndesmus torquatus, 356.

Atkins, Dr. H. A., notice of death
of, 391.

Attila cozumelse, 295.

Auk, Crested, 3S8.

Great, 115, 209, 374.
Paroquet, 388.

Razor-billed, 38.

Auriparus flaviceps, 229.

Avoeet, American, 285, 311.

Bagg, Egbert, Jr., the Turkey Buz¬
zard in Central New York, 109.

Bain, Francis, the migration of
Swallows, 216; a Blue Heron’s
meal, 221 ; winter birds of Prince
Edward Island, 262.

Baldpate, 288.

Ball, Forrest, Colafites aura tux in
California, 3S3.

Banks, James W., nest and eggs of
the Rusty Grackle ( Scolecopha -
gus ferrttgineus ), 106.

Barrows, W. B., abnormal colora¬
tion in a caged Robin, 303; an¬
other black Robin, 303.

Bartramia longicauda, 18, 286, 315.

Batchelder, Charles F., winter notes
from New Mexico, 121, 233; Jun-
co annectens — a correction, 306.

Beckham, Charles W. , notes on
some of the birds of Pueblo, Col¬
orado, 139; a white-winged Junco
in Maryland, 306:

Bell, Robert, notice of his List of
Birds observed between Norway
House and Forts Churchill and
York, 209.

Bernicla brenta, 10, 288.

canadensis, 18, 111, 193, 287.
canadensis hutchinsi, 18.
canadensis leucopareia, 293.
nigricans, 63.

Bicknell, Eugene P., a study of the
singing of our birds, 140, 249.

Bird, Myrtle, 99.

Bittern, 99, 287, 374.

Least, xoi, 296.

Blackbird, Brewer’s, 282.

Crow, 210, 253.

Blackbird, Red-and-buff-shoulder’d,
8, 249.

Red-winged, 210, 238, 266,
282.

Rusty, 252, 282.

Yellow-headed, 8, 112, 192,
282, 334.

Blackcap, Wilson’s, 332.

Black-head, Little, 193, 2SS.

Bluebird, 86, 98, 266, 277.

Arctic, 534.

California, 330.

Mexican, 85, 172.

Rocky Mountain, 8.

Bobolink, 97, 98, 152, 189, 266, 2S2.

Bob-white, 45, 315.

Bonasa umbella, 10.

umbella umbelloides, 17,271.

Botaurus lentiginosus, 18, 287.

Brachyrhamphus sp., 159.

Brant, 10, 288.

Black, 301.

Branta canadensis hutchinsi. 158.

Brenta minima, 293.

Brewster, William, Swainson’s
Warbler, 65 ; the Heath Hen of
Massachusetts, So; preliminary
notes on some birds obtained in
Arizona by Mr. F. Stephens in
1884, 84; Swainson’s Warbler —
an omission, 105 ; Peuceea ce sti¬
lt alt s and its subspecies illinoen-
sis, 105; Hawk Owls in New
England, 109; the Eider Ducks
of the New England coast, in;
the Common Cormorant in Mas¬
sachusetts, 1 12 ; the Rock Ptarmi¬
gan of Newfoundland, 193; addi¬
tional notes on some birds col¬
lected in Arizona and the adjoin¬
ing Province of Sonora, Mexico,
by Mr. F. Stephens, with a de¬
scription of a new species of
Ortyx, 196; Nelson’s Sharp-tailed
Finch (Am mod ra m us caudacutus
nelsoni ) on the Atlantic Coast,
216; the Ptarmigan of Anticosti
— a correction. 220; additional
notes on Swainson’s Warbler
(Helinaia szvainsoni) , 346; the
Oyster-catcher ( Hcematopus ■pal-
liatus ) in Massachusetts, 384.

Broad-bill, 193.

Brown, Nathan Clifford, Swamp
Sparrows and Yellow-rumps —
a question of evidence, 307 ; the
Great Marbled Godwit at Port¬
land, Maine, 385.

iSSs-J

Index.

395

Browne, F. C., the Red Crossbill
breeding in Eastern Massachu¬
setts, 105 ; the Hawk Owl in
Eastern Massachusetts, 220; an¬
other Richardson’s Owl in Mass¬
achusetts, 3S4.

Bubo virginianus, 212, 2S4, 298.

virginianus arcticus, 17, 21.
virginianus saturatus,
virginianus subarcticus, 8,
H3-

Bucephala albeola, 337.

islandica, 336.

Budytes flavus, 157.

Buffle-head, 193.

Bunting, Baird’s, 268.

Bay-winged, 23.
Blackj-throated, 106, 192, 281,
3°7-

Henslow’s, 209.

Indigo, 266, 289.

Lark, 32, 49, 281.

Snow, 101, 265, 279, 290.
Varied, 198.

Burgomaster, 37.

Buteo borealis, 174, 285.

borealis calurus, 9, 17, 356.
borealis krideri, 109.
borealis socoroensis, 205.
brachyurus, 204.
cooperi, 17, 165.
fuliginosus, 204, 371.
lineatus alleni, 292.
oxypterus, 371.
swainsoni, 226, 285.
swainsoni oxypterus, 371,
Bryant, Walter E., the relationship
of Podiceps occidentalis and P.
clarkii, 313.

Buzzard, Swainson’s, 285.

Turkey, 10, 109, 213, 285.
C^eligena clemencise, 85. 199.
Calamospiza bicolor, 16, 32, 226,
281.

melanocorvs, 49.

Calcarius lapponicus, 157.

Calipepla californica vallicola, 372.

squamata, 213, 226, 228,
Calodromas, 208.

Calopezus, 208.

Calypte costae, 231, 309.
Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus,
220, 229,

Canace obscura, 10, 17.

Cancroma zeledoni, 370.
Canvasback, 228.

Caprimulgus minor americanus,
178. 179.

Caprimulgus virginianus, 178.

vociferus, 257, 272, 2S3.
Cardellina rubrifrons, 45:4.
Cardinal, 72.

Cardinalis cardinalis suberbus, 344.
saturatus, 295.
virginianus, 15, 16, 61, 307.
Carpodacus cassini, 16, 73, 333,
349-

frontalis, 16, 141.
frontalis mexicanus, 207
haemorrhous, 207.
mexicanus, 207.
purpureus, 279.

Carpodectes antonise, 291.

Catbird, 55, 98, 99, 215, 266, 277,
297, 299, 300.

Catharista atrata, 109, 31 1.
Cathartes aura, 10, 17, 109, 143,
2S5, 35&-

burrovianus, 293.
urubitinga, 293.

Catherpes mexicanus, 233.

mexicanus conspersus 15,350.
Cazique, Blue-throated, 85, 199.
Ceophloeus, 52.

pileatus, 52.

Centrocercus urophasianus, 10, 17,
Centurus carolinus, 17, 283, 335.
dubius, 295.
uropygialis, 226, 228.
leei, 295.

Centronyx bairdi, 16, 198, 231, 333.
Centrophanes lapponicus, 16, 63,
190, 280.

ornatus, 16, 280, 333.
pictus, 190, 280.

Cepphus carbo, 294.

columba, 159, 294.
grylle, 294.^
mandtii, 294.
motzfeldi, 294.

Ceratorhina monercerata, 387.
Cerorhina suckleyi, 388.

Certhia familiaris, 291.

familiaris mexicana, 197, 350.
familiaris rufa, 277.
familiaris rufa montana, 15.
pinus, 343.

Certhiola finschi, 293.

sancti-thomse, 293.
sundevalli, 293.
tricolor, 291.

Ceryle alcyon, 9, 17, 238, 260, 283,

3 1 1 • _ .

superciliosa stictoptera, 208,
Chadbourne, Arthur P., Oporornis
agilis and Dendrceca palmarum

396

In if ex.

[Octobet

palmarum at Shelburn, New
Hampshire, 104; wintering of the
Swamp Sparrow in Eastern Mas¬
sachusetts, 216; Swamp Sparrows
and Yellow-rumps, 380.

Chcetura pelasgica, 257, 283.

yucatanica, 290.

Chamsepelia passerina, 229.
Chamberlain, Montague, the nest¬
ing habits of the Cape May War¬
bler {Dendrceca tigrina) , 33 ; al¬
bino Robins ( Tardus migrato-
rius ), 102; a white Crow ( Corvus
frugivorus ), 107; the Kingbird
in a new role, 108; non-appear-
of Juncos at Montreal, 380.
Charadrius dominicus, 18, 285.

dominicus fulvus, 157.

Chat, Yellow-breasted, 101, 278,

3°S.

Chaulelasmus streperus, 18, 112,
144, 2S8.

Chen cserulescens, 10, 287.
hyperboreus, 18. 287.
hyperboreus albatus, 63, 207.
Chewinlc, 150, 308.

Chickadee, Black-capped, 265, 304.
Carolina, 304.

Hudsonian, 265.

Long-tailed, 277, 330.
Mountain, 126, 127, 330.
Chlorostilbon caniveti, 295.

forficatus, 295.

Chondestes grammica. 281.

grammica strigata, 16, 141.
Chordeiles popetue, 55, 178, 283.
popetue henryi, 17, 143.
virginianus, 178, 180, 257.
virginianus henryi, 180.
virginianus minor, 180.
Chroicocephalus franklini, 222.
Chrysomitris pinus, 16, 124, 141,
210, 333.

Chuck-will’s-widow, 21 1, 220.
Cinclus mexicanus, 8, 15, 140, 157,
234, 330.

Circus cyaneus hudsonius, 22, 63,

193-

hudsonius, 9, 17, 157, 284.
Cistothorus stellaris, 190, 278.
Clangula albeola, 18, 158, 193, 288.
glaucium, 373.
glaucium americana, 18.
islandica, 18.

Coale, H. K., a new bird for Illi¬
nois, 109.

Coccyzus americanus, 17, 283, 335.

erythrophthalmus, 283.

Cock, Sage, 10.

Colaptes auratus, 259, 284, 335,383.
auratus mexicanus 8, 143.
chrysoides, 226, 228, 302.
mexicanus, 127, 174, 302,335,
356.

Colinia, 44.

Colinus, 44, 45.

graysoni, 45.
ridgwayi, 199, 228, 231.
virginianus, 45.
virginianus floridanus, 45.
virginianus texanus, 45.

Columba fasciata, 17, 174.

Colymbus sp., 158.
adamsi, 63.
nigricollis, 340, 341.
pacificus, 63.
septentrionalis, 63.
torquatus, 10, 18, 63, 288.

Contopus albicollis, 290.
borealis, 17.
depressirostris, 294.
pertinax, 356.
pileatus, 292.
richardsoni, 17, 143.
virens, 63, 255, 369.

Conurus carolinensis, 17.

Cooke, W. W., notes on the occur¬
rence of certain birds in the Mis¬
sissippi Valley, 31 ; Indian bird
names, 222.

Coot, American, 10, 112, 287.

Cormorant, 210, 21 1.

Cormorant, Common, 97, 112.
Double-crested, 28S.

Corvus americanus, 334.

corax carnivorus, 9, 16, 157,
174, 282, 371.
corax sinuatus, 371.
cryptoleucus, 16.
frugivorus, 9, 16, 107, 253,
282.

grebnitzskii, 95.

Cory, C. B., notice of his ‘Birds of
Haiti and San Domingo,’ 295 ; no¬
tice of his ‘List of the Birds of the
West Indies,’ 319.

Cotile riparia, 15, 63, 279, 315.

Coturniculus henslowi, 190, 209,
281.

lecontei, 23, 190, 381.
mexicanus, 370.
passerinus, 63, 281, 371.
passerinus perpalidus, 16.

Coues, Elliott, probable occurrence
of Diomedea exulans in Florida,

387-

Cowbird, American, 49, 107, 152,

3°9-

*885.]

Index.

397

Cowbird, Bronzed, 21 1.

Crake, Corn, 296, 297.

Crane, Sandhill, 10, 287.
Whooping, 287.

Creeper, Black-and-White, 112, 278.
Brown, 98, 126, 265, 277.
Honey, 293.

Mexican, 197.

Crex pfatensis, 296, 297.

Crossbill, American, 8.

Red, 98, 100, 105, 207, 264,

297> 333 > 379’-

White-winged, 98, 264.

Crow, Clarke’s, 101, 282..

Common, 9, 107, 213, 253,
2S2, 296, 298, 300, 334, 373.
Crymophilns, 182.

fulicarius, 182.

Cuckoo, Black-billed, 283.

Yellow-billed, 283, 335.
Cupidonia cupido, 17, 82, 285.
pinnata, 82.

Curlew, Eskimo, 41, 273, 287.
Hudso nian,io, 287.
Long-billed, 10, 41, 273, 286.
Cyanecula suecica, 240.

Cyanocitta cristata, 252, 282.
stelleri frontalis, 217.
stelleri macrolopha, 16, 125,
H2, 174. 355-

Cyanocorax cucullatus, 293.
Cyanolesbia, 46. 47.
forficata, 47.
mocoa, 47.
smaragdina, 47.

Cyclorhis insularis, 295.
Cyclorrhynchus psittacula, 159, 388.
Cygnus columbianus. 193.
Cymbilanius lineatus fasciatus, 294.
Cymochorea leucorrhoa, 95, 158.
Cypselus saxatilis, 6. 17.
Cvpseloides niger borealis, 17.
Cyrtonyx montezurme, 46.
Dab-chick, 314.

Dafila acuta, 18, 63, 193, 201, 241,
2S8, 372.

Damon, J. L., Cowbird wintering
in Western New York, 309.
Davison, J. L., the first nest and
eggs of Eremofhila alfestris
found in Niagara County, N. Y. ,
217.

Dendroeca agstiva, 15, 141, 278, 331.
auduboni, 15, 141, 331, 352.
blackburniae, 103, 376.
bryanti. 370.

brj’anti castaneiceps, 370.
cserulea, 15, 278, 369.
cierulescens, 62, 65.

Dendroeca castanea, 65, 272, 315.
coronata, 15, 216, 278.
discolor, 62, 278.
graciae, 15, 331, 352.
kirtlandi, 376, 381.
maculosa, 15, 65, 278, 376.
nigrescens, 15, 197, 352.
palmarum hypochrysea, 315.
palmarum palmarum, 104.
petechia rufivertex, 295.
pinus, 278, 3.
rufopileata, 291.
striata, 61, 278.
tigrina, 33.
townsendi, 331.
vieilloti, 370.
vigorsii, 343.

Dendrocopos immaculatus, 95.
Diomedea albatrus, 158.
brachyura, 175.
exulans, 387.

Dolichonyx oryzivorus, 16, 62, 152,
189. 282.

Dove, Mourning, 10, 285.

Trinidad Ground, 358.

Drew, Frank M., on the vertical
range of birds in Colorado, 11.
Dryobates. 52.

Dryopicos, 52.

Dryopicus, 52.

Dryotomus, 52.

Duck, Buffle-head, 337.

Dusky, 336.

Eider, 43, m, 113, 266.
Harlequin, 337.

Labrador, 209.

Lesser Scaup, 193.
Long-tailed, 28S, 385.
Pin-tail, 193.

Redhead, 10, 288.

Ring-billed, 288.

Ring-neck, 163.

Ruddy, 28S.

Shoveller, 193, 288.

Sprig-tail, 193.

Summer, 193.

Surf, 3S6.

Wood, 10, 193, 288.

Dutcher, William, Bird Notes from
Long Island, N. Y., 36; the Can¬
ada Goose, hi.

Dwight, J., Jr., the Ipswich Spar¬
row ( Passer cuius princeps) in
Delaware, 105.

Dytes auritus, 96, 289.

auritus californicus, 18.
nigricollis californicus, 96,
289.

Index.

[October

398

Eagle, Bald, io, 192, 2S5.

Golden, 10, 98, 285.
White-headed Sea, 192.

Ectopistes migratorius, 285.

Egret, Great White, no, 192, 336.

Eider, Pacific, 386.

Elainea cinerescens, 291.

Elanoides forficatus, 19, 21, 192.

Elanus leucurus, 205.

Empidonax acadicus, 112, 256.
atriceps, 291.
difficilis, 17.
flaviventris, 65, 256.
flulvifrons, 207.
fulvifrons pallescens, 207.
fulvifrons rubicundus, 207.
gracilis, 295.
hammondi, 17, 143, 283.
minimus, 17, 256, 2S3.
obscurus, 17.
pusillus, 17.
trailli, 256.
viridescens, 291.

Engyptila gaumeri, 290.

Eniconetta stelleri, 158.

Ephialtes, 1S3.

Eremophila alpestris, 189, 217.

alpestris crysolaema, 17, 239.
alpestris leucolaema, 16, 142.

Ereunetes occidentalis, 384, 385.

pusillus, 18, 63, 143, 201, 241,
286.

pusillus occidentalis. no.

Erismatura rubida, 144, 288.

Euetheia, 48.

bicolor, 48.

olivacea intermedia, 395.
zena, 48.

Eugenes fulgens, 199.

Falco albigularis, 205.
arcticus, 188.
candicans, 90, 187.
candicans p islandicus, 18S.
candicans gyrfalco, 90, 188.
communis, 267.
fuscus, 188.

groenlandicus, 187, 18S.
gyrfalco, 90, 187, 18S.
gyrfalco candicans, 90. 188.
gyrfalco groenlandicus, ig8.
gyrfalco islandicus, 188.
holbcelli, 1S7.
islandicus, 188, 315.
islandicus candicans, 188.
islandus, 1S5, 187, 188.
islandus p albus, 1 87-
islandus y maculatus, 187.
islandus fuscus, 188.

Falco peregrinus naevius, 9, 17, 212,
285.

peregrinus pealei, 157.
rusticolus, 185, 188.
rusticolus gyrfalco, 187.
rusticolus obsoletus, 187.
Falcon, Peregrine, 267.

Prairie, 285.

Finch, Bachman’s, 106.

Cassin’s, 173, 333.

Grass, 280.

Lark, 281.

Lazuli, 281.

Nelson’s Sharp-tailed, 306.
Painted, 72, 298.

Pine, 124, 239, 333.

Purple, 263, 279.

Sea-side, 272, 301.
Sharp-tailed, 216, 301, 306.
Fisher, A. K., Wood Ibis ( Ta?italns
loculator ) in Eastern New York,
222 ; capture of Ammodramus
caudacutus nelsoni in the Lower
Hudson Valley, New York, 306;
capture of two more specimens
of Helm in th op h il a leucobronckia-
lis at Sing Sing, New York, 37S ;
evidence concerning the inter¬
breeding of Helminthophila chry-
soptera and H. pinus , 378.
Flicker, Golden-winged, 284.
Flycatcher, Acadian, 112.

Arizona Crested, 199.
Ash-throated, 98.
Black-crested, 242.
Great-crested, 254.
Hammond’s 283.

Least, 256, 283.

Olivaceus Crested 199.

Small Green-crested, 256.
Swallow-tailed, 218.

Traill’s, 256.

Wilson’s 330.

Yellow-bellied, 256.
Fratercula corniculata, 159.

Frost, Edwin Brant, the Logger-
head Shrike in New Hampshire,
379-.

Fulica americana, 10, 18 112, 287.
caribaea, 292.
spinosa, 337.

Fringilla aestivalis, 106.
bachmani, 105.
bicolor, 48, 49.
mexicana, 207.
zena, 48.

Fuligula atfinis, 193,
collaris, 193.

i 885.]

Index.

399

Fuligula ferina americana, 193, 372.

Fulix, affinis, 18, 288.

collaris, 18, 158, 288.
marila, 18, 158.

Fulinarus glacialis glupischa, 158.

Gadwall, 1 1 2, 288.

Galeoscoptes carolinensis, 15, 140,
277.

Gallinago media wilsoni, 18.
wilsoni 286, 336.

Gallinula galeata, 18, 193, 210.

Gallinule, Common, 193.

Florida. 193.

Gannet, 98.

Gazetta candidissima, 17, 299.

Gault, B. T., nest and eggs of Ca-
lypte. costce , 309.

Geococcyx californianus, 17, 143,

375-

Geothlypis bairdi, 294.

macgillivrayi, 15, 141, 332.
Philadelphia, 65, 278.
speciosa, 368.

trichas, 15, 62, 65, 278, 367.
trichas occidentalis, 141.

Glaucidium phalsenoides, 229, 231.

Gnat-catcher. Blue-gray, 272, 334.

Godwit, Hudsonian, 286.

Marbled, 286, 385.

Golden-eye, 266.

Barrows, 336.

Goldfinch, 264, 279.

Pine, 264.

Goodale, Joseph L., the Wood
Thrush in Maine, 215; the Yel-
low-rumped Warbler wintering in
Maine, 216.

Goss, N. S., observations on Ela-
tio ides forficatus and Ictinia sub-
ccp.rulea in Kansas, 19; rare sum¬
mer residents in Kansas, 113;
Cyanocitta stelleri frontalis nest-
ingin holes in trees, 217 ; Wilson’s
Plover in Nova Scotia, 221 : Rissa
tridcictyla kotzbuei in Washing¬
ton Territory, 222; the Black-
capped Vireo and Nonpariel in
Southwestern Kansas, 274; early
accidental occurrence of Cathar-
ista atrata and Tantalus loculator
in Kansas, 385 ; the Little Yellow
Rail ( Porzana noveboraceusis )
in Kansas, 385; the Thick-billed
Grebe ( Podylimbus podiceps)
breeding in Kansas, 388.

Goose, American White-fronted,
,287.

Canada, 42, in, 193, 214, 287.
Blue-winged. 10, 287.

Goose, Common Wild, 193.

Snow, 287.

Goshawk, 266, 284.

Grackle, Boat-tailed, 100.

Bronzed, 282.

Purple, 189.

Rusty, 106, 282, 373.
Granatellus sallaei boucardi, 273.
Grebe, American Eared, 96, 289.
Carolina, 96.

Clarke’s 313.

Eared, 340.

European Crested, 93.
Horned, 96, 193, 289, 314,
340.

Red-necked 314.

Thick-billed, 289, 388.
Western, 313, 314.

Greenlet, 117.

Grosbeak, Black-headed, 100, 112,
192, 281.

Blue, 1 12, 21 1.

Cardinal, 97, 98, 151, 307,

343-

Evening, 174, 279, 296, 334.
Pine, 264.

Rose-breasted, 100, 151, 266,
281, 299.

Grouse, Dusky, 10.

Pinnated, 80.

Ruffed, 10, 40, 270, 300.
Sharp-tailed, 285.

Willow, 201.

Grus americanus canadensis, 10,
18, 63, 144, 157, 201, 287.
Guillemot, Briinnich’s, 38.

Guiraca cserulea, 16, 112, 142, 211.
Gull, Black-backed, 266.

Bonaparte, 266, 374.
Burgomaster 37.

Franklin's 289.

Glaucous, 37, 337.

Herring, 266, 288.

Kittiwake, 266.

Pacific Kittiwake, 222.
Ring-billed, 288.

Sabine’s, 374, 375.

Gurney, J. H., notice of his ‘List of
the Diurnal Birds of Prey,’ 203.
Gymnocitta cyanocephala, 9, 13, 16.
Gyrfalcon, 187.

Gray, 187, 188.

Iceland, 284.

Labrador 187.

White, 187.

H/EMatopus bachmani, 157.
palliatus, 384.

Haliaetus leucocephalus, 10, 16,

143. I57> !92> 285-

400

Index.

[October

Hardy, Manly, late occurrence of
the Phoebe ( Sayornis fuscus) at
Brewer, Maine, 10S.

Harelda glacialis, 63, 288.

hyemalis, 158, 385.
Harporhynchus cinereus bendirei,

IS-

curvirostris palmeri, 196,
228.

guttatus, 294.

lecontei, 196, 229, 230, 231.
melanostoma, 294.
rufus, 15, 140, 277, 29S.
Harrier, Common, 22, 192.

Hawk, Duck, 9, 209, 285.

Fish, 9, 192, 210. 212, 285.
Florida Red-shouldered, 292.
Marsh, 9, 100, 192, 285.
Pigeon, 100, 285.

Red-tailed, 174, 2S5.
Rough-legged, 2S5, 295.
Sharp-skinned, 99, 174, 284,
3rI-

Sparrow, 100, 285.

Western Red-tailed, 9.
Hayward, R. , curious food for the
Kingfisher ( Ceryle alcyon), 31 1.
Helinaia, 76.

swainsoni, 76, 105, 346, 377.
Helmintherus swainsoni, 301.

vermivorus, 62, 103, 304.
Helminthophaga celata, 15, 40,211,
278, 331-
peregrina, 15.
ruficapilla, 15.
virginise, 15, 331.

Helminthophila celata lutescens,
352, 366.

chrysoptera, 102, 304, 359,
361, 363, 37S.
gunni, 362.

lawrencei, 359, 361, 363.
leucobronchialis, 304, 359,

378, 361.
peregrina, 65.
pinus, 359, 361, 363, 378.
virginite, 352.

Helonaea swainsoni, 62, 104.

Hen, Heath, 80. 82.

Prairie, 81, 82, 285.

Henshaw, H. W. , the Gulls of the
Californian Coast, 231 ; list of
birds observed in summer and
fall on the upper Pecos River, 326 ;
a new bird to Massachusetts, 384;
the Baird’s Sandpiper (. Actodro -
mas bairdi') at Locust Grove,
New York, 384; the bill of the
Horned Puffin ( Ceratorhina mon-
ocerata ), 387.

llerodias alba egretta, 96, 299.
egretta, no, 192.

Heron, Black-crowned Night, 10,
192-

Great Blue, 10, 190, 221, 2S7.
Green, 287.

Little Blue, 272.

Night, 97, 2S7.

White. 96, 100, 192.
Hesperiphona vespertina, 15, 174,
279. 334’ 349-

Heteractitis incanus, 157.
Hierofalco gyrfalco, 204.

gyrfalco candicans, 205.
gyrfalco islandus, 205, 284.
gyrfalco obsoletus, 205.
gyrfalco sacer, 63.
holbcelli, 205.

mexicanus polyagrus, 17, 205,
285.

Himantopus mexicanus, 18.
Ilirundo ervthrogaster, 13, 141, 278.
366.

rustica, 366.

rustica erythrogastra, 366.
Histrionicus histrionicus, 158, 337,
minutus, 18. .

Hoffman, W. J., bird names of the
Selish, Pah-Uta, and Shoshoni
Indians, 7.

Holterhoff, Godfrey, Jr., the Glossy
Ibis and Avocet at San Diego,
Cal., 31 1

Hoy, Dr. P. R., nest and eggs of the
Golden-winged Warbler ( Hel -
minthopila chrysoptera) , 102.
Hummingbird, Black-chinned, 310.
Costa, 310.

Refulgent, 199.
Ruby-throated, 9. 218, 256,
283, 299. 300.

Hydrochelidon lariformis, 21 1.

lariformis surinamensis, 18,
1 12.

surinamensis, 289.
Hylocichla fuscescens, 277.

fuscescens salicicola, 15.
mustelina, 278, 369.
unalascse, 330.

unalashk® aububoni, 15,330.
ustulata swainsoni, 15, 140,
277’ 330-
Hylotoma, 51, 52.

Hylotomus, 51, 52.

pileatus, 283.

Ibis, Glossy, 311.

White, 2S7.

Wood, 213, 221, 3 1 1 -
Icteria virens. 278.

virens longicauda, 15, 141.

Index.

401

>SSS.]

Icterus bullocki, 16, 142, 282.
cucullatus, 159, 292.
cucullatus igneus, 292.
cucullatus nelsoni, 292.
curasoensis, 291.
galbula, 16, 55, 58, 251, 282,
29S.

parisorum, 1, 355.
spurius, 16, 251, 282.

Ictinia subcaerulea, 19.

Indigo-bird, 151.

Ingersoll, Ernest, notice of his
‘Country Cousins; Short Studies
in the Natural History of the
United States,’ 91.

Ionornis martinica, 63.

Iridoprocne bicolor, 189.

Jacana, Brazilian, 337.

Jay, Blue, 100, 101, 253, 265, 282.
Blue-fronted, 217.

Canada, 99, 107, 265, 335.
Long-crested, 125.

Pinon, 9.

Steller’s, 174.

Jeffries, Wm. A., the Common Cor-
morant off Boston Harbor, 112.
Jer-Falcon, Brown, 90.

White, 90.

Jordan, David Starr, notice of his
‘Manual of the Vertebrates of the
Northern United States,’ 20S.
Junco, 115, 116, 117,380.

Mexican, 198.

Slate-colored, 146.
White-winged, 306.

Junco aikeni, 16, 32.

annectens, 16, 306.
caniceps, 16, 123, 124, 141.
cinereus, 174, 198, 363, 364.
cinereus caniceps, 174, 355.
cinereus dorsalis, 354, 364.
cinereus palliatus, 354, 364.
hyemalis, 16, 63, 146, 280,
‘306.

oregonus. 16, 123, 124, 141,
r74-

Kells, Wm. L., foster parents of
the Cowbird, 106.

Killdeer, 2S5.

Kingbird. 108, 253, 283.

Western. 283.

Kingfisher, 9, 95, 238, 260, 283, 31 1.
Kinglet, Golden-crested. 265, 277.

Ruby-crowned, 93, 98. 99. 173,
277> 330-

Kitchen, J. M. W., on the function
of the inferior larynx in birds,
24-

Kite, Mississippi, 21.

Kite, Swallow-tailed, 19, 192, 284,

347-

Kittiwake, 266.

Pacific, 22.

Knot, 312, 373.

Lagopus albus, 63, 221.
albus alleni, 201.
hyperborea, 95.
islandorum, 95.
lucurus, 14, 17, 95.
muta, 94.
muta vulgaris, 95.
ridgwayi, 95.

rupestris, 63, 95, 157, 194,
221.

ruprestris atkhensis, 95.
rupestris nelsoni, 95.
rupestris reinhardti, 95, 195.
welchi, 194. .

Lampornis thalassinus, 295.
Lampronetta fischeri, 63, 201.
Langille, J. H., notice of his ‘Our
Birds in their Haunts,’ etc., 91.
Lantz, D. E., the song of Cardina-
lis virginianus , 307.

Lanio melanopygius, 291.

Lanius borealis, 15, 212, 279.
ludovicianus, 210, 379.
ludovicianus excubitorides
15, 279, 332.

Lanivireo solitarius plumbeus, 15,
I4I-

Lark, Horned, 189, 217, 239, 282,
296-

Meadow, 250, 266.

Mexican Meadow, 198.

Shore, 100.

Western Meadow, 8, 282.
Larus argentatus smithsonianus,
232, 288.

brachyrhynchus, 232.
californicus, 232.
canus, 232.

delawarensis, 18, 232, 28S.
franklini, 288.
glaucescens, 158.
glaucus, 37, 63.
occidentalis, 232.
philadelphiae, 232.

Lawrence. G.N. , notice of his paper
describing new species of Ameri¬
can birds, 290; descriptions of new
species of the family Columbidae,
337-

Leucosticte atrata, 16.
griseinucha, 157.
tephrocotis, 16.
tephrocotis littoralis, 16.
Ligea, 295.

402

Index.

[October

Limosa fedoa, 18, 286.
fceda, 385
haemastica, 286.
lapponica novae-zelandise, 63,
201.

Lobipes hyperboreus, 18, 63, 192.
3I5-

Lomvia arra, 63.

arra bruennichi, 38.
Long-beak, Greater, 273.

Longspur, Chestnut-collared, 280,

333-

Lapland, 23, 190, 280, 334.
Painted, 190.

Smith’s, 280.

Loomis, LeverettM., supplementary
notes on the ornithology of Ches¬
ter County, S.C., 168.

Loon, 289.

Lophodytes cucullatus, 18, 144, 288.
Lohophanes bicolor, 277.

inornatus griseus, 15.
wollweberi, 349.

Lophortyx californica, 10, 247, 372.
californicus brunnescens. 208,
372-

gambeli, 131, 247, 301.
gambeli X californica, 247.
Loxia albiventris, 207.
americana, 379.
curvirostra, 207.
curvirostra americana, 8, 16,
105, 207, 212, 333,
curvirostra bendirei, 128, 207.
curvirostra mexicana, 207, 372.
curvirostra stricklandi, 372.
leucoptera, 16, 210.
pytiopsittacus, 207.

Lunda cirrhata, 159,388.
M’Callum, G. A., albinism, 113.
McKinley, James, field notes from
Pictou County, Nova Scotia, 39.
Macrorhamphus griseus, 18, 374.

griseus scolopaceus, 37, 63,
273, 2S6.

Magpie, Black-billed, 9, 282.
Mallard, 100, 112, 289, 336.

Mareca americana, 18, 288.
penelope, 373.

Martin, Purple, 55, 57, 98, 279, 299,
300.

Megascops, 184.
asio, 184. '
asio bendirei, 184.
asio floridanus, 184.
asio kennicotti, 184.
asio maccalli, 184.
asio maxwellise, 1S4.

Megascops flammeolus, 184.
trichopsis, 184.

Melanerpes erythrocephalus, 17, 63,
M3. 259, 283.

formicivorus bairdi, 8, 174,

356.

torquatus, 17, 143.

Melanetta fusca, 291.

Meleagris gallopavo, 10.

gallopavo americana, 17, 285.

Melopelia leucoptera, 17, 229.

Melospiza cinerea, 157.

fasciata, 95, 147, 2S0.
fasciata fallax, 16, 141.
fasciata montana, 124, 236,
georgiana, 372,
lincolni, 16,65, I42» 2S0, 354.
palustris, 149, 1S9, 216, 280,
372, 380-

Merganser, 266.

Hooded, 112, 193.

Merganser serrator, 158.

Mergus cucullatus, 193, 372.
merganser, 372.
mergus americanus, 18, 144,
28S.

serrator, 201, 241, 372.

Merlin, Richardson’s, 285.

Merriam, C. Hart, preliminary re¬
port of the Committee on Bird
Migration, 53 ; notice of his paper
on the Birds of the Bermudas, 95 ;
nest and eggs of the Blackburnian
Warbler, 103; Swainson’s War¬
bler off Southern Florida, 104;
a remarkable migration of Canada
Jays, 107; the White Pelican on
Lake Ontario, hi; third adden¬
dum to list of birds ascertained to
occur within ten miles from Point
des Montes, Province of Quebec,
Canada; based chiefly upon notes
of Napoleon Comeau, 1 1 3 ; Com¬
mittee on the Migration and Geo¬
graphical Distribution of North
American Birds ; Circular for
1885, 1 1 7 ; change of color in the
wing-feathers of the Willow
Grouse, 201 ; probable breeding of
the Whea tear ( Saxicola cenanthe')
on the northern shore of the Gulf
of St. Lawrence, 305 ; eggs of the
Knot ( T ring'd canutus) found at
last, 312 ; fourth addendum to list
of birds ascertained to occur with¬
in ten miles of Point de Monts,
province of Quebec, Canada; bas¬
ed chiefly upon the notes of Napo-

iSSs-]

Index.

4°3

leon A. Comeau, 315; Kirtland’s
Warbler from the Straits of Mack¬
inac, 376; odd nesting habits of
the Blue Yellow-backed Warbler
in Missouri, 377; Swainson’s
Warbler in Jamaica, 377 ; an al¬
bino Surf Duck (CEdemia fierspi-
cillata ), 372.

Merrill, J. C., republication in
‘The Auk’ of Descriptions of
New North American birds, — a
suggestion, 389.

Merula merula, 129.

migratoria, 55, 277,. 303, 304.
migratoria propinqua, 15,
140, 330.
torquata, 129.

Micrathene whitneyi, 231.

Microligia, 295.

Micropalama himantopus, 273, 286.

Milvulus forticatus, 218.

Mimocichla ardesiaca, 295.

Mimus carolinensis, 55, 215, 297.
gilvus rostratus, 291.
polyglottus, 15.

Minor Ornithological Publications,
96, 209, 295, 372.

Mitrephoyus pallescens, 207.

Mniotilta varia, 15, 62, 278.

Mockingbird, 86, 98.

Molothrus Eeneus, 21 1.

ater, 16, 49, 50, 106, 142, 282,

309-

pecoris, 49, 50, 152.

Motacilla ocularis. 157.

Murdoch, John, notes on some
species of birds attributed to
Point Barrow, Alaska, 200.

Muscicapa atra, 51.

carolinensis fusca, 51.
fulvifrons, 207.
fusca, 51.
nunciola, 51.
phcebe, 51.

Mj-iadestes townsendi, 15, 128, 140,
33i- .

Mviarchus crinitus, 254.

cinerascens, 17, 98.
lawrencei, 208.
lawrencei olivaceus, 198, 208.
mexicanus magister, 198,
207.

platyrhynchus, 295.

Myiodioctes canadensis, 65.
minutus, 372.
pusillus, 278, 330, 332.

Nauclerus forticatus, 2S4.

Nelson, E. W., counter-‘notes on
some species of birds attributed to
Point Barrow, Alaska,’ 239.

Neocorys spraguei, 269.

Nests and eggs of the birds of
Ohio, notice of work on, 289.
Nettion carolinensis, 18, 144, 201,
241, 288.

Newton, Alfred, notice of his arti¬
cle ‘Ornithology,’ 205.
Nighthawk, 55, 178, 283.

Cuban, 182.

Western, 182, 283.

Night-jar, 257.

Numenius borealis, 63, 273, 287.

hudsonicus, 10, 143, 201 241,
287.

longirostris, 10, 18, 20S, 273,
286.

Nutcracker, Clarke’s, 282.

Nuthatch, Pigmy, 126, 172, 330.
Red-bellied, 265, 277.
Slender-billed, 126, 127, 172,
277> 33°- .

White-bellied, 93, 98, 265.
Nuttall Ornithological Club, 116,
224, 390.

Nutting, Charles C., notice of his
paper on a collection of Nicara¬
guan birds, 293.

Nyctala acadica, 272, 284.

tengmalmi richardsoni, 384.
Nyctea nyctea, 157.

scandiaca, 37, 63, 284.
Nyctherodius violaceus, 18.
Nvctiardea gardeni, 299.

grisea nsevia, 10, 192, 287.
Nymphicus novge-hollandise, 314.
Oceanodroma furcata, 158.
Ochthodromus wilsonius, 221, 273.
CEdemia americana, 18, 158.

perspicillata, 158, 386.
CEdnicnemus dominicensis, no.
OEstrelata defilippiana, 292.

fisheri, 292.

Old-squaw, 266.

Olor americanus, 10.
buccinator, 287.
columbianus, 157.

Onychotes gruberi, 293.
solitarius, 293.

Oreoscoptes montanus, 8, 13,. 15,
140.

Oriolus ater, 49.
niger, 50.

Oriole, Baltimore, 55, 58, 86, 101,
251, 282, 298, 290.

Black, 49.

Bullock’s 282.

Hooded, 159.

Orchard, 251, 282.

Scotts, 1.

Ortolan, 190.

Index.

[October

4°4

Ortjgia, 45.

Ortygis, 45.

Ortyx, 45.

Ortyx virginiana, 14, 213, 285, 296,
297> 299, 315.
douglasii, 46.
elegans, 46.
graysoni, 227, 297.
niassena, 46.
montezumae, 46.
picta, 46.

Oryzoborus nuttingi, 294.

Osgood, Fletcher, the Chuck-will’s-
widow ( Antrostomus carolinen¬
sis ) in Massachusetts, 220.
Osprey, 192.

Oxyechus vociferus, 18, 143, 285.
Otocoris alpestris, 282.

Ouzel, Water, 8, 234, 330.

Owl, Acadian, 266.

American Long-eared, 9.
Barn, 192, 210, 284.

Barred, xoo, 189, 266, 284.
Burrowing, 9, 284.

Great Horned, 99, 266, 284.
Hawk, 31, 108, 220, 383.

Little Screech, 9.

Long-eared, 99, 192, 284.
Marsh, 1S9.

Monkey-faced, 101.
Richardson’s, 384.

Saw-whet, 272, 284.

Screech, 101, 260, 284, 296.
Short-eared, 87, 99, 100, 189,
284.

Snowy, 37, 366, 284.

Western Horned, 9.

White, 192.

Oyster-catcher, 3S4.

Pagophila eburnea, 63.

Palmer, William, abundance of
Parus atricapillus near Wash¬
ington, 304.

Pandion haliaetus, 192.

haliaetus carolinensis, 285.
solitarius, 293.

Paroquet, Cockatoo, 314.

Parra chavaria, 338,

dominica, 338, 339.
jacana, 339, 338.
senegalla, 338, 339.
variabilis, 338.

Panda americana, 15, 61, 62,

377-

nigrilora, 368.
pitiayumi, 368.

Parus atricapillus, 304.

atricapillus septentrionalis,
i5; 277.

Parus atricapillus turneri, 207, 331.
carolinensis, 304.
cinctus, 372, 373.
cinctus obtectus, 372.
montanus, 15, 126, 127, 140,
331-

Passer domesticus, 190, 300.
Passerculus alaudinus, 292.
anthinus, 212.
bairdi, 268.
beldingi, 292.
princeps, 36, 105.
rostratus, 198, 230.
sandwichensis, 157.
sandwichensis alaudinus, 16,
201, 241.

sandwichensis bryanti, 292.
sandwichensis savanna, 16,
272, 280.

savanna, 65. 376.

Passerella iliaca, 150, 281.

iliaca schistacea, 16.
Passerina amoena, 16, 142, 281.
ciris, 276.

cyanea, 16, 151, 289.
versicolor, 198.

Pedioecetes phasianellus campes-
tris, 208.

phasianellus columbianus,

285.

Pelagadroma marina, 386.

Pelecanus ervthrorhynchus, 18, 111,
144, 288.

Pelican, Frigate, 113.

White, hi, 288.

Pelidna alpina americana, 18, 63.

subarquata. 63.

Pelionetta perspicillata, 95.
Perisoreus canadensis, 335.
Perissoglossa tigrina, 32.

Petrel, Stormy, 99.

White-faced Stormy, 3S6.
Petrochelidon lunifrons, 15, 279,
366.

pyrrhonota, 366.

Peucaea aestivalis, 106.

aestivalis bachmani, 106.
aestivalis illinoensis, 105, 106,
299.

arizonae, 226, 370.
botteri, 370.
carpalis, 228.
cassini, 226.
mexicana, 370.
ruficeps boucardi, 354.
Peucedramus olivaceus, 172, 349,
352-

Pewee, 51.

Wood, 255.

■ 8SS.]

Phaenicothraupis carmioli, 291.
Phainopepla nitens, 228, 242.
Phalacrocorax carbo, 97, 112, 210.
dilophus, 1 12. 288.
dilophus albociliatus, 208.
dilophus cincinnatus, 158.
pelagicus, 158.

Phalaenoptilus nuttalli, 9, 17, 143,
283, 356, 382.

Phalarope, Northern, 183, 192.

Red, 183.

Wilson’s, 1S3, 273, 286.
Phalaropus fulicarius, 63.
lobatus, 157, 183.
tricolor, 1S3.

Philacte canagica, 158.

Philohela minor, 261, 286.
Philomachus pugnax, 336.
Philortix, 45.

Phloeotomus, 52.

Phoebe, 51, 98, 108, 154, 283.
Phonipara, 48
Phylloscopus borealis, 373.

Pica camtschatica, 95.

rustica hudsonica, 9, 16, 142,
282.

Picoides arcticus, 210.

tridactvlis dorsalis, 17.
Picicorvus columbianus, 16, 282.
Picus insularis, 115.
nuttalli, 213.
pileatus, 52.
pubescens, 257, 283.
pubescens gairdneri, 17, 126,
1.43-

stricklandi, 199.

.villosus, 100, 115, 373.
villosus harrisi, 9, 17, 127,
174- 283. 356.

Pigeon, Band-tailed, 174.
Passenger, 285.

Wild, 40.

Pinicola enucleator, 15.

Pintail, 288.

Pittasoma michleri zeledoni, 291.
Pipilo aberti, 16.

chlorurus, 16, 142.
ervthrophthalmus, 150, 282,
308, 369.

fuscus mesoleucus, 16, 228,
237-

maculatus arcticus, 142, 282.
maculatus arcticus megalo-
nyx, 16.

maculatus megalonyx, 128,

355-

Plautus, 183.

PI egad is guarauna, 18.

Index.

Plectrophenax hyperboreus, 291.
nivalis, 157.

Plectrpphanes lapponicus, 23, 334.
nivalis, 16, 23, 63, 279.
ornatus, 23.
pictus, 23.

Plover, Belted Piping, 285.

Black-bellied, 32, 41, 283.
Field, 286.

Golden, 41, 285.

Killdeer, 285, 375.

Piping, 37.

Semipalmated, 285.

Snowy, 335.

Upland, 212, 297.

Wilson’s, 221, 273.

Podasocys montanus, 18, 143.
Podiceps auritus, 340.
californicus, 340.
clarkii, 313.
cornutus, 193, 314.
griseigena holbcelli, 314.
holboelli, 18.
occidentalis, 313, 314.
Podilymbus podiceps, 18, 96, 289,
3H. 388.

Pochard, American, 193.

Polioptila CEerulea, 15, 272, 334, 349,
plumbea, 228.

Polysticte stelleri, 63.

Pooecetes gramineus, 23, 280, 315.

gramineus confinis, 16, 141.
Poor-will, 9, 283, 382.

Porzana Carolina, 18, 62, 190, 209,
287.

jamaicensis, 299.
leucogastra, 294.
noveboracensis, no, 274, 385.
Pratincola rubicola, 129.

Procellaria hypoleuca, 387.
marina, 387.

Progne subis, 15, 55, 57, 228, 279,
299.

Protonotaria citrea, 32.

Psaltriparus grind®, 208.

minimus californicus, 207.
plumbeus, 15.

Pseudogryphus californianus, 167.
Ptarmigan, Rock, 193, 222.

Willow, 221.

Puffin, Horned, 3S7.

Pyranga sestiva cooperi, 15, 198,
372-

hepatica, 197.

ludoviciana, 8, 15, 141, 333,

354-

rubra, 95, 27S.
rubra cooperi, 372.

Index.

[ October

406

Pyrrhuloxia sinuata, 228.

Quail, 2S5, 296.

Arizona, 296, 299, 301.

California, 10, 295.

Florida, 45.

Grayson’s, 45, 297.

Masked, 199.

Massena, 46.

Migratory, 301.

Mountain, 300.

Texan, 45.

Querquedula carolinensis, 18, 144,
193. 372-

cyanoptera, 112.

discors, 18, 144, 288, 372.

Quiscalus, 43.

purpureus, 1S9.

purpureus aeneus, 16, 282.

Rail, Carolina, 190.

Clapper, 98, 274.

Red-breasted, 287.

Sora, 98, 287.

Virginia, 96, 98, 192, 287.

Yellow, 274, 385.

Rallus elegans, 287.

longirostris crepitans 274.

virginianus, iS, 144, 192, 287.

Raven, American, 9, 174, 282.

Recurvirostra americana, iS, 144,
210, 21 1. 286.

Redbird, Cardinal, 300.

Summer, 98.

Red-head, 193, 288.

Redpoll, Lesser, 99, 264, 279.

Redstart, American, 98, 278.

Regulus calendula, 14, 15, 173, 277,
311-.

japonicus, 291.

satrapa, 15, 277, 301.

Ricker, C. B., a specimen of Hel-
minthophila leucobronchialis in
New Jersey, 378.

Ridgway, Robert, on Buteo har-
lani (Aud.) and B. cooper i
(Cass.), 165; remarks on the Cal¬
ifornian Vulture ( Pseudogry -
pkus calif ornianus), 167; note
on Sarcorhamphus cequatorialis
Sharpe, 169; notice of his paper
on the American Red Crossbills,
206; notices of his papers on
various American birds, 207, 290,
370; do. of his paper on the birds
of Cozumel Island, 294; descrip¬
tion of a new Cardinal Grosbeak
from Arizona, 343; Helmintko-
phila leucobronchialis , 359; on
funco cinereus (Swain.) and its
geographical races, 363; notice of

his paper on the type specimen of
Buteo oxyplerus, 371 ; do. emend¬
ed names of North American
birds, 371 ; a Petrel new to North
America, 386 ; announcement of
his nomenclature of Colors and
Compendium, etc.

Ridgway Ornithological Club, 116,
3i9>

Rhodostethia rosea, 63.

Rhyacophilus solitarius, 18.

Rhynchofalco fusco-caerulescens,
4°.v

Rhynchophanes maccowni, 16.

Rhynchops nigra, 193, 299.

Rissa brevirostris, 158.

tridactyla kotzbuei, 222, 213.
tridactyla pollicaris, 158.

Rives, Wm. C., Jr., M. D., nesting
of the Worm-eating Warbler
(. Helmitherus vermivorus) in Vir¬
ginia, 103; notice of' his ‘The
Birds of Newport,’ 20S.

Robin 55, 102, 21 1, 277,300, 303,304.
Western, 330.

Ruff, 336.

Sage, John H., return of Robins to
the same nesting place, 304; an¬
other example of Helminthophila
leucobronchialis from Connect¬
icut, 304; nesting of the Worm¬
eating Warbler ( Helminthotherus
vermivorus') in Southern Con¬
necticut, 305 ; occurrence of the
Sharp-shinned Hawk in New
Hampshire in winter, 31 1.

Salpinctes obsoletus, 15, 234, 277.

Sandpiper, Baird’s, 273, 384.
Bartram’s, 375.

Bonaparte’s, 286.
Buff-breasted, 2S6.

Least, 192, 286.

Pectoral, 286, 374.
Semipalmated, 286.

Solitary, 286.

Spotted, 2S6.

Stilt. 273, 287.

Western Semipalmated, no,

3S4, 385-.

Sarcogrammus cinereus, 339,
goensis, 339.
indicus, 339.
inornatus, 339.

Sarcorhamphus fequatorialis, 169.
gryphus, 168, 269, 1 7 1 -

Saunders, W. E., the Black-throated
Bunting, Yellow-breasted Chat,
and Connecticut Warbler in Qn-
tario, 307.

Index.

■SS5.]

Saxicola oenanthe, 15, 113, 305.

Sayornis, 51.

fusca, 108, 283.
phoebe, 51, 254, 369.
sayi, 17.

Scardafella inca, 228.

Scolecophagus cyanocephalus, 13,
142, 2S2.

ferrugineus, 106, 252, 282, 373.

Scops, 183.

asio, 9, 184, 260, 284.
asio maxwelliae, 17.
flamtneolus, 17.
indicus, 184.

Scopus, 184.

Scott, W. E. D., on the breeding
habits of some Arizona birds ; I,
Icterus par isorum , 1; II, Icterus
cucullatus , 159; III, Phainopepla
tit tens, 242; IV, Vireo vicinior,
321 ; winter mountain notes from
Southern Arizona, 172; early
spring notes from the mountains
of Southern Arizona, 348.

Scott, W. L., the Great White Egret
and the Yellow Rail in Ottawa,
Canada, no; on the names ‘Snow¬
bird’ and Winter Wren, 114.

Seebohm, Henry, notice of his ‘A
History of Britsh Birds,’ etc., 88.

Se’.asphorus flammula, 291.
platycercus, 17.
rufus, 17, 356.
torridus, 291.

Setophaga picta, 353.

ruticilla, 15, 61, 62, 98, 141,
278.

Seton, Ernest E. T., Manitoban
Notes, 2 1 ; the Swallow- tailed Fly¬
catcher in Manitoba and at York
Factory, 218; notes on Manito¬
ban birds, 267 ; nest and eggs of
the Philadelphia Vireo, 305 ; the
Western Grebe in Manitoba, 314;
the popular names of birds, 316;
interesting records from Toronto,
Canada, 334.

Sheldrake, American, 288.

Hooded, 28S.

Shoveller. 112, 193, 288.

Shrike, Great Northern, 238, 278.
Loggerhead, 379.
White-rumped, 279, 332.

Shufeldt, R. W., notes of his me¬
moir on the osteology of Ceryle
alcyon, 95 ; do. on the avian patel¬
la, 96; variations in the form of
the beak, that take place during
its growth, in the Short-tailed Al¬

4°7

batross ( Diumedea brackyura) ,
175; notice of his memoir on the
osteology of Numenius longiros-
tris , 208; on the feeding habits of
Phalcenoptila nuttalli , 382 ; an-
noucement of his work entitled
‘Contributions to the Anatomy
of North American Vertebrates,’
391-

Sialia arctica, 8, 15, 140, 234.

mexicana, 15, 140, 172, 331,

.349-

sialis, 15, 140, 277, 3S1.
sialis azurea, 85.

Simoj-hynchus cristatellus, 159, 341,
388.

psittacula, 159, 342.
pygmseus, 159.

Sitta canadensis, 15, 277.

aculeatus, 15, 126, 172, 277,

33 L 349-.

carolinensis, 277, 321, 349.
Pygmrea, 15, 126, 172, 331,
35°-

Siurus auricapillus, 15, 61, 62, 65,
133- 278.

, motacilla, 91.
naevius, 15, 278.

Skimmer, Black, 193.

Skylark, Missouri, 369.

Smith, Hugh M., breeding of Loxia
americana in the District of Co¬
lumbia 379; Ereunetes occide?ita-
lis on the lower Potomac, 385;
Harelda hyemalis in Maryland in
summer, 385.

Snipe, American, 336.

Red-bellied, 37, 286.
Red-breasted, 374.

Wilson’s 286.

Snowbird, 115, 1 1 7.

Black, 98, 263, 280.
White-winged, 32.

Solitaire, Townsend’s, 128.

Somateria dresseri, in, 113.
mollissima, in.
spectabilis, 63.
v-nigra, 63, 158, 386.

Southwick & Jencks, southern range
of Rtssa tridactyla kotzbuei , 313.

Sparrow, Baird’s, 198, 333.
Clay-colored, 280.

Chipping, 145, 280.

English, 190, 211, 296.

Field, 145, 280.

Fox-colored, 150, 281.

House, 99.

Harris’s, 281.

Henslow’s, 190.

[October

408

Index.

Sparrow, Ipswich, 36, 97, 99, 105.
Java, 314.

Large-billed, 198.

Leconte’s, 23, 190, 280, 381.
Lincoln’s, 280.

Oak-woods, 299.

Savanna, 97, 272, 280.

Song, 95, 147, 236, 263, 2S0.
Swamp, 100, 149, 189, 216,
280, 307, 380.

Titlark, 212.

Tree, 144, 236, 262, 265, 280.
White-crowned, 272, 281.
White-throated, 281.
Worthen’s Field, 291.
Yellow-winged, 280.

Spatula clypeata, 18, 112, 193, 288.

Speotyto cunicularia hypogsea, 9,
17, 143, 284.

Spermophila, 47.

Sphyropicus thyroides, 17, 174,349.
varius, 17, 258.
varius nuchalis, 9, 17, 174.

Spindalis benedicti, 295.
exsul, 295.

Spiza americana, 106, 192, 281.

Spizella breweri, 16.

domestica, 145, 280.
domestica arizonse, 16, 141.
montana, 16.
monticola, 144, 2S0.
monticola ochracea, 236.
pallida, 16, 141, 280.
pusilla, 145, 280.
socialis, 380.
wortheni, 291.

Sporophila, 47.

morelleti, 47-

Squatarola helvetica, 32, 63, 2S5.

Steganopus wilsoni, iS, 273, 286.

Stejneger, Leonard, Analecta or¬
nithological XVII, on the origin
of the word Quiscalus, 43 ; X\ III,
Colinus, not Ortyx, 44; XIX, is
the name Ortyx massena tenable?
46; XX, Cyanolesbia , strictly cor¬
rect, 46; XXI, concerning the
names of some North American
Spizinte, 47; XXII, the correct
name of the American Cowbird,
49; XXIII, remarks on the gen¬
eric name Sayornis and on Say¬
ornis phoebe , 51! XXIV, on the
proper generic name of the Pile-
ated Woodpecker and allies, 51;

XXV, Why Chordeiles Virgini¬
an us and not Ch. popetuef 178;

XXVI, on the generic names of
the Phalaropes, 182; XXVII,

Scops preoccupied, 183; XXVIII,
on Gyrfalcons, 184; XXIX, Ja-
cana contra Parra , 337 ; Colymbus
nigricollis, not a North American
Bird, 340; XXXI, “ Simorhyn -
Merrem, 1819, ”341; XXXII,
Dendroica vigorsii (Aud.), 343;
notice of his paper on the Wrens
of the subgenus Anorthura , 94;
do. the Ptarmigans of the group
Attagen , 94; do. descriptions of
new species of birds from Kam-
tschatka. 95 ; do. list of recent or¬
nithological publications in the
United States, 95; notice of his
paper on the genus Cepphus , 294;
on the alleged occurrence of the
Pacific Eider in Labrador, 386.

Stelgidopteryx serripennis, 15, 141,
279.'

Stephens, F., notes of an ornitho¬
logical trip in Arizona and Son¬
ora, 225.

Stercorarius crepidatus, 63.
longicaudus, 158.
parasiticus, 18, 63, 158, 232.
pomatorhinus, 63.

Sterna anajstheta, 230.
anglica, 38.
antillarum, 289.
forsteri, 18, 289.
macrura, 63.
paradisea, 158.

Strepsilas interpres, 63.

Strix nebulosa, 189, 284.

Sturnella magna, 250.

magna mexicana, 198.
neglecta, 13, 16, 142, 282.

Sula bassana, 98.

Surnia funerea, 31, 108. 220.
ulula caparoch, 383.

Swallow, Bank, 87, 279.

Barn, 278, 266.

Cliff, 279, 366.

European Chimney, 366.
Rough-winged, 279.
Violet-green, 279, 333.
White-bellied, 86, 98, 189,
27S.

Swan, Trumpter, 287.

Whistling, 10, 193.

Swift. Chimney, 257, 283.
White-throated, 9.

Sylvania microcephala, 372.

Sylvia pinus, 343.

solitarius, 343.
vigorsii, 343.

Symphemia semipalmata, iS, 286,
289.

iSSs-J

Index.

4°9

Synthliborhamphus antiquus, 159.
Tachycineta bicolor, 15, 278.

thalassina, 15, 141, 279, 333,
354-

Tachypetes aquila, 113.

Tanager, Cooper’s 198.

Liver-colored, 197.

Louisiana, 333.

Scarlet, 278.

Western, S.

Tantalus loculator, 18, 221, 3x1.
Teal, Blue-winged, 112, 28S, 375.

Green-winged, 193, 238, 288,
295-

Telmatodytes palustris, 15, 190, 27S.
Tell-tale, Greater, 192.

Lesser, 189.

Teretristis fernandina, 368.

torn si, 368.

Tern, Black, 1 12.

Gull-billed, 38.
Thalassidroma pelagica, 99.
Thompson, Frank J., recent occur¬
rence of the Black Vulture in
Ohio, 109; th eCEdicnemus domin-
icensts in confinement, no.
Thrasher, Brown, 277. ,

Leconte’s, 196.

Palmer’s, 196.

Sage, 8.

Thrush, Brown, 98, 277, 29S.

Dwarf, 330.

Golden-crowned, 98, 278.
Long-billed Water, 91.
Olive-backed, 98, 277.

Rocky Mountain Hermit, 330.
Russet-backed, 85.
Small-billed Water, 278.
Swainson’s, 330.

Wilson’s, 277-
Wood, 72, 215, 277, 28S.
Thryonxanes bewicki leucogaster,
140.

Titlark, 209, 278.

Tinnunculus sparverius, 17, 143,

285.

sparverius isabellinus, 205.
Titmouse, Tufted, 277.

Totanus flavipes, 18, 143, 189, 286.
melanoleucus, 18,99, 193, 286.
solitarius, 374.

Towhee, 282.

Canon, 237.

Northern, 282.

Spuri'ed, 128.

Townsend, Charles H., the occur¬
rence of the Catbird ( Mimics ca ro-
linensis) on the Farallone Islands,
Pacific Ocean, 215.

Townsend, Charles W. , the Black-
throated Bunting in Maine, 106.

Tringa canutus, 63, 312, 375.
maculata, 157, 374.
minutilla, 376.

Tringoides macularius, 18, 143, 286,

298.

Trochilus alexandri, 310.

colubris, 17, 218, 256, 283,

299.

Troglodytes aedon, 140, 278.
aedon marianae, 351.
aedon parkmani, 15, 278.
alascensis, 94, 157.
beani, 295.
boi’ealis, 94.
fumigatus, 94.
hiemalis, 94.
hiemalis pacificus, 94.
parvulus, 94.
parvulus bergensis, 94.

Tryngites rufescens, 63, 286.

Tui'dus migratorius, 102, 114.
mustelinus, 215.
unalascae auduboni, 349.
ustulatus, 85.
ustulatus aliciae, 190.

Turkey, Wild, 10, 174, 285.

Turner, Lucien M., notes on the
birds of the Nearer Islands, Alas¬
ka, 154; notice of his ‘ List of
the Birds of Labrador,’ 368 ; fa¬
miliar Chipping Sparrows, 380.

Tyrannula cooperi, 208.
mexicana, 208.

Tyrannus cai-olinensis, 17, 142, 253,
283.

tyrannus, 369.
verticalis, 17, 143, 283.
vociferans, 17.

Uria grylle, 63.

lomvia, 159.

(Jrinator lumme, 159.
pacificus, 159.

Utamania torda, 38.

Vireo approximans, 291.
atricapillus, 274.
bairdi, 295.
belli. 101.
carmioli, 291.
gilvus, 279.

gilvus swainsoni, 332, 354.
huttoni stephensi, 197, 354.
magister, 295.
noveboracensis, 369.
olivaceus, 65, 279.
philadelphicus, 65, 272, 279,
305-

pusillus, 197.

4IQ

Index.

[October

Vireo solitarius, 65, 279.

solitarius cassini, 332.
solitarius plumbeus, 332.
vicinior, 321.

Vireo, 117.

Arizona, 321.

Bell’s, 101.

Blue-headed, 279.

Cassin’s, 332.

Gray, 321.

Philadelphia, 272. 279, 305.
Plumbeous, 332.

Red-eyed, 98, 279.

Stephens’s, 197.

Swainsoti’s, 332.

Warbling, 279.

White-eyred, 72.

Vireolanius pulchellus verticalis,
293-

cinerea, 295.

Vireosylvia cinerea, 295.
gilva, 141.
grandior, 291.

Vultur californianus, 169.

Vulture, Black, 109.

California, 167.

Warbler, Audubon’s, 329, 331.
Bay-breasted, 272.
Black-and-Yellow, 278.
Blackburnian, 103.
Black-capped, 278.
Black-capped Yellow, 278.
Black-poll, 278.
Black-throated Gray, 197.
Black- throated Green, 98.
Blue-winged Yellow, 98, 37S.
Blue Yellow-backed, 97, 377.
Cape May, 32, 33.

Cerulean, 278.

Connecticut, 104, 308.

Golden Swamp, 32.
Golden-winged, 102, 378.
Grace’s, 331.

Hooded, 72, T90.

Kirtland’s, 376.
Macgillivray’s, 332.
Mourning, 278.

Olive, 172.

Orange-crowned, 278, 330.
Prothonotary, 97.

Prairie, 278.

Pine-creeping, 278, 343, 3S1.
Red-poll, 104.

Swainson’s, 54, 65, 104, 105,
301, 3°5’ 346, 377-
Tennessee, 190.

Townsend’s, 331.
White-throated, 378.
Worm-eating, 103, 305.

Warbler, Yellow, 331.

Yellow-bellied Red-poll, 190.
Yellow-rumped, 98, 216, 278,
307, 3S0, 381.
Yellow-throated, 72.
Waxwing, Cedar, 279.

Northern, 279.

Widmann, Otto, note on the capture
of Cotnrniculus lecontei and Den-
droceca kirtlandi within the city
limits of St. Louis, Mo., 381.
Wilcox, Timothy E., introduced
game birds in Oregon and Idaho,
3l5-

Willard, Samuel Wells, food of the
Hummingbird ( Trockilus colu-
bris')., 218; the occurrence of
Ckroicocephalus fratiklinr iu Wis¬
consin, 222; notice of his paper
on the birds of Brown and Outa¬
gamie Counties, Wis., 289.
Willet, 2S6, 29S.

Wheatear, 113, 305.

Whip-poor-will, 179, 257, 272.
Wood, Dr. William, notice of death
of, 391.

Woodcock, 99, 213, 261, 2S6.
Woodpecker, Black-backed, 265.
Brown-headed, 174.
California, 9, 174.

Downy, 101, 257, 265, 283.
Gairdner’s. 126, 127.
Golden-winged, 259, 284, 380.
Hairy, 100, 265.

Harris’s, 9, 127, 174, 283.
Nuchal, 174.

Nuttall’s, 213.

Pileated, 51, 101, 283.
Red-headed, 93, 99, 101, 209.
258, 283.

Red-bellied. 283, 335.
Red-naped, 9.

Red-shafted, 9, 174.
Strickland’s, 199.
Yellow-bellied, 258, 301.
Wren, Bewick’s, 99.

Canon, 233.

Carolina. 72, 86, 98, 209.
House, 98, 278.

Long-billed Marsh, 96, 190,
278.

Rock, 234, 277.

Short-billed Marsh, 190, 278.
Western House, 278.

Winter, 213, 115.

Xanthocephalus icterocephalus,
8, 16, 1 12, 192, 282.

Xema sabinei, 63.

Yellowbird, Summer, 278.

1 SSs • 1

Index.

4 1 1

Yellow-legs, 286.

Greater, 99, 286.
Yellow-shanks, 189.

Yellow-throat, Maryland, 72, 98,
27S, 367.

Zamelodia ludoviciana, 151, 192,
281.

melanocephala, 16, 99, J12,
142, 281

Zeledon, Jose C., notice of his Cat¬
alogue of the Birds of Costa Rica,
370;

Zenaida bogotensis, 358.

Zenaida rubripes, 337.

ruficauda, 291, 357.
vinaceo-rufa, 291, 359.
Zenaidura carolinensis, 9, 17, 143,

2§5, 372-

macroura, 372.

Zonotrichia albicollis, 65, 281.

gambeli intermedia, 16, 141.
intermedia, 124.
leucophrys, 16, 65, 141, 272,
281.

querula, 281.

Old

Series,

Vol.X

CONTINUATION OF THE

BULLETIN OF THE NUTTALL ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB

New

Series

Vol II

The Auk

a Quarterly Journal of Ornttliologr

Vol. II —APRIL, 1SS5 — No. 2

Wheeler , Printer , 41b Harvard St., Cambridge , Afass

CONTENTS.

PAGE.

Winter Notes from New Mexico. By Charles F. Batchelder . 121

Sexual Selection and the Nesting of Birds. By J. A. Allen . 129

Notes on Some of the Birds of Pueblo, Colorado. By Charles Wickliffe Beckham. 139

A Study of the Singing of our Birds. By Eugene P. Bicknell . 144

Notes on the Birds of the Nearer Islands, Alaska. By Lucian M. Turner . . 154

On the Breeding I Iabits of Some Arizona Birds. By W.E.D. Scott. Second Paper.

Icterus cucullatus . . 159

On Butko harlani (Aud.) and B. cooperi Cass. By Robert Ridgway .... 165

Remarks on the California Vulture ( Pseudogryphus californianus). By Robert

Ridgvjay . 167

Note on Sarcorhamphus asquatorialis Sharpe. By Robert Ridgway .... 169

Winter Mountain Notes from Southern Arizona. By W. E. D. Scott .... 172

Variations in the Form of the Beak, that take place during its growth, in the

Short-tailed Albatross {Diomedea brachyura). Bv Dr. R. IV. Shujeldt, U.S.Army. 175

Analecta Ornithologica. Fifth Series. By Leonhard Stejneger . 17S

Supplementary Notes on the Ornithology of Chester County, South Carolina.

By Lei>erelt M. Loomis . iSS

The Rock Ptarmigan of Newfoundland. By William Brezvster . . • . . . . 193

Additional Notes on some Birds collected in Arizona and the adjoining Prov¬
ince of Sonora, Mexico, by Mr. F. Stevens in iS$4; with a Description of a

New Si’ECiES of Urtyx. By William Brewster . 196

Notes on Some Species of Birds attributed to Point Barrow, Alaska. By fohn

Murdoch . 200

Change of Color in the Wing-Feathers of the Willow Grouse. By C. Hart

Merriam , M. D . ' . . . . 201

Recent Literature. — Gurney’s ‘List of the Diurnal Birds of Prey,’ 203 ; Newton’s ‘Ornithology,’
205 ; Ridgway on the American Red Crossbills, 206; Ridgway on Various American Birds, 207;
Jordan’s ‘Manual of Vertebrates,’ 23S; Shufeldt on the Osteology ol Numenius longiroslris ,
20S; Rives on the Birds of Newport, R. I., 20S; Bell on Birds observed between Norway
House and F'orts Churchill and York, 209; Minor Ornithological Publications, 209; Publica¬
tions Received, 214.

General Notes. — The Wood Thrush in Maine, 215; The Occurrence of the Catbird ( Mimus
carolinensis ) on the Farallone Islands, Pacific Ocean, 215; The Yellow-rumped Warbler Win¬
tering in Maine, 216; The Migration of< the Swallows, 216; Nelson’s Sharp-tailed Finch on the
Atlantic Coast, 216; Wintering of the Swamp Sparrow in Eastern Massachusetts, 216; Cyan-
ocitta stelleri frontalis Nesting in Holes in Trees, 217 ; The First Nest and Eggs of Eremo-
phila alpestris found in Niagara County, N. Y., 217; The Swallow-tailed Flycatcher in
Manitoba and at York Factory, 21S; The Food of the Hummingbird ( Trochilus colnbris), 21S;
The Chuck-will’s-widow ( Antrostomus carolinensis) in Massachusetts, 220; The Hawk Owl
in Eastern Massachusetts, 220; The Ptarmigan of Anticosti — A Correction, 220; A Blue
Heron’s Meal, 221; Wood Ibis ( Tantalus loculator) in Eastern New York, 221; Wilson’s
Plover in Nova Scotia, 221 ; The Occurrence of Chroicocephalus franklini in Wisconsin, 222;
Rissa tridactyla kotxbuei in Washington Territory, 222.

Correspondence. — Indian Bird Names, 222.

Notes and News. — Government Aid to the A. O. U. Committee on Bird Migration, 223; The
New Maine Bird-law, 223 ; The Collection of Birds in the Museum of Comparative Zoology,
224; The Editor’s Change of Address, 224; Obituary — Dr. N. Severtzow, 224; The Ridgway
Ornithological Club, 224; ‘The Young Ornithologist,’ 224.

‘THE AUK,’ published as the Organ of the American Ornithologists’
Union, is conducted as a Magazine of General Ornithology. In general
character it differs little from the late ‘Bulletin of the Nuttall
Ornithological Club,’ 0/ which it forms virtually a Second Series. Each
number will contain about one hundred pages, and the illustrations will occa¬
sionally include colored plates.

‘The Auk’ is published under the supervision of Mr. J. A. Allen,
Editor-in-Chief, assisted by Dr. Elliott Coues. Mr. Robert Ridgway, Mr.
William Brewster, and Mr. Montague Chamberlain, Associate-Editors.

Terms : — $3.00 a year, including postage, strictly in advance. Single num¬
bers, 75 cents. Free to Foreign Members, and to Active Members of the A.O.U.
not in arrears for dues.

Subscriptions and Advertisements should be addressed to the publishers,
ESTES AND LAURIAT, Boston, Mass. Foreign Subscribers may obtain
‘ The Auk.’ through J. VAN VOORST, 1 Paternoster Row, London.

All articles and communications intended for publication, and all books and
publications for notice, should be sent to J. A. ALLEN, American Museum of
Natural History, Central Park, New York City.

BARGAINS IN BOOKS,

Recently Purchased from the Private Library
of a Naturalist.

^gp^OuR annual foil catalogue of books in every department of literature, for
sale at greatly reduced prices, is now ready and will be sent free to any address.

GOULD'S BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. A synopsis of the Birds of Aus¬
tralia, and the adjacent Islands. By John Gould, F. L. S. Containing 73
full-page flutes , Colored by Hand, showing upwards of 150 species ,
Impl. 8vo, handsomely bound in half morocco, gilt-hack, and gilt-top, edges
uncut. London, 1837-38. - Reduced from $45.00 to $30.00.

An exceptionally fine copy, bound from the original numbers as issued (in four parts), the
magnificently colored plates being all perfect and in splendid condition.

NATURALIST'S LIBRARY. Edited by Sir William Jardine. A com¬
plete set of the scarce original edition of this now famous library. 40 vols. 16
mo., with upwards of 1200 colored plates and numerous portraits of Nat¬
uralists. Neatly bound in half calf, binding as good as new. Edinburgh.
Reduced from $3.00 to $1.65 per vol.

BIRDS OF NORTH AMERICA. A history of North American Birds. By
S. F. Baird, T. M. Brewer, and R. Ridgway. Land Birds. Illustrated by 64
beautiful full-page plates , containing 543 heads of each species, and 59J wood-
cuts. 3 vols. Quarto. Cloth. Perfectly new and fresh set. Boston, 1874.
Reduced from $30.00 to $20.00

ANOTHER COPY. With the plates beautifully and accurately colored.
Perfectly new and fresh set. Reduced from $45.00 to $30.00.

This work was projected with the intention of making it fully adequate to the scientific
demands of the times, — an exhibit of North-American ornithology as nearly perfect as human
skill and ample resources could render it; and it is uot too much to say that this purpose has been
successfully carried out. The history has been recognized, in Europe and at home, as a work of
the highest scientific value, and has supplanted all others as an ornithological authority.

Ferns and Flowering Plants of Great Britain. By Anne Pratt. A series
of 3/3 beautifully colored full-page engravings, in which are comprised figures
of 1458 species, with explanatory text and indices. 6 vols. Square 8vo.
Handsomely bound in extra cloth, gilt edges, new and f re fit set. London, 1S75.
Reduced from $36.00 to $19.00.

The method of classification adopted in this work is that which is termed the Natural System ,
in which the whole vegetable kingdom is divided into three great classes. English, rather than
Latin, terms have in all cases been used by the writer, so as to adapt the book to the use of the
unscientific.

AGASSIZ’ NATURAL HISTORY. Contributions to the Natural History
of the United States of America. By Louis Agassiz. Contents : Essay on
Classification, North-American Testudinata, Embryology of the Turtle, Acalephs
in General, Ctenophone, Discophora;, Hydroidae. 4 vols. 4to, cloth. Boston,
1857-62. Reduced from $40.00 to $18.00.

Novj out of print and scarce.

These volumes contain 77 plates, the execution of which exhibits a degree of minuteness and
finish superior to the best works published in Europe on similar subjects. The illustrations of
Acalephs are unquestionably the most beautiful ever published.

Estes & Lauriat,

301-305 Washington St.,

Boston, Mass.

Opp. “Old South.”

THE COUES CHECK LIST

OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS,

SEC OKI ID EDITION,

WITH A

DICTIONARY OF THE SCIENTIFIC NAMES.

ONE VOLUME ROYAL OCTAVO, $3.00.

THE STANDARD.

Some Opinions of Reviewers.

The treatment of some of the most essential points which should form the in¬
itial training of the word-constructor and word-expounder is erroneous and mis¬
leading . . . The lack of clear logic, incisive statement, and proper arrangement
in the process of derivation confronts one continually. — A. C. Merriam , in
The Auk.

We need not say that the fine scholarship of Dr. Cones has made this diction¬
ary of birds a ram avis in scientific literature. — New York Herald.

This is a unique feature, rarely attempted in scientific works, and nowhere
else so well done as here. The highest praise must be awarded to Dr. Coues
for the fullness, accuracy and literary elegance with which this part of his work
has been performed. . . . Three hundred titles are included, which shows cer¬
tainly that the most graceful pen now wielded in American science is also one
of the most active. — The Chicago Dial.

Those who are familiar with the author’s peculiarly felicitous literary style,
as displayed in his ‘Birds of the Colorado Valley,’ and in his numberless essays
and published addresses, will not be surprised to find that he has accomplished
that rare feat of making a dictionary readable. The happy faculty of adorning
whatever he touches does not fail him even here, the dryest philological techni¬
calities being vivified with the genius of a master of words. — The Washington
Capital.

PART ONE NOW READY. To be completed in four parts.

A NEW AND BEAUTIFUL WORK ON THE

Birds of Haiti and San Domingo

By CHARLES B. CORY, F. L. S., Etc.

THE work will be completed in four parts, the whole to contain from sixteen
to twenty full-page plates (size nA x 9 inches), from original drawings.

BEAUTIFULLY AND ACCURATELY COLORED BY HAND

In water-colors, with accompanying descriptions.

When completed, the work will form one handsome quarto volume, and no
trouble nor expense will be spared to render the plates as beautiful and faithful
reproductions of nature as possible.

The coloring of every plate, nest , egg, tree, or plant will be entirely done by
hand.

The Edition will be Absolutely Limited to Three Hundred Copies,

And will be sold only to subscribers for the complete work.

PRICE $5.00 PER PART.

Each part as issued will be securely wrapped in pasteboard covers and
delivered free of expense.

Subscriptions i-eceived by the publishers,

ESTES & LAURIAT, Boston, Mass.

'

Old ^ CONTINUATION OF THE

fr|'ev i bulletin of the nuttall ornithological club

The Auk

a Otuirtcrly Journal of Ormtljologv

Vol. 2 — JANUARY, 1885— No. 1

PUBLISHED FOR

The American Ornithologists’ Union

W. H. Wheeler , Printer , 41b Harvard St., Cambridge , Mass

CONTENTS.

PAGE.

On the Breeding Habits of Some Arizona Birds. First Paper. By IV. E. D. Scott
Bird Names of the Selish, Paii-Uta, and Shoshoni Indians. By W. cf. Hoffman ,

M.D. . . ...

On the Vertical Range of Birds in Colorado. By Frank M. Drew .
Observations on Elanoides forficatns and Ictinia subcccrulea in Kansas. By N. S. Goss
Manitoban- Notes. By Ernest E. T. Seton .

On the Function of the Inferior Larynx in Birds. By J. M. W. Kitchen, M. D. .
Notes on the Occurrence of Certain Birds in the Mississippi Valley. By IV.

W. Coohe .

The Nesting Habits of' the Cape May Warbler (Dendrceca tigrina). By Montague

Chamberlain . .

Bird Notes from Long Island, N. Y. By William Dutcher .

Field Notes from Pictou County, Nova* Scotia. By James Me Kinlay.

Analecta Ornitiiologica. Fourth Series. By Leonhard Stejneger .

Preliminary Report of the Committee on Bird Migration. By C. Hart Merriam,

M.D . .... .

Svvainson’s Warbler. By William Brewster . . . . .

The Heath Hen of Massachusetts. By William Brevjster .

Preliminary Notes on Some Birds obtained in Arizona by Mr. F. Stephens in
1S84. By William Brewster .

7
1 1

D

21

24

3i

33

36

39

43

S3

cS

So

S4

Recent Literature. — Abbott’s ‘A Naturalist’s Rambles about Home,’ 86; Seebohm’s History
of British Birds, 38; Ingersoll’s ‘Country Cousins,’ 91 ; Langille’s ‘Our Birds in their Haunts :
A Popular Treatise on the Birds of Eastern North America,’ 91 ; Stejneger on the Wrens of the
Subgenus Anorthura , 94; Stejneger on the Ptarmigans of the group Attagen, 94; Stejneger on
New Species of Birds from Kamtschatka, 95; Stejneger on Recent Ornithological Publications
in the United States, 95; Merriam on a Bird New to the Bermudas, etc., 95 ; Shufeldt on the
Osteology of Ceryle Alcyon, 95; Shufeldt on the Avian Patella, 96; Minor Ornithological Pub¬
lications, 96; Publications Received, 101.

General Notes. — Albino Robins ( Tardus migralorius ), 102; Nest and Eggs of the Golden¬
winged Warbler ( Hel m inthophila chrysoptera) , 102; Nest and Eggs of the Blackburnian War¬
bler, 103; Nesting of the Worm-eating Warbler ( Hel m itherus vermivorus), 103; Oporornis
ogilis and Dendraeca palmarum palmarum at Shelburne, near Gorham, New Hampshire, 104;
Swainson’s Warbler off Southern Florida, 104; Swainson’s Warbler — An Omission, 105; The
Red Crossbill breeding in Massachusetts, 105; The Ipswich Sparrow ( Passerculus princeps ) in
Delaware, 105 ; Peuccea cestivalis and its Subspecies illinoensis, 105 ; The Black-throated Bunting
in Maine, 106; Foster Parents of the Cowbird, 106; Nest and Eggs of the Rusty Grackle ( Scole -
cophagus ferrugineus) , 106; A White Crow ( Corvus frugivorus), 107 ; A Remarkable Migration
of Canada Jays, 107; The Kingbird in a New Role, 10S; Late Occurrence of the Phoebe ( Sayor -
nis fusca) at Brewer, Maine, 108; Hawk Owls in New England, 10S; The Turkey Buzzard in
Central New York, 109; Recent Occurrence of the Black Vulture in Ohio, 109; A New Bird for
Illinois, 109; Tlie Great White Egret and Yellow Rail in Ottawa, Canada, no; CEdicnemus
dominicensis in Confinement, no; The VTestern Semipalmated Sandpiper on the Coast of
Virginia, no; The Canada Goose, in; The Eider Ducks of the New England Coast, in;
The White Pelican on Lake Ontario, in; The Common Cormorant off Boston Harbor, 112;
The Common Cormorant in Massachusetts, 112; Rare Summer Residents in Kansas, 112;
Third Addendum to List of Birds Ascertained to Occur within Ten Miles from Point des
Monts, Province of Quebec, Canada; Based chiefly upon the Notes of Napoleon A. Coraeau,
113; Albinism, 113.

Correspondence. — Vernacular Names of Birds, 1 14.

Notes and News. — Ornithological Publications, 115; Ornithological Societies, 116; The Balda-
mus Collection of Birds’ Nests and Eggs, 116; The Names ‘Junco’ and Snowbird, and ‘Vireo’
and ‘Greenlet,’ 116.

Committee on the Migration and Geographical Distribution of North American
'Birds. — Circular for 1SS5. By C. Hart Merriam, M. D . 117

‘THE AUK,’ published as the Organ of the American Ornithologists’
Union, is conducted as a Magazine of General Ornithology. In general
character it differs little from the late ‘Bulletin of the Nuttall
Ornithological Club,’ of which it forms virtually a Second Series. Each
number will contain about one hundred pages, and the illustrations will occa¬
sionally include colored plates.

‘The Auk,’ is published under the supervision of Mr. J. A. Allen,
Editor-in-Chief, assisted by Dr. Elliott Coues. Mr. Robert Ridgway, Mr.
William Brewster, and Mr. Montague Chamberlain, Associate-Editors.

Terms: — $3.00 a year, including postage, strictly in advance. Single num¬
bers, 75 cents. Free to Foreign Members, and to Active Members of the A.O.U.
not in arrears for dues.

Subscriptions and Advertisements should be addressed to the publishers,
ESTES AND LAURIAT, Boston, Mass. Foreign Subscribers may obtain
‘ The Auk ’ through J. VAN VOORST, 1 Paternoster Row, London.

All articles and communications intended for publication, and all books and
publications for notice, should be sent to J. A. ALLEN, Cambridge, Mass.

BARGAINS IN BOOKS,

Recently Purchased from the Private Library
of a Naturalist.

gfgp^OuR annual fall catalogue of books in every department: of literature, for
sale at greatly reduced prices, is now ready and will be sent free to any address.

GOULD'S BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. A synopsis of the Birds of Aus¬
tralia, and the adjacent Islands. By John Gould, F. L. S. 'Containing 73
full-page plates, Colored by Hand, showing upwards of 1 30 species,
Impl. Svo, handsomely bound in half morocco, gilt-back, and gilt-top, edges
uncut. London, 1837-38. ■ Reduced from $45.00 to $30.00.

An exceptionally fine copy, bound from the original numbers as issued (in four parts), the
magnificently colored plates being all perfect and in splendid condition.

NATURALIST’S LIBRARY. Edited by Sir William Jardine. A com¬
plete set of the scarce original edition of this now famous library. 40 vols. 16
mo., 7 vith upwards of 1200 colored plates and numerous portraits of Nat¬
uralists. Neatly bound in half calf, binding as good as new. Edinburgh.
Reduced from $3.00 to $1.65 per vol.

BIRDS OF NORTH AMERICA. A history of North American Birds. By
S. F. Baird. T. M. Brewer, and R. Ridgway. Land Birds. Illustrated by 64
beautiful full-page plates, containing 5.75 heads of each species, and 593 wood¬
cuts. 3 vols. Quarto. Cloth. Perfectly new and fresh set. Boston, 1874*
Reduced from $30.00 to $20.00

ANOTHER COPY. With the plates beautifully and accurately colored.
Perfectly new and fresh set. Reduced from $45.00 to $30.00.

This work was projected with the intention of making it fully adequate to the scientific
demands of the times, — an exhibit of North- American ornithology as nearly perfect as human
skill and ample resources could render it; arid it is not too much to say that this purpose has been
successfully carried out. The history has been recognized, in Europe and at home, as a work of
the highest scientific value, and has supplanted all others as an ornithological authority.

Ferns and Flowering Plants of Great Britain. By Anne Pratt. A series
of 313 beautifully colored full-page engravings, in which are comprised figures
of 143S species, with explanatory text and indices. 6 vols. Square Svo.
Handsomely bound in extra cloth, gilt edges, new and fresh set. London - iS75-
Reduced from $36.00 to $19.00.

The method ot classification adopted in this work is that which is termed the Natural System,
in which the whole vegetable kingdom is divided into three great classes. English, rather than
Latin, terms have in all cases been used by the writer, so as to adapt the book to the use of the
unscientific.

AGASSIZ’ NATURAL HISTORY. Contributions to the Natural History
of the United States of America. By Louis Agassiz. Contents : Essay on
Classification, North- American Testudinata, Enibryology of the Turtle, Acalephs
in General, Ctenophorse, Discophorai, Hydroidae. 4 vols. 4to, cloth. Boston,
1857-62. Reduced from $40.00 to $18.00.

Now out of print and scarce.

These volumes contain 77 plates, the execution of which exhibits a degree of minuteness and
finish superior to the best works published in Europe on similar subjects. The illustrations of
Acalephs are unquestionably the most beautiful ever published.

Estes & Lauriat,

301-305 Washington St.,

Opp. “Old South.” Boston, Mass.

THE COUES CHECK LIST

OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS,

SECOND EDITION",

WITH A

DICTIONARY OF THE SCIENTIFIC NAMES.

ONE VOLUME ROYAL OCTAVO, $3.00.

THE STANDARD.

Some Opinions of Reviewers.

iH^eatme?^fS°m5 °f the most essentiaI Points which should form the in-

leadini ' The fack of He°n8frU ■t°i: ^ word'exPounder is erroneous and mis-
4.1 ° 1 ie ° c ear incisive statement, and prooer arranwmpnt

TAeAulZ°CeSS °fderivation confronts one continually.- A. C. Merriam , in

ar SS n0t Saj that lhe fine scholarship of Dr. Cones has made this diction-
•> ot buds a rara avis in scientific literature.— New York Herald.

Ihis is a unique feature, rarely attempted in scientific works, and nowhere
eH done as h^e. The highest praise must be awarded ?o Dr Soues

has^bee^i' l^-fon^ed1^^ T^h Itei'ary degance with which this part of his work
tainlv tl a/ thl df' ‘ ' ' T,h[ee hundred titles are included, which shows cer-

Of the mStactWe^ S.Wielded in Am<!riCan °»e

Those who are familiar with the author’s peculiarly felicitous literary style
a d!sp ayed in his ‘Birds of the Colorado Valley,’ and in his numbedes7essays
and pubbshed addresses, will not be surprised to find that he has accomplished
that rare feat of making a dictionary readable. The happy faculty of adorning
cilfriesTe-16 touc'hes does not fail him even here, the drvest philological technf-
CapTaL g V1Vlfied WltH t £ g6niuS of a master of words.— The \ Washington

3 PAETS NOW HEADY. To be completed in four parts.

A NEW AND BEAUTIFLTL WORK ON THE

Birds of Haiti and San Domingo

By CHARLES B. CORY, F. L. S„ Etc. ^

TS1”? f!! be co",l’lc“':i ,in four parts, the whole to contain from sKteen
1 twe n tv lull-page plates (size I I.J s 9 inches), from original drawing.

BEAUTIFULLY AND ACCURATELY COLORED BY HANd’

In water-colors, with accompanying descriptions.

When completed, the work will form one handsome quarto volume and no
rou ile noi expense will be spared to render the plates as beautiful and faithful
reproductions of nature as possible. aiia t£utmul

hand 6 COl°ring °f e™ry plate, nest, egg, tree, or plant will be entirely done by

The Edition will be Absolutely Limited to Three Hundred Copies,

And will be sold only to subscribers for the complete work.

PRICE $5.00 PER PART.

delPeltdp! “of Ilf, 'lL™11 b‘ S‘CUrely W

Subsci iptions received by the publishers,

ESTES & LAURIAT, Boston, Mass.

0ld | CONTINUATION OF THE r New

Zr* i bulletin of the nuttall ornithological club { sveor|'^

The Auk

9 OmirtcrL journal of Ornttljologp

Vol. II — JTJIiTT, 1SS5— No. 3

PUBLISHED FOR

The American Ornithologi

BOSTON,

ESTES & LAUR

W. H. Wheeler, Printer, 41b Harvard St., Cambridge , Mass.

CONTE NTS.

' PAGE.

Notes or an Ornithological Trip in Arizona and Sonora. By F. Stephens . 225

The Gulls of the California Coast. By II. IV. Henshcrw . .231

Winter Notes from New Mexico; By Charles F. Batchelder . . 233

Counter-1 Notes on Some Species of Birds Attributed to Point Barrow, Alaska.’

By E. IV. Nelson . . . . ,. 239

On the Breeding Habits of Some Arizona Birds. By IV. E D. Scott. Third Paper.

Phainopepla nitens . 242

H ybrid Quail (Lophortyx gamheli x L. calif or turns'). By II. W. Hens haw .... 247

A Study of tiie Singing of Our Birds. By Eugene P. Bicknell ...... 249

Winter Birds of Prince Edward Islanjd. By Francis Bain ... . 262

Notes on Manitoban Birds. By Ernest E. T. Seton . . . . 267

Long Island, N. Y., Bird Notes. By Newbold T. Lawrence . . 272

The Black-capped Vireo and Nonpareil in Southwestern Kansas. By N. S. Goss 274
The Birds of Southeastern Dakota. By G. S. Agersborg . . . . . . •. 276

Recent Literature. — Nests and Eggs of the Birds of Ohio, 2S9; Willard on Birds of Brown
and Outagamie Counties, Wisconsin, 2S9; Lawrence on New Species of American Birds, 290;
Ridgvvay on New Species and Sub-species of American Birds, and on the Nomenclature of
Other Species, 290; Nutting on Nicaraguan Birds, 293; Stcjneger on the Genus Cepphus, 294;
Ridgway on New Species of Birds from Cozumel Island, Yucatan, 294; Cory’s Birds of Haiti
and San Domingo, 295; Minor Ornithological Publications, 295 ; Publications Received, 302.

General Notes; — Abnormal Coloration in a Caged Robin, 303 ; Another Black Robin, 303; Re¬
turn of Robins to the same Nesting-places, 304; Abundance of Partis atricapil/us near Wash¬
ington, 304; Occurrence of Hel m inthophila leucobronchial is in Virginia, .304; Another Example
of Helminthophila leucobronchial is from Connecticut, 304; Nesting of the Worm-eating
Warbler ( Hel m inth other us “vermivorus ) in Southern Connecticut, 305 ; Probable Breeding of
the Wheatear ( Saxicola cenanthe ) on the North Shore of the Gulf of St. Lawrence, 305; Nest
and Eggs of the Philadelphia Vireo, 305; A White-winged Junco in Maryland, 306; J'unco an-
nectens — A Correction, 306; Capture of Amniodrclmus caudacutus nelsoni in the Lower Hudson
Valley, New York, 306; Swamp Sparrows and Yellow-rumps — A Question of Evidence, 307;
The Song of Cardinalts virginianus, 307; The Black-throated Bunting, Yellow-breasted Chat
and Connecticut Warbler in Ontario, 307; A Belated Bird, 30S; Cowbird Wintering in Western
New York, 309; Nest and Eggs of Calyple costte , 309; Curious Food for the Kingfisher (' Ceryle
alcyon), 31 1 ; Occurrence of the Sharp-shinned Hawk in New Hampshire in Winter, 31 1 ; Early
and Accidental Occurrence of Catharisla atrata and Tantalus loculalor in Kansas, 31 1; The
Glossy Ibis and Avocet at San Diego, Cal., 311; The Eggs of the Knot ( Tringa canutus)
found at last, 31a; Southern Range of Rissa tridactyla kotzbuei, 313; The Relationship of
Podiceps occidentalis and P. clarkii, 313; The Western Grebe in Manitoba, 314 ; Capture of
Escaped Cage-birds, 314; Introduced Game Birds in Orgon and Idaho, 315; Fourth Addendum
to List of Birds Ascertained to occur within ten miles from Point de Monts, Province of
Quebec, Canada, 315.

Correspondence.^ The Popular Names of Birds, 316.

Notes and News; — Time 'and Place of Meeting of thb A. O U. for 1SS5, 317’; A. O. U. 1 Code
and Check List,’3iS; Economic Ornithology, 31S ; Mr. Brewster’s Ornithological Explorations,
31S; Messrs. Bailey and Sennett’s Ornithological Collections, 31S; Ridgway Ornithological
Club, 319; Ornithological Works in Prospect, 319; New Ornithological Journals, 320.

'THE AUK,’ published as the Organ of the American Ornithologists’
Union, is conducted as a Magazine of General Ornithology. I11 general
character it differs little from the late ‘Bulletin of the Nuttall
Ornithological Club,’ of which it forms virtually a Second Series. Each
number will contain about one hundred pages, and the illustrations will occa¬
sionally include colored plates.

‘The Auk’ is published under the supervision of Mr. J. A. Allen,
Editor-in-Chief, assisted by Dr.' Elliott Goues, Mr; Robert Ridgway, Mr.
William Brewster, and Mr. Montague Chamberlain, Associate-Editors.

Terms: — $3.00 a year, including postage, strictly in advance. Single num¬
bers, 75 cents. Free to Foreign Members, and to Active Members of the A.O.U.
not in arrears for dues.

Subscriptions and Advertisement? should be addressed to the publishers,
ESTES AND LAURIAT, Boston, Mass. Foreign Subscribers may obtain
1 The Auk ’ through J. VAN VOORST, 1 Paternoster Row, London.

All articles and communications intended for publication, and all books and
publications for notice, should be sent to J. A. ALLEN, American Museum ok
Natural History, Central Park, New York- City.

Old |
Series, \
Vol.X )

CONTINUATION OF THE

BULLETIN OF THE NUTTALL ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB

( New
j Series,

1 Vol II

The Auk

9 iDuavtcrlr journal of Ovmtliologr

Vol.

II — OCTOBEH, 1885 —

No. 4

PUBLISHED FOR

The American Ornithol

BOSTON, Mass

ESTES Sc LAURIAT

W. H. Wheeler , Printer, 41b Harvard St., Cambridge, Mass.

CONTENTS.

PAGE.

On the Breeding Habits of Some Arizona Birds. By W. E. D. Scott . . . 321

List ok Birds observed in Summer and Fall on the Upper Pecos River, New

Mexico. By //. W. Henshaw . 326

Interesting Records from Toronto, Canada. By Ernest E. T. Seton . . . 334

Analecta Ornithologica. Sixth Series. By Leonhard Stejneger . 337

Description of a New Cardinal Grosbeak’from Arizona. By Robert Ridgway . 343

Additional Notes on the Nest and Eggs of Swainson’s Warbler. By William

Brewster . . 346

Early Spring Notes from the Mountains of Southern Arizona. By W. E. D.

Scott . . . . 348

Descriptions of New Species of Birds of the Family Columbid.e. By George N.

Lawrence . 357

Helminthopiiila leucobronchialis. By Robert Ridgway . ' 359

On Junco cinereus (Swains.) and its Geographical Races. By Robert Ridgzuay . 363

Recent Literature. — Sharpe’s Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum — Volume X,
365; Turner’s List of the Birds of Labrador, 368; Zeledon’s Catalogue of the Birds of Costa
Rica, 370; Ridgway on New American Birds, 370; Ridgway on the Type Specimen of Buteo
oxypterus Cassin, 371 ; Ridgway’s List of Emended Names of North American Birds, 371 ;
Minor Ornithological Publications, 372; Publications Received, 375.

General Notei. — Kirtland’s Warbler from the Straits of Makinac, 376; Odd Nesting Habits
of the Blue Yellow-backed Warbler in Missouri, 377; Swainson’s Warbler in Jamaica, 377;
A Specimen of Helminthophila leucobronchialis in New Jersey, 378; Capture of two more
Specimens of Helminthophila leucobronchialis at Sing Sing, New York, 37S; Evidence con¬
cerning the Interbreeding of Helminthopkilia chrysoptera and H. Finns, 378; The Loggerhead
Shrike in New Hampshire, 370; Breeding of Lox'ia americana in the District of Columbia, 379;
Non-appearance of J uncos at Montreal, 380; Familiar Chipping Sparrows, 3S0; Swamp Spar¬
rows and Yellow-rumps, 3S0; Note on the Capture of Coturniculus lecontei and Dendrceca kirt-
landi within the city limits of St. Louis, Mo., 381 ; On the Feeding Habits of Phalcenoptilus
nuttalli, 3S2 ; Colaptes auratus in California, 383; A Hawk Owl at Chatham, Mass., 383 ; An¬
other Richardson’s Owl in Massachusetts, 3S4; The Oyster-catcher ( Hcematopus palliatus )
in Massachusetts, 3S4; The Baird’s Sandpiper ( Actodromas bairdi) at Locust Grove, New
York, -384; A Bird New to Massachusetts, 3S4; Ereunetes occidentdlis on the Lower Potomac,
3S5 ; The Great Marbled Godwit at Portland, Maine, 385 ; The Little Yellow Rail ( Porzana
noveboracensis) in Kansas, $Sy, Harelda hyemalis in Maryland in Summer, 3S5 ; An Albino
Surf Duck ( CEdemia perspicillata), 3S6; On the Alleged Occurrence of the Pacific Eider in
Labrador, 3S6; A New Petrel for North America, 3S6; Probable Occurrence of Diomedea extl-
lans in Florida, 3S7 ; The Bill of the Horned Puffin ( Ceratorhina monocerata) , 387; A prested
Auk on the Massachusetts Coast, 38S; The Thick-billed Grebes ( Podilyntbus podiceps ) Breed¬
ing in Kansas, 3S8.

Correspondence. — Republication in ‘The Auk’ of Descriptions of New North American Birds.
— A Suggestion, 3S9.

Notes and News. — The Next Meeting of the American Ornithologists’ Union, 389; Ridgway
Ornithological Club, 390; The A. O. U. Check List and Code of Nomenclature, 390; Ornitho¬
logical Works in Press, 390; Obituary — Dr. William Wood, Dr. H. A. Atkins, 391; New
Natural History Serials, 391 ; Recent Additions to the British Museum Collection of Birds, 392

Index . .

‘THE AUK,’ published as the Organ of the American Ornithologists’
Union, is conducted as a Magazine of General Ornithology. In general
character it differs little from the late ‘ Bulletin of the Nuttall
Ornithological Club,’ of which it forms virtually a Second Series. Each
number will contain about one hundred pages, and the illustrations will occa¬
sionally include colored plates.

‘The Auk’ is published under the supervision of Mr. J. A. Allen,
Editor-in-Chief, assisted by Dr. Elliott Coues. Mr. Robert Ridgway, Mr.
William Brewster, and Mr. Montague Chamberlain, Associate-Editors.

Terms: — $3.00 a year, including postage, strictly in advance. Single num¬
bers, 75 cents. Free to Foreign Members, and to Active Members of the A.O.U.
not in arrears for dues.

Subscriptions and Advertisements should be addressed to the publishers,
ESTES AND LAURIAT, Boston, Mass. Foreign Subscribers mav obtain
‘ The Auk ’ through J. VAN VOORST, 1 Paternoster Row, London.

All articles and communications intended for publication, and all books and
publications for notice, should be sent to J. A. ALLEN, American Museum of
Natural History, Central Park, New York City.

READY IN DECEMBER

The American Ornithologists’ Union

CHECK LIST

— OF —

NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS
AND CODE OF NOMENCLATURE,

„ Being the Report to the Union of the A. O. U. Committee
on Classification and Nomenclature of North
American Birds.

The Report consists of two Parts, of which Part I is the new Code of Nomen¬
clature recently adopted by the Union. This is an elaborate exposition of the
Rules of Nomenclature by which the Committee was guided in deciding the
names of North American Birds as given in the accompanying Check List.

Part II is a Classified List of North American Birds, giving the names of the
higher groups, as well as of the species and subspecies, from subgenera to
orders. The names of the genera and subgenera are accompanied by references
to the work or paper in which they were first established ; the names of the
species and subspecies are followed by a citation of the publication where they
were first described, and of the authority (when not also the original describer)
who first used the name as adopted in the List.

A Concordance is given of the previous Check Lists, as Baird’s (1858), Coues’s
(1872), Ridgway’s (1880), and Coues’s second List (1882) ; to which is added a
brief statement of the geographical distribution of each species and subspecies,
with special reference to its North American range.

The List, besides being the ‘ latest,’ and an authorized ‘ standard ’ List, em¬
braces two features not found in any previous List of North American Birds,
inasmuch as it gives the Classification and the Habitat of each bird included.

The Code and List is the result of the expenditure of much time and research
on the part of the Committee during the last two years. In many respects
the List will doubtless prove more satisfactory, and in some ways of far greater
utility, than either of its several excellent predecessors.

The work, making an octavo volume of about 300 pages, is printed on fine
paper, and no care has been spared to make it typographically attractive and
accurate, the work having been printed at the University Press, Cambridge.

Price, in full cloth, $3.00, postpaid.

Address :

L. S. FOSTER (Agent of the Union for the sale of the work),

35 Pine St., New York.

JUST COMPLETED

A. NEW AND BEAUTIFUL WORK ON THE

Birds of Haiti and San Domingo

By CHARLES B. CORY, F. L. S., Etc.

THE work is now completed, the whole containing twenty full-page plates
(size ii^ x 9 inches ), frotn original drawings.

BEAUTIFULLY AND ACCURATELY COLORED BY HAND

in water-colors, with accompanying descriptions, and no trouble nor expense
has been spared to render the plates as beautiful and faithful reproductions of
nature as possible.

The coloring o f every plate, nest, egg, tree , or plant has beeti entirely done by
hand. '*■

The Edition is Absolutely Limited to Three Hundred Copies.

One volume handsomely bound in Half Red Morocco. Gilt Top. Every plate securely
mounted on Guards. Price, $20.00

The Birds of the Bahama Islands. By Charles B. Cory. Pub¬
lished by the author. Only about seventy copies of the original edition of this book,
illustrated with eight plates (uncolored), remain unsold. Boston, 1880. Price, $7.00

A Naturalist in the Magdalen Islands. By Charles b. Cory.

Giving a description of the Islands, and list of birds taken there, with other ornithological
notas. Boston, 1878. Price, $1.25

The Beautiful and Curious Birds of the World.

By Ciiari.es B. Cory, F.L.S., etc. Published by the author.

THIS MAGNIFICENT WORK is now complete in seven parts, atlas folio, containing in
all twenty plates (size 21 by 27 inches) beautifully and accurately finished by
hand, in water-colors, by competent artists, securing the greatest delicacy in shades of
plumage. These plates present to view a series of the most beautiful and curious birds, extinct
and living, now known to science. Among the species illustrated are Birds of Paradise, Dodo,
Great Auk, Apteryx, etc. The whole accompanied by descriptive text.

4®- The edition has been absolutely limited to two hundred copies, of which only fifty now
remain unsold. As the drawings have all been erased from the stones, the production of a
second edition has been rendered impossible.

Price of the set, complete in parts $65.00

Handsomely bound in half morocco, each

plate securely mounted on guards, $75.00

Elegantly bound in full Levant morocco,

extra, each pi. securely mounted on guards, $90.00

JUST PUBLISHED.

A List of the Birds of West Indies, including the Bahama Islands
and the Greater and Lesser Antilles, excepting the Islands of Tobago and Trinidad. By
Charles B. Cory, F.L.S, etc. 1 vol. royal 8vo. Price, $1.00

Any of the above works may be procured from

ESTES & LAURIAT, Boston, Mass.

THE COUES CHECK LIST

OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS,

Second Edition, litl a Dictionary of tie Scientific Names,

ONE VOLUME ROYAL OCTAVO, $3.00.

THE STANDARD.

Some Opinions of Reviewers.

The treatment of some of the most essential points which should form the in¬
itial training of the word-constructor and word-expounder is erroneous and mis¬
leading . . . The lack of clear logic, incisive statement, and proper arrangement
in the process of derivation confronts one continually. — A. C. Merriam, in
The Auk.

We need not say that the fine scholarship of Dr. Cones has made this diction¬
ary of birds a rant avis in scientific literature. — New York Herald.

This is a unique feature, rarely attempted in scientific works, and nowhere
else so well done as here. The highest praise must be awarded to Dr. Coues
for the fullness, accuracy and literary elegance with which this part of his work
has been performed. . . . Three hundred titles are included, which shows cer¬
tainly that the most graceful pen now wielded in American science is also one
of the most active. — The Chicago Dial.

Those who are familiar with the author’s peculiarly felicitous literary style,
as displayed in his ‘Birds of the Colorado Valley,’ and in his numberless essays
and published addresses, will not be surprised to find that he has accomplished
that rare feat of making a dictionary readable. The happy faculty of adorning
whatever he touches does not fail him even here, the dryest philological techni¬
calities being vivified with the genius of a master of words. — The Washington
Capital. 4

KEY TO NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS.

Containing a concise account of every species of living and fossil bird at present known on
the Continent north of the boundary line between Mexico and the United States, including
Greenland. Second ed., revised to date and entirely rewritten: with which are incorporated

GENERAL ORNITHOLOGY:

AN OUTLINE OF THE STRUCTURE AND CLASSIFICATION OF BIRDS; and

FIELD ORNITHOLOGY:

„ A MANUAL OF COLLECTING, PREPARING, AND PRESERVING BIRDS.

By Elliot Coues, M.A.. M.D., Ph.D., member of the National Academy of Sciences, etc.

PROFUSELY ILLUSTRATED.

The original edition of this standard text-book of Ornithology being entirely out of print,
and still very much in demand, the publishers have spared neither pains nor expense in the
preparation of “The New Key,” in which the whole subject is carefully brought down to date.
Coues’s “Key” is too well known as a leading and authoritative treatise to require rem irk,
having for twelve years held its place as the standard work of reference for professional orni¬
thologists, as well as for students and amateurs.

The amount of matter in this new edition has been nearly quadrupled, and the number of
illustrations, many of them engraved expressly for this edition, has been more than doubled.

Complete in one volume.

Royal Octavo Vellum Cloth .... net $10.00
“ “ Library Sheep .... “ 11.50

“ “ Half Mor. Extra ... “ 13 50

Persons wishing to secure copies should send their orders early, enclosing
the advertised price, and the book will be forwarded, securely wrapped, free
of expense , by the publishers,

ESTES & LAURIAT, 301-305 Washington St.,

Opp. “Old South.” Boston, Mass.

JUST COMPLETED

A NEW AND BEAUTIFUL WORK ON THE

Birds of Haiti and San Domingo

By CHARLES B. CORY, F. L. S., Etc.

THE work is now completed, the whole containing twenty full-page-plates
(size i i-i x 9 inches) , from original drawings.

BEAUTIFULLY AND ACCURATELY COLORED BY HAND

in water-colors, with accompanying descriptions, and no trouble nor expense
has been spared to render the plates as beautiful and faithful reproductions of
nature as possible.

The coloring of every plate , nest , egg, tree , or pla7it has been entirely done by
hand.

The Edition is Absolutely Limited to Three Hundred Copies.

One volume handsomely bound in Half Red Morocco. Gilt Top. Every plate securely
mounted on Guards. Price, $20.00

The Birds of the Bahama Islands. By Charles B. Cory,- Pub¬
lished by the author. Only about seventy copies of the original edition of this, hook,
illustrated with, eight plates (uncolored), remain unsold. Boston, 1880. Price, $7.00

A Naturalist in the Magdalen Islands. By Charles B: . Cory.

Giving a description of the Islands, and list of birds taken there; with other ornithological
notes. Boston, 1878. Price, $1.25

The Beautiful and Curious Birds of the World.

By Charles B. Cory, F.L.S., etc. Published by the author.

THIS MAGNIFICENT WORK- is now complete in seven parts, atlas folio, containing in
all twenty plates (size 21 by 27 inches) beautifully and accurately finished by
hand, in water-colors, ■ by competent artists, securing the greatest delicacy in shades of
plumage. These plates present to view a series of the most beautiful and curious birds, extinct
and living, now known to science. Among the species illustrated are Birds of Paradise, Dodo,
Great Auk, Apteryx, etc. The whole accompanied by descriptive text.

The edition has been absolutely limited to two hundred copies, of which only fifty now
remain unsold, As the drawings have all been erased from the stones, the production of a
second edition has been rendered impossible.

Price of the set, complete in parts $65.00

Handsomely bound in half morocco, each

plate securely mounted on guards, $7 5.00

Elegantly bound in full Levant morocco,

extra, each pi. securely mounted on guards, $90.00

JUST PUBLISHED.

A List of the Birds of West Ind ies. Including the Bahama Islands
and the Greater and Lesser Antilles, excepting the Islands of Tobago and Trinidad. By
Charles B. Cory, F.L.S., etc. • 1 vol. royal 8vo. Price, $1.00

Any of the above works may be procured from

ESTES & LAURIAT, Boston, Mass.

THE COUES CHECK LIST

OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS,

Second Edition, with a Dictionary of the Scientific Haines.

ONE VOLUME ROYAL OCTAVO, $3.00.

THE STANDARD.

Some Opinions of Reviewers.

The treatment of some of the most essential points which should form the in¬
itial training of the word-constructor and word-expounder is erroneous and mis¬
leading . . . The lack of clear logic, incisive statement, and proper arrangement
in the process of derivation confronts one continually. — A. C. Merriam , in
The Auk.

We need not say that the fine scholarship of Dr. Coues has made this diction¬
ary of birds a rara avis in scientific literature. — JVczv York Herald.

This is a unique feature, rarely attempted in scientific works, and nowhere
else so well done as here. The highest praise must be awarded to Dr. Coues
for the fullness, accuracy and literary elegance with which this part of his work
has heen performed. . . . Three hundred titles are included, which shows cer¬
tainly that the most graceful pen now wielded in American science is also one
of the most active. — The Chicago Dial.

Those who are familiar with the author’s peculiarly felicitous literary style,
as displayed in his ‘Birds of the Colorado Valley,’ and in his numberless essays
and published addresses, will not.be surprised to find that he has accomplished
that rare feat of making a dictionary readable. The happy faculty of adorning
whatever he touches does not fail him even here, the dryest philological techni¬
calities being vivified with the genius of a master of words. — The Washington
Capital.

KEY TO NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS.

Containing a concise account of every species of living and fossil bird at present known on
the Continent north of the boundary line between Mexico and the United States, including
Greenland. Second ed., revised to date and entirely rewritten: with which are incorporated.

GENERAL ORNITHOLOGY:

AN OUTLINE OF THE STRUCTURE AND CLASSIFICATION OF BIRDS; and

FIELD ORNITHOLOGY:

A MANUAL OF COLLECTING, PREPARING, AND PRESERVING BIRDS.

By Elliot Coues, M.A.. M.D., Ph.D., member of the National Academy of Sciences, etc.

PROFUSELY ILLUSTRATED.

The original edition of this standard text-book of Ornithology being entirely out of print,
and still very much in demand, the publishers have spared neither pains or expense in the
preparation of “The New Key,” in which the whole subject is carefully brought down to date.
Coues’ “Key” is too well known as a leading and authoritative treatise to require remark,
having for twelve years held its place as the standard work of reference for professional orni¬
thologists, as well as for students and amateurs.

The amount of matter in this new edition has been nearly quadrupled, and the number of
illustrations, many of them engraved expressly for this edition, has been more than doubled.

Complete in one volume.

Royal Octavo Vellum Cloth .... net $10.00

“ “ Library Joheep .... “ 11-50

“ “ HAP? Itl&R. Lxtra ... “ 13 50

Persons wishing to secure copies should send their orders early, enclosing
the advertised price, and the book will be forwarded, securely wrapped, free
of expense , by the publishers,

ESTES & LAURIAT, 301-305 Washington St.,

Opp. “Old South.” Boston, Mass.

(\

A