CeO E WI Vu wwia A We “yey evu very” “k no VENT AA? AL ae vVevY or ~ ey YF fe pe bo rato sch nd Net ENA Aah a ener OTN GG Vow : ew 3 ou. Was Ww Ny, 4 ay ae . } ; ‘ “Vy 7 PO’ v ~ Re awh) ore, z MA Ge) 4 idiidiaits th 5 ie Ne Sed j too) DY DH NG RE SIG ERY BRIN 7 So i Sel ad igh: hae tee et Nae, SES Pe BOS i) hy Ww \ Nd | Ah Ne! fiNAL A; gY thé) Lf , ii ry Ne ie FSo1 1) Neg ke we fy ae "J re. < My LW \/ V v WS Ned Nd ; 2 q 4 we } GANS: SY jah \\~ ¥ \ Be BN W ft ie AeA se ~ hye re BS ae & yu Seywg aS ACN Se vas PAA Ly Se Wi a PCO rath” ACFE, wv Jv w i aan Ihe 5 : MWY aa” wid iv : ila OY MR \/ REL VANS Ve Gna aN POA) bh Tig VS dal PRR wee J Me oy ist we: ' OP ws ti TW vd - vhs is) OW WW) vw 4 jae ww AO ARO bd Ye wy se Dd) te. \/ ww rw? | ~ ; e Z : 4 oe € 3 “i “aguvaalvd Weel eH VvyyvviNwv iy Vs )} vl VV w ed or j , ww a 1 SN, R wm. VS we v vvVy LAA Aad v Mo Mi OLp SERIES, CONTINUATION OF THE NEw SERIES, NVOT-L XLT: BULLETIN OF THE NUTTALL ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB VoL. IV ‘The Auk’ 4 Quarterly Journal of Ornithology EDITOR, SEVEN ASSOCIATE EDITORS, ELLIOTT COUES, ROBERT RIDGWAY, WILLIAM BREWSTER, AND MONTAGUE CHAMBERLAIN VOLUME IV PUBLISHED FOR The American Ornithologists’ Union NEW YORK L. Ss. FOSTER y 1887 CONTENTS OF VOLUME IV. NUMBER. I. PAGE Notes oF A Bird CATCHER. wy Frederic A. Lucas 5 Mee cy er A New Vireo FROM GRAND CaAyMAN, WEsT INDIES. By Charles B. Cory ee Rae. TO THE “CATALOGUE ¢ OF THE BIRDS OF "KANSAS. By NV. S. Goss : List oF THE MipsumMeER Birps OF THE " Kowak RIVER, Nortu- ERN ALASKA. By Charles H. Townsend : : SUMMER BIRDS OF THE BRAS D’OR REGION OF Cape BRETON IsLaAnp, Nova Scotia. By Fonathan Dwight, Fr. ON THE AVI-FAUNA OF PINAL CouUNTY, WiTH REMARKS ON Some BIRDS OF PIMA AND GILA COUNTIES, ARIZONA. By W. £. D. Scott 3 Some UNDESCRIBED PLuMAGES oF NortTH AMERICAN BIRDS. ‘By George B. Sennett DESCRIPTIONS OF TWO New SUBSPECIES OF Trrmice FROM 1 Texas. By George B. Sennett . FurTHER NOTES ON THE GENUS yore By Leonhard Stej- neger THE REDISCOVERY ¢ or BACHMAN’S ; WARBLER, Helminthophila bach- manne (Aud. )s IN THE UNITED STATES. ee George N. Law- rence THE BIRDS OF THE West Inpres, INCLUDING THE BAHAMA IsLANDs, THE GREATER AND THE LESSER ANTILLES, EXCEPTING THE IsLANDS OF TOBAGO AND TRINIDAD. By Charles B. Cory THE SENSE OF SMELL IN CATHARTES AuRA. By /ra Sayles FourTH MEETING OF THE AMERICAN O © *HOLOGISTS’ UNION RECENT LITERATURE. Pleska on the Birds of the Kola Peninsula, 61; W. E. Brooks on the Genus Acanthis, 63; Stejneger on Japanese Woodpeckers, 63 ; Stejneger on the British Marsh-Tit, 64; Stejneger on a Lost Spe- cies’ of Murrelet, 65; Ferrari-Perez on the Birds of Mexico, 65; Ridgway on a Melanistic Phase of the Broad-winged Hawk, 66; Ridgway on the Species of the Genus Emfzdonax, 66; Cory on Birds from several little-known Islands of the West Indies, 66; Minor Ornithological Publications, 66; Publications Received, 69. GENERAL NOTES. Occurrence of Cory’s She -w 2r (Puffinus borealis) and Several Spe- cies of Jaegers in Large Nu bers in the Vicinity of Gayhead, Mass., during the Autumn of 1886. 71; Phenicopterus ruber asa South Carolina Bird, 72; Occurrence of the Florida Gallinule at iv Contents of Volume IV. Springfield, Mass., 72; Wilson’s Phalarope (Steganopus tricolor) in Rhode Island, 73; Occurrence of Phalaropus lobatus at Syra- cuse, N. Y., 73; A Fern-eating Woodcock, 73; A Further Note on Colinus ridgwayt, 74; A Black Gryfalcon (Falco rusticolus obso- Zetus from Maine, 75; The Golden Eagle in Massachusetts, 75; A Singularly marked Specimenof Sphyrafpicus thyrotdeus, 75 ; Occur- rence of Calcartus ornatus in Maine, 76; An Addition to the Or- nithology of South Carolina, 76; Thé Object of the Shrike in Im- paling its Prey, 77; Additional Occurrences of the Connecticut Warbler in Maine, 77; The Brown Thrush laying in the Nest of the Wood Thrush, 78; Capture of three Rare Birds near Hartford, Conn., 78; Piranga rubriceps and Tringa fuscicollis in Califor- nia, 79. CORRESPONDENCE. Scarcity of Adult Birds in Autumn, 79; Classification of the Macrochi- res, 8o. NOTES AND NEWS. Ornithologists and Taxidermists, 82; The Ridgway Ornithological Club, 83; The A. O. U. Committee on Bird Protection, 84; Orni- thological Explorations, 84. NUMBER II. PAGE. ADDITIONS TO THE BIRDS OF VENTURA CouNTY, CALIFORNIA. By FonGe Cooper ie | ae. DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SPECIES OF RHAMPHOCINCLUS FROM Sr. Lucia, West INpies. Sy Charles B. Cory : A List oF THE Birps CoLLECTED BY Mr. B. W. RicHARDSON, IN THE ISLAND OF MARTINIQUE, WeEsT INDIES. By Charles B. Cory |: 5 5 aie ee te orth THe NEw ENGLAND GLossy IBISES OF » 1850. By F. C. Browne A List oF THE SUMMER BIRDS OF THE PRESIDENTIAL RANGE OF THE WHITE Mountains, N.H. By Arthur P. Chadbourne THE BirDs OF THE WEsT INDIES, INCLUDING THE BAHAMA ISLANDS, THE GREATER AND THE LESSER ANTILLES, EXCEPTING THE ISLANDs OF TOBAGO AND TRINIDAD. By Charles B. Cory .« ADDITIONAL NOTES ON THE BIRDS OF PUEBLO CouNTY, COLORADO. By Charles Wickliffe Beckham : AucGust BIRDS OF THE CHILHOWEE Mounrarys, “TENNESSEE. “By F. W. Langdon : SomE RaRE FLORIDA Biens. “By W. E. ‘D. Sroz Tue PRESENT CONDITION OF SOME OF THE BIRD ROOKERIES OF THE GuLF Coast oF FLoripA. By W. EZ. D. Scott . SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES ON THE GeNus ACANTHIS. By Leonhard Stejneger : Turrr New Forms or Nortu AMERICAN. Birbs. By William DY CUSED eee SEONG! ale cle ts a area rie 85 94 95 97 100 144 145 eS a Contents of Volume IV. RECENT LITERATURE. Sclater’s Catalogue of the Ceerebide, Tanagride, and Icteride, 149; Conclusion of the Great Work on the Nests and Eggs of the Birds of Ohio, 150; Ridgway’s Nomenclature of Colors and Ornitholo- gist’s Compendium, 152; Bryant on the Ornithology of Gauda- lupe Island, 154; Ralph and Bagg on the Birds of Oneida County, N. Y., 154; Platt on the Birds of Meriden, Conn., 154; Maynard on ‘Five New Species of Birds from the Bahamas,’ 155; Shufeldt’s Contributions to Science, 155; Stejneger ‘On the Status of Syxth- liborhamphus wumizusume as a North American Bird,’ 155; Ridg- way on New Species of American Birds, etc., 156; Publications Received, 156. GENERAL NOTES. The Common Murre (Uréa frozlle) and the Razor-billed Auk (Alca torda) on the New England Coast, 158; Capture of the Razor- billed Auk in Norfolk, Virginia, 158; Megalestris skua, 158; More News of Ardea wuerdemanni, 159; Ardea egretta in Niagara County, N. Y., 159; Further Notes on the Masked Bob-white (Colinus ridgwayt), 159; Capture of a Third Specimen of the Short-tailed Hawk (Buteo brachyurus) in Florida, 160; A Third New England Specimen of Swainson’s Hawk (Buteo swatnsonz), 160; A Migration of Hawks at Germantown, Pa., 161; The Saw- whet Owl in the District of Columbia, 161; The Imperial Wood- pecker (Campephilus imperialis) in Northern Sonora, 161; The Coppery-tailed Trogon (Trogon ambiguus) breeding in Southern Arizona, 161; Capture of a Fish Crow (Corvus osstfragus) at Wareham, Mass., 162; Occurrence of Agelatus phaniceus on the West Coast of England, 162; The Redpolls of Massachusetts, 143 ; Vireo solitarius alticola in Tennessee, 164; Another Specimen of the Prothonotary Warbler in Massachusetts, 164; An overlooked Speciinen of Bachman’s Warbler, 165; Remarks on Four Exam- ples of the Yellow-throated Warbler from Chester County, S. C., 165; Discovery of the Nest and Eggs of the Western Warbler (Dendroica occidentalis), 166; What Constitutes a Full Set of Eggs? 167. CORRESPONDENCE. The Camera and Field Ornithology, 168; Classification of the Mac- rochires, 170; The Sense of Smell in Cathartes aura, 172. NOTES AND NEWS. Obituary—Dr. John M. Wheaton, 174; Economic Ornithology and Mammalogy, 174; American Museum of Natural History, 175 ; Or- nithological Publications, 175; Antedated works on Natural His- tory, 176; Colorado Ornithology, 176; McIlwraith’s ‘Birds of On- tario,’ 176. vi Contents of Volume IV. NUMBER III. PAGE DESCRIPTIONS OF SIx SUPPOSED NEW SPECIES OF BIRDS FROM THE ISLANDS OF OLD PROVIDENCE AND ST. ANDREWS, CARIBBEAN SEA. By Charles B. Cory . . athe A List oF THE BIRDS TAKEN BY Mr. Roserr HENDERSON, IN THE ISLANDS OF OLD PROVIDENCE AND ST. ANDREWS, CARIB- BEAN SEA. By Charles B. Cory. 3 shes eA Brrps oF Tom GREEN AND CoNCcHO Counties, Texas. By Wil- liam Lloyd : Sigel wat THE RED-HEADED WoopreckER A HoARDER. “By OP. flay . ON THE AVI-FAUNA OF PINAL COUNTY, WITH REMARKS ON SOME Birps oF PIMA AND GILA Counties, ARIZONA. By W. £. D. Scott. With Annotations by ¥. A. Allen. TU AUN wale ts har caae Rare Birps oF NORTHEASTERN NEW BRUNSWICK. By Philip aoe Fin, THE PRESENT ConprIrion OF ‘Some OF THE Birp ROOKERIES OF THE GuLF CoAsT oF FLoripa. By W. £. D. Scott Tue BirpDs OF THE WEST INDIES, INCLUDING THE BAHAMA ISLANDS, THE GREATER AND THE LESSER ANTILLES, EXCEPTING THE ISLANDS OF TOBAGO AND TRINIDAD. By Charles B. Cory. A New RAcE OF THE SHARP-TAILED SPARROW (Ammodramus cau- dacutus). By Fohnathan Dwight, Fr. Be ed Se GA OBSERVATIONS IN WESTERN Nortu CAROLINA MounrTAINS IN 1886. By George B. Sennett : : DESCRIPTION OF A “NEw Fuethta FROM OLD PROVIDENCE ISLAND. By Charles B. Cory RECENT LITERATURE. The New Canadian Ornithology, 245; MclIlwraith’s Birds of Ontario, 246; Stejneger on the Species of Pardalotus, 249; Stejneger on two European Thrushes, 249; Stejneger on Japanese Birds, 249; Blakiston on the Water-Birds of Japan, 250; Wells and Law- rence on the Birds of Grenada, W. I., 250; Ridgway Ornithologi- cal Club, 251; Publications Received, 251. GENERAL NOTES. The Double-crested Cormorant near Springfield, Mass., 253; The Florida Gallinule in Nova Scotia, 253; The Middletown, Conn., Glossy Ibis of 1850, 253; Geococcyx californianus—A Correction 2543 Hummingbirds feeding their Young on Insects, 255; Otoco- vis alpestris praticola in Chester County, 5S. Cay 255 (Clankers Nutcracker (Picicorvus columbianus) in the Bristol Bay Region, Alaska, 255; Clarke’s Nutcracker from the Kowak River, Alaska, 256; The Canada Jay in Southern Vermontin Summer, 256; Yan- thocephalus xanthocephalus in Connecticut, 256; Yellow-headed Blackbird (Xazthocephalus xanthocephalus) in Maine, 256; The Baltimore Oriole (/cferus galéula) in Nova Scotia, 256; Occur- rence of the Evening Grosbeak (Coccothraustes vespertina) at To- ronto, Canada, 256; Occurrence of the Evening Grosbeak in Fulton County, Ky., 257; Winter Plumage of Leucosticte austra- Zs, 257; Note on Spizella monticola ochracea Brewst., 258; Sfz- zella pussilla wintering near Hartford, Conn., 259; Change of Contents of Volume IV. Winter Habitat in the Grass Finch, 259; A Song Sparrow winter- ing in Eastern Maine, 260; The Song Sparrow in New Brunswick in Winter, 260; Unusual Nesting-site of the Song Sparrow, 260; The Sharp-tailed Sparrow (Ammodramus caudacutus) in a Fresh- water Marsh, 261; Nesting of the Hudsonian Chickadee (Parus hudsonicus), 261; Another Addition to the Avi-fanna of South Carolina, 261; Another Specimen of Bachman’s Warbler (Helmin- thophila bachmant), 262; Additional Specimens of Bachman’s and Swainson’s Warblers, obtained by Mr. Chas. S. Galbraith, in the Spring of 1887, 262; Birds laying their Eggs in the Nests of other birds, 263; New Species of Winter Birds in New Brunswick, 264; Additions to Mr. Drew’s List of the Birds of Colorado, 264. CORRESPONDENCE. Individual Variation in the Skeletons of Birds, and other Matters, 265 ; Scarcity of Adult Birds in Autumn, 268; The ‘Proceedings’ of the U. S. National Museum, 270. NOTES AND NEWS. American Museum of Natural History, 270; The late Dr. Wheaton’s Collection of Birds, 272; Ornithological Publications, 272; De- struction of Herons in Florida, 272. vil NUMBER IV. PAGE Tue PresENT CONDITION OF SOME OF THE BIRD ROOKERIES OF THE GuLF Coast oF FLoripa. By W. £.D. Scott . Pedy fe) Tue Pine Fincu (Sfinus Pinus) BREEDING AT CORNWALL-ON- Besos We M-. By: GAs Alvene | s., jell n/p pee lop Sten a 204: THe AMERICAN CROSSBILL (Loxia curvirostra minor) IN LARGE NUMBERS NEAR CHARLESTON, S. C. By Arthur T. Wayne 287 Birps ofr Tom GREEN AND ConcHo Counties, Texas. By Wul- Ret aen Teysai ee 5 6 SO ae aap eciet ae oe ohn 208 ADDITIONS TO THE AVI-FAUNA OF Bayou SarA, La. By Charles Wieebife Beckham 9 <2 0. el eh ie cana es Ue 299 Tur SIGNIFICANCE OF CERTAIN PHASES IN THE GENUS Helmin- thophila. By Spencer Trotter, M.D... +. ++. .+ + + 308 Tue Brrps oF THE West INDIES, INCLUDING THE BAHAMA ISLANDS, THE GREATER AND THE LESSER ANTILLES, EXCEPTING THE IsLANDS OF TOBAGO AND TRINIDAD. By Charles B. Cory . 311 SumMEeR Birps oF SANTA Cruz ISLAND, CALIFORNIA. By Elz Re rrmeye lao prek ce ay mee eR eis allel 2h ee gee Gee DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SUBSPECIES OF JuNCO. By Henry K. Coale. 330 ORNITHOLOGICAL CurRrosITIES.—A HAWK WITH NINE TOES, AND A BoBoLINK WITH Spurs ON Irs WINGS. By Heury K. Coale . 337 RECENT LITERATURE. Ridgway’s ‘Manual of North American Birds,’ 333; Olphe-Galliard’s Ornithology of Western Europe, 336; Minor Ornithological Pub- lications, 337; Publications Received, 342. vill Contents of Volnme TV. GENERAL NOTES. Merganser americanus breeding in New Mexico, 344; The Clapper Rail again in Massachusetts, 344; Jctinta misstssippiensis and Hgialitis ntvosa nesting in Southern Central Kansas, 344; The Merlin (Falco @salon) in Greenland, 345; Notes on Melanerpes Sormicivorus batrdi in New Mexico, 345; Egg-laying extraor- dinary in Colaptes auratus, 346; The Range of Quzscalus major, 346; The Lapland Longspur about Washington, D. C., 347; Descriptions of Two New Races of Pyrrhuloxia sinuata Bonap., 347; Helinata swainsonii near Chester C. H., S. C., 347; Another Bachman’s Warbler in Florida, 348; Additional Captures of Hed- minthophila leucobronchialis, 348; Helminthophila leucobronchilis in New Jersey, 349; The Canadian Warbler breeding in Pike County, Pa., 349; On the Correct Subspecific Title of Baird’s Wren (No. 7194, A. O. U. Check List), 349; Central New York Notes, 350; On the Western Trend of Certain Fall Migrants in Eastern Maine, 351; A Bird Scare, 351. CORRESPONDENCE. The Dermo-Tensor Patagii Muscle, 353; A Protest, 357; The Metric System, 357- NOTES AND NEWS. Obituary — Spencer Fullerton Baird, 358; A. O. U. and ‘Auk’ announcements, 359; Proposed Monument to Audubon, 359; Ornithological Work, in Progress. 359; Annual Report of the Ornithologist to the Department of Agriculture for 1886, 360. INDEX : : 3 : : : é : : ; 5 2 361 CONTENTS OF VoLUME IV : : , ; : ; : ; iii THEY AAI : Aw OAR THRE OU RNAL. OF ORNDEROLOGY. VOL. IV. JANUARY, 1887. No. I. NOTES OF .A BIRD CATCHER. BY FREDERIC A. LUCAS. Amonc the few pastimes of those who ‘‘go down to the sea in ships” and ‘‘do business in [the] great waters” of the south- ern hemisphere is that of fishing for the sea birds that abound in the vicinity of Cape Horn and the Cape of Good Hope. The birds that will take a hook are limited to a few species of Alba- trosses and Petrels, some, like the Whale Bird (Prox turtur), which are extremely abundant, keeping at a respectful distance, while others, like the Giant Skua, steadily refuse to take a bait under any circumstances. First and foremost is the Wandering Albatross (Diomedea exulans), whose great size and cautious behavior makes his capture the crowning triumph of the avian angler. It is commonly stated that the Albatross takes a bait readily, but although this may have formerly been true, it is now a very misleading statement. The Albatross has undoubtedly learned wisdom by experience, and just as the grizzly bear is said by Mr. Roosevelt to have become more timid since the in- troduction of improved rifles, so, year by year, the Albatross has grown more and more distrustful of anything with a line attached to it. During four voyages I found that only the younger birds could be caught easily, those of the first year the most readily, those of the second less so, the difficulty increasing regularly with age. Like all other sea birds, Albatrosses can be most easily en- ticed into biting during tempestous weather when, having been 2 Lucas, Notes of a Bird Catcher. [ January prevented for days from procuring their regular amount of food, the pangs of hunger overcome their natural distrust. The Albatross has a deliberate way that accords well with his ample proportions and grave countenance, and when a bait is spied does not hasten to plant himself beside it like a greedy little Cape Pigeon, but usually takes a contemplative turn before settling down for a thorough inspection of the tempting dainty. If the investigation proves satisfactory he may condescend to bite, but it not infrequently happens that by the time this conclusion is arrived at the end of the line is reached also, and the morsel of fat pork is suddenly snatched away leaving the bird looking about him with a much aggrieved and puzzled expression. There the Albatross will often sit for five minutes before rising to follow the departing vessel, possibly to go through with pre- cisely the same performance. Should he, however, be hooked, the spirit of opposition is aroused within him, and sitting upright, with big webbed feet thrust firmly forward, the Albatross beats the water vigorously with his wings, or holds them stiffly ex- tended in an effort to free himself from the hook by mere dead weight. The strain of such a bird pulling at the end of a hundred and fifty feet of line is considerable ; but so long as he pursues these tactics his capture is pretty well assured. For the Albatross is not ‘hooked’ in the ordinary sense of the word, but is simply held by the hook catching in the curved bill. So long, therefore, as the strain on the line is steady, so long will the hook hold; once slackened, it drops by its own weight, and if, as sometimes happens, the bird flies towards the ship he is soon free. Like the majority of sea birds, the Albatross cannot rise from a vessel’s deck, but waddles about as helpless as if wing-clipped. As regards size, the largest of four measured by me a two year old bird—was to! 4" in extent and weighed about fourteen pounds. I have known one to weigh eighteen pounds, and have been told of specimens which actually measured 12, 13, and 15 feet from tip to tip. Is it not possible that it requires as many years for this bird to attain its full size as to put on the adult plumage? Certain it is that the largest specimens are the whitest and most wary. And I would suggest that melanistic examples of Dzome- dea exulans may not be infrequent, for twice on one voyage large, dark colored birds were observed which, from their size, 1887. | Lucas, Notes of a Bird Catcher. 3 could have been no other than this species. These were not young of the year but sooty colored, like a vastly exaggerated Giant Fulmar. Unfortunately I did not improve my opportu- nities to observe the food of the Albatross, but the stomachs of two that were opened contained partially digested fragments of cuttlefish (?) and a small quantity of feathers. They have been seen to devour the castaway body of a com- panion that had been caught and skinned, and to tear up and eat a large ling (Haloporphyrus). Doubtless anything that can be eaten does not come amiss. The farthest north I have any personal record of seeing the Wandering Albatross is 30° S., 24° W. The Molly-Hawk, or Molly-Mawk (Diéomedea melanophrys), and the Goney (2. calminata) are more easily taken than their larger relative, but the Sooty Albatross (Phebetria fuliginosa) —in the ordinary track of vessels at least—is wary in the ex- treme, and, although it will approach so near that the eye is dis- tinctly visible, steadily refuses to even look at a bait. Déo- medea melanophrys was seen occasionally in the harbor of Valparaiso. Most knowing of all Petrels is the Cape Hen, or Giant Fulmar (Osstfraga gigantea). Ifa loose piece of fat pork was thrown out, it was immediately snatched up, but even during heavy gales it was quite impossible for me to coax one to touch a piece with hook and line attached. Where the tempting morsel was large the Cape Hen would indeed swoop towards it as if about to alight, but caution invariably got the better of appetite, and I am ready to take oath that these birds actually winked as they sailed by. In its movements, and especially when alighting, the Giant Ful- mar has an uncouth, angular look about it that is very amusing. The species not uncommonly ranges as far north as 12° south latitude, for several were seen and two shot at the Chincha Islands during the month of November. One perfect albino was seen. presenting a strange contrast to the others by which it was accompanied. Majaqueus eqguinoctialis is apparently not common off Cape Horn and of the few seen fewer still could be induced to take a hook. Those that did so invariably escaped by reversing the tactics of the Albatross and flying towards the ship instead of in- dulging in worse than useless opposition, It being simply 4 Lucas, Wotes of a Bird Catcher. [ January impossible to pull in line as fast as a bird could fly, the hook always dropped from the bird’s beak. The Southern Fulmar (/admarus glactalotdes) is not un- common off Cape Horn, and is readily taken. It bites freely, and fights well when captured, scratching, flapping, and biting ina very vigorous manner. The quarrelsome disposition of this bird at times becomes a drawback to his capture, for a Fulmar will frequently devote his time and energies to driving away the Cape Pigeons sooner than to take the bait himself. Thalassotca antarctica is about as common, or uncommon, as the preceding species, and is also comparatively easy to cap- ture. As arule both these species keep farther from ships than the abundant and tame Cape Pigeon (Daption capensis). Of the species herein noted, 7halassotca antarctica appears to be the most exclusively southern in its range. Going southwards Daption made its appearance May 16, /almarus May 20, and Thalassoica not until June 21. The well known Cape Pigeon (Dafption capensts) is usually met with in the Atlantic near latitude 35° %S., or ‘‘off the River ‘Plate,’” as it is termed in the vernacular. On the Paci- fic coast it seems to range much farther north, for in July we left them outside the harbor of Valparaiso, and in September they were common in latitude rr° south. Captain Carey, of the ship ‘Calhoun,’ informed me that a few followed that vessel nearly to Acapulco, 16° N. The Cape Pigeons are always hungry and it is an easy matter to take any desired number of them. Ordinarily they are set free after a short detention, but occasionally they are killed, and after parboiling made into a pot pie. Concerning the flavor thereof I cannot now speak positively, as it has been many years since my last taste of Cape Pigeon pie. This species has an extremely dis- agreeable habit, shared by many of its relatives, of vomiting up when captured a thick, oily, and ill-smelling liquid, so that it is necessary to handle this bird with some caution. The Cape Pigeon caz dive although it very rarely does so, usually gathering its food from the surface of the water. Once or twice I have noticed them dipping up the water as if drinking, but this may not have been the case. Like the other Petrels, but to a still greater extent, the Cape Pigeons delight in assembling around the contents of the cook’s swill pail. Ifthere be nothing but dish-water, sufficient only to '1887.] = + Lucas, Notes of a Brrd Catcher. 5 make a smooth, oily spot, down will go every bird near, and there they will sit for five, or even ten minutes gazing at one another and apparently waiting, like Micawber, for something to turn up. My note book says that in February, going east, we saw no Cape Pigeons, the Petrels seen then being probably G?tstrelata, which, although following in our wake, kept ata considerable distance. Last and least (in size at all events) is the busy Mother Carey’s Chicken, never at rest but perpetually fluttering over the water, ever and anon pattering over the surface yet not even alighting to feed. Once, and only once, did I observe these little birds take a bait, and that was when a heavy gale of several days’ duration had apparently rendered them perfectly ravenous. * The following method can be vouched for as very successful in capturing the Stormy Petrels. To one end of a spool of stout, black thread fasten a bit of wood just large enough to make a drag that will keep the thread taut when towed behind a vessel. To this attach at intervals of from four to six feet threads with a small hook or bent pin at the end, graduating the length accord- ing to the distance they will be from the drag. These will hang from the main thread like droppers from a leader and the little Petrels flying to and fro in the vessel’s wake will sooner or later strike some of the threads and become entangled. A few words in conclusion on the question as to whether or not the birds seen in a ship’s wake are the same day after day. It seems to me that Capt. Hutton is correct in his opinion that while they may be it is doubtful if they are. In exceptional cases, as, for example, the birds which followed the ship ‘Cal- houn’ nearly to Acapulco, it would appear that the birds were undoubtedly a small flock enticed beyond their usual range. Personally, I can see no objection to the theory that the Albatross and other birds can fly for several days in succession without rest, the more that their easy sailing flight requires the minimum of exertion. Moreover, I have on moonlight nights occasionally observed birds circling around the ship, and on two occasions birds were picked up on deck between 4 and 8 a.m. One of these was a small Puffinws, the other an Oceanodroma(?). I * This has been my own experience with these little birds, but Col. Goss tells me that on the Grand Banks they will bite eagerly at a hook baited with a bit of cod liver. 6 Cory ox a New Vireo from Grand Cayman, W. I. [January do see serious objections to the theory that sea birds regu- larly rest upon the water at night, in the long and heavy gales so prevalent off Cape Horn, which would seem to make such a pro- ceeding a physical impossibility. And how is it with the little Stormy Petrels which have apparently a constitutional aversion to sitting in the water? It is doubtful ifthe Albatross habitually follows any one vessel for a considerable length of time, while the reverse is probably true of the Cape Pigeon. While the amount of ‘pickings’ from a single ship would make quite an item in the daily fare of several Cape Pigeons, they would count for little with one Albatross. This latter bird is much given to making vast stretches back and forth over the ocean, and even while near a ship continually circles round about in search of food. That an Albatross caz seea vessel distinctly from an elevation of a thousand feet is doubtless true, but judging from my own experience this bird rarely ascends to such a height, for I zever observed it more than two or three hundred feet above the ocean. Is it not more probable that the bird meets with vessels while quartering over the ground as just described and stays by them until drawn off in search of food? Contrary to what might be supposed, it is during calms that birds become detached from the ship they may have been following. At such times the Albatross is especially given to resting upon the water, from which it cannot then rise without much flapping of wings and splashing of water as it runs along the surface until it has acquired the necessary momentum to start upon its customary graceful flight. The smaller birds follow the example of their larger relatives, and, scattered here and there by twos and threes, alternately quarrel and preen their plumage until the breeze springs up, and with it everything once more starts into renewed activity. A NEW VIREO FROM GRAND CAYMAN, WEST INDIES. BY CHARLES B. CORY. THE box of birds lately received from Grand Cayman, or Great Cayman, contained still another new bird from that most interesting island, which I propose to call se 1887.] Goss, Additions to the Birds of Kansas. “wT Vireo caymanensis, sp. nov. Sp. CHar.—(g Coll. C. B. Cory, No. 6273.) Upper parts dull olive, brightest on the rump and upper tail-coverts ; crown darker than the back, showing a slight brownish tinge; underparts dull yellowish- white, faintly tinged with olive on the sides and flanks ; upper throat dull white ; a dull white superciliary stripe from the upper mandible; a stripe of slaty brown from the upper mandible passing through and back of the eye; quills dark brown, narrowly edged with dull green on the outer webs, most of the inner feathers showing a white edging on the basal portion of the inner webs; tail dull olive brown, the feathers showing green on the edges; upper mandible dark; lower mandible pale; feet slaty brown. Length, 5.40; wing, 2.75; tail, 2.25; tarsus, .75; bill, .52. Hasitat. Island of Grand Cayman, West Indies. Several specimens of Sezurus noveboracensis were received from Grand Cayman, having been taken there in August. A few birds were also sent from Little Cayman; they were Polzopiti/a cerulea (Linn.), Dezxdroica dominica (Linn.), Vireo calidris barbatulus (Cab.), Huetheta olivacea (Gmel.), Hlatinea marti- nica? (Linn.), Zyrannus dominicensis (Gmel.),anda Zeniada. The latter appears to be somewhat different from Z. sfadicea, but a larger series is necessary to determine if the comparatively slight differences are constant. It is of a somewhat paler brown, and shows a decided slaty tinge on the flanks; the metallic re- flections on the feathers of the neck appear different in color, being paler and less in extent. It is possible that the two birds are not separable specifically, but in case future investigation should prove them to be distinct I would propose the name of Zenaida richardson for the Little Cayman bird. DOPITIONS LO THE CATALOGUE OF THE BIRDS OF KANSAS. BY N. S. GOSS. THE following observations have been made, and notes gathered, since the publication, May 1, 1886, of my ‘Revised Catalogue of the Birds of Kansas’: 8 Goss, Additions to the Birds of Kansas. [ January Podilymbus podiceps (Z/zz.). Pirp-BiLLED Grespe.—June 5, 1886, I found these birds breeding in a pond in Meade County. I shot a young bird about two-thirds grown and saw several others, and caught a glimpse, in the rushes, of an old bird followed by little chicks, not more than a day or two old. Phalaropus tricolor ( Vze¢//.). Witson’s PHALAROPE.—- June 8, 1886, I found three pairs of these birds breeding on marshy ground, bordering a slough or pond of Crooked Creek, Meade County, and I therefore enter the species as an occasional summer resident in Western Kansas ; quite common throughout the State during migration. Nest on the ground, usually on hummocks, quite deeply excavated, and lined with leaves from the old dead grasses ; eggs, three or four—usually four; ground color, cream to ashy drab, rather thickly but irregularly blotched with varying shades of brown to black. The female is larger and brighter in color than the male, but from limited observations of the birds Iam led to think certain writers are mistaken in reporting that the females arrive first and do all the courting, but leave the work of nest- making, incubation, and the rearing of the young tothe males. I have never been so fortunate as to find either of the birds upon the nest; but certainly, both appear equally watchful and solicitous, circling around and croaking as one approaches their nests, or near their young (grayish little fellows that leave the nest as soon as hatched). The earliest arrival noticed in the State was at Neosho Falls, April 29, 1879. In this flock, as in all others seen at or about the time of their arrival, the sexes appeared to be about equally divided, and I am inclined to think further examin- ation will prove the birds to be joint workers in the hatching and rearing of their young. With a view to removing all doubts, I trust all naturalists who are so fortunate as to be upon their breed- ing grounds during the breeding season will carefully note and report their observations. fEgialitis nivosa (Cass.). Snowy PLover.—Summer res- ident on the salt plains along the Cimarron River, in the Indian Territory, the northern limits of which extend across the line into southwestern Comanche County, Kansas. Quite common ; arrives about the first of May ; begins laying the last of May. Nest, a depression worked out in the sand; evos, three, 1.20% -90, pale olive drab, approaching a light clay color, with a green- ish tint, rather evenly and thickly marked with irregularly-shaped 1887. Goss, Additions to the Birds of Kansas. 9 ragged-edged splashes and dots of dark or blackish brown. (See Auk, IIT, 1886, p. 409.) Colinus virginianus texanus (Zawr.). TEXAN BoB-wuHiTe. —This bird is entered inthe A. O. U. ‘Check-List’ as ‘*Hab. Southern and Western Texas, north to Western Kansas.” On receipt of the ‘List’, I wrote to Mr. Robert Ridgway, a member of the committee that prepared the list, to know when and where in the western part of the State the birds had been taken. In reply he says: ‘‘Colinus virginianus texanus, as a bird of Kansas, rests on two specimens, adult females, in the National Museum, labelled, respectively, No. 34425, Republican Fork, May 27, 1864, Dr. Elliott Coues, U.S. A.; and No. 34425, same locality, date, and collector. (See Hist. N. Am. B., III, p. 474.) These specimens agree exactly with typical examples of ¢exanus 3° as compared with vzrg7nzzanus proper.” Since the early settle- ment of the State I have known through report of military men and hunters that Bob-whites were occasionally seen on the Cim- arron River. I never met with them there, and had taken it for granted that they were C. vzrgznzanus; but as the birds were found in Western Kansas long before our Bob-whites, in follow- ing up the settlements, reached the central portion of the State, I am now inclined to think further examination may prove the western bird of the plains to be variety ¢exanws, and that they reached that portion of the country by following north on the old military trails. I have written to several persons in that region for specimens, but as yet have no reply. Empidonax pusillus traillii (Awd.). Tratii’s Ftry- CATCHER.—Mr. George F. Brenninger, Beattie, Marshall Coun- ty, has kindly sent me for examination a nest containing three eggs, taken July 17, 1886, in a thick second growth of timber, on the bank of a small creek at Beattie, and writes that he found in the same vicinity quite a number of nests. The earliest found, with a full set of eggs, was June 14. In the Goss Ornithological Collection is a female which I shot at Neosho Falls, July 26, 1881, and I have occasionally noticed the birds during thg sum- mer months, and have no doubt but they will prove to be quite a common summer resident. I congratulate Mr. Brenninger on the find, and thank him for calling my attention to it. The nests are usually placed in upright forks of the small limbs of trees and bushes, from four to ten feet from the ground. most common Junco I met with. I secured a large series, which exhibits considerable variation in size and coloration. 103. Pipilo fuscus mesoleucus. Although not observed at all in 1883, I found them quite common here in October, 1886, in suitable stony places. One was shot within the city limits, and I saw another in the yard of a hotel, but they prefer the rocky a@rroyos that are to be found along the Arkansas River and other streams. At a quarrymen’s camp, eleven miles west of Pueblo, they were particularly abundant, and so tame that they came and went about the shanties with as much fearlessness as domestic fowls. Their alarm or call-note seemed to me very much like that of the Song Sparrow. All of those collected were very difficult to preserve in good form on account of the loose way in which the feathers were attached to the skin. 104. Petrochelidon lunifrons. The bird itself was not observed, but a ‘colony’ of their nests was seen attached to some limestone cliffs near the same camp above referred to. 105. Lanius ludovicianus excubitorides. Through an oversight this bird was not mentioned in any former paper. It was rather common in the spring of 1883, but during my last visit only two were seen. 106. Helminthophila celata. But one specimen of this Warbler was obtained. It was shot October 8, out of a party of three or four which were flitting about the top of a large cottonwood just within the city limits. It was a ‘bird of the year,’ with the orange crown showing quite distinctly. No others were observed. 107. Sylvania pusilla pileolata. Two of these birds were taken; one on October 5, ina clump of willows, and another on the 20th, in the same place. I was much surprised to find the Black-cap here as late as the 20th; for we had had several severe frosts prior to that date, enough to have totally de- stroyed the food of this insect-eating species. It was in fine plumage, and there was no external indication that it had been incapacitated for migra- tion by wounds, moult, etc, 108. Salpinctes obsoletus. First seen October 6 in some rocky arroyos, eight or ten miles from Pueblo, where one was collected and six or eight more were seen. I again saw one at the same place on October 27. One of the shyest birds I have ever met with. tog. Certhia familiaris americana. One was captured and another seen on October 24. 110. Parus atricapillus septentrionalis. This Chickadee was encoun- tered but twice; on October 12, when two were shot out of a flock of eight or ten P. gambelz, with which they seemed to be on the best of terms, and again on November 2, when three were found together in a thicket. The note is rather faint, and not much like that of the eastern bird. t11. Regulus calendula. Observed upon two or three occasions. Two were shot, a male and a female, both ‘birds of the year,’ and the former, as 124 BreckHam on Birds observed at Pueblo. Colorado. {April I expected (see Pr. U. S. Nat. Mus. 1885, pp. 625-628), had a fully devel- oped red crown-patch. 112. Turdus aonalaschkze auduboni. Three representatives of this species were collected, October 5,6, and15. No others were seen. Additional Notes on Species mentioned in the former paper. Rallus virginianus. Only one individual seen—in a marsh, November 3. ZEgialitis vocifera. Rather uncommon, Falco sparverius. But three or four were seen. Colaptes cafer. Common. Dryobates pubescens gairdneri. Not common. Otocoris alpestris arenicola. Very abundant. In my former paper on the birds of Pueblo, the Shore Lark found here was provisionally referred to the form /eucolema, but upon a re-examination of the skins collected, the bird turns out to be arentcola. Pica pica hudsonica. Abundant. Cyanocitta stelleri macrolopha. A single individual was seen on Octo- ber 6. They were reported to be very abundant at this time in the Green horn Mountains, thirty miles from Pueblo. Agelaius pheeniceus. Common up to the date of my departure. Sturnella neglecta. Only four or five of these birds were noted during my stay. Icterus bullocki. On October 24, long after the time when nearly all of the summer residents had migrated, I shot one of these birds in a dense thicket of willow bushes. It was a young female in very dark, soiled plu- mage, and quite immature, but apparently able to fly very well. It was in company with another which I failed to secure. Scolecophagus cyanocephalus. Ten ora dozen seen about a slaughter house near town. Carpodacus frontalis. Not as abundant as in 1883. Spinus tristis. Very abundant. Spinus psaltria. Abundant. Generally seen in pairs. All of those I shot were young birds, and several of the males had almost attained the full ‘spring plumage.’ Spinus pinus. Not seen until October 31, when several small flocks were observed. Zonotrichia intermedia. Exceedingly abundant. Barely one-fourth of the males collected had attained the white crown; all of them, both males and females, were birds of the year. They sang a good deal in that sput- tering sort of a way familiar to all who have studied the habits of Z. albicolls and other Sparrows in the fall. This ‘practising’ song proceeds, I am sure, from young birds just beginning to exercise their vocal powers, and is doubtless quite disconnected with any sexual excitation. The call- note of this Sparrow is very similar to that of Z. albicollis. Spizella socialis arizone. Common in small flocks during the first half of the month; but few were seen towards the last. 1887. ] Lancpon on Birds of the Chilhowee Mountarus, Tenn. I 25 Junco hyemalis oregonus. Rather common. Melospiza fasciata montanus. Not very common. _Melospiza lincolni. In the same places as the last, and about equally numerous during first part of the month. Pipilo maculatus arcticus. Not common. Dendroica auduboni. About a dozen individuals altogether were seen, and one was captured as late as October 24. Parus gambeli. Abundant during the whole time of my stay. Exceed- ingly tame and, like other Paride, partially gregarious. Not seen at all at Pueblo in 1883. Myadestes townsendi. But one was seen—October 31. The bird was common here in the spring of 1883. Turdus ustulatus swainsoni. On October 30, I shot a belated Olive- backed Thrush in a willow thicket. It was very emaciated, one leg had been broken, and but one feather was left to ‘adorn’ its tail—or, perhaps, ‘point a moral.’ Its presence here at this date is thus easily accounted for. Merula migratoria propinqua. I saw but four or five individuals during my stay. Sialia arctica. Rather uncommon. The only one shot was a young male with the blue feathers edged with brown. Sialia mexicana. Observed only upon two or three occasions, when they appeared to be migrating; coming from the north and disappearing towards the south. AUGUST BIRDS OF THE CHILHOWEE MOUN- TAINS, TENNESSEE. BY F. W. LANGDON. THE observations herein recorded were made chiefly in Blount County, East Tennessee, between August 11 and 21, 1886, in- clusive. The elevations known as the ‘Chilhowee Mountains,’ are a group of spurs or offshoots from the Great Smoky Range of the East Tennessee and North Carolina border; and extend, nearly at right angles to the ‘Smokies,’ as a series of more or less parallel ridges, 1500 to 4ooo feet in height, for fifteen or twenty miles in a general northwesterly direction. There are three main ranges answering the above description and these are lim- ited or cut off, so to speak, at their northwestern extremities, by the Chilhowee range proper (called on some maps Chilhowee 126 LanGpon on Birds of the Chilhowee Mountains, Tenn. [April ‘Mountain’). This latter range, about twenty miles in length, and nearly parallel with the ‘Smokies,’ is pierced (about twenty- five miles south-east of Knoxville) by Little River. A mile west of the ‘gap’ so formed is Mount Nebo, one of the sub-divisions of the Chilhowee range, and an objective point of the expedition, where are located some chalybeate springs anda hotel. From this locality excursions were made in various directions, notably one to the Great Smoky Mountains, about twenty miles south- east. The altitudes of the higher peaks of the region range from 2452 feet at Nebo, to 6701—Clingman’s Dome in the ‘Smokies.”* The whole Chilhowee group, including the principal range of that name, is situated in Blount and Sevier Counties, and is drained by the Little Pigeon, a tributary of the French Broad; and by Little and Little Tennessee Rivers, flowing into the Ten- nessee. The drainage of the entire region is thus eventually Ohioan. The Chilhowee Mountains are not unknown to zodlogical science, Dr. James Lewis having described a species of land- shell, .Aeléx chilhoweensts, from that region, about ten years ago. The topography of the region is alternately mountain and ‘cove’—as the little ‘pockets’ of tillable land, walled in by moun- tains except where they border the rivers, are called. Generally speaking a road following the river is the only outlet for these ‘coves’ that can be traversed by wagon. The ‘coves’ passed through by the expedition were Miller’s and Tuckaleechee,—said to be from six to eight miles in length and about a third as wide; Tuckaleechee being the larger of the two. Both are drained by Little River. The entire mountain region is well wooded, and towards the ‘Smokies’ heavily timbered. At Mt. Nebo the principal trees are poplar, oak, chestnut, chinquapin, hickory, beech, sweet and black gums}; a few wal- nut, butternut, and birch; with a sprinkling of pines throughout and of small spruce along ravines and small streams. The under- growth is chiefly of poplars, gums, dogwood, chinquapin, and, * Vide Guyot, in Am. Jour. Sci. and Arts., 2nd ser., Vol. XXIV, p. 277; and Saf- ford, ‘Geology of Tennessee,’ Nashville, 1869. 2 water ake mp mee oy 1887. | LANGDON oz Birds of the Chilhowee Mountains, Tenn. I 27 occasionally along streams, witch-hazel; in many places the ‘mountain laurel’ forms impenetrable thickets for miles. ‘Pine Mountain,’ adjoining Nebo on the east, and separated from it only bya shallow ravine, is clothed on its upper two- thirds with a mantle almost exclusively of pine, while its basal third corresponds closely with Nebo, The foot-hills surrounding Nebo are mostly cleared of timber and under cultivation, corn, wheat and sorghum being the prin- cipal crops, with some cotton and tobacco. This is the case also in the ‘coves’ traversed on the way to the ‘Smokies.’ As the ‘coves’ are left behind, however, and the Great Smoky Range is approached the scenery becomes bolder in character, the route lying over mountainous ridges and the horizon shut in on all sides by range after range of mountains from three to six thousand feet in height. Along Little River the scenery in many places might fairly be called grand. Night overtakes us on Scott Mountain at the home of Mr. A. J. Dorsey and his estimable family, whose hospitalities much enhance the enjoyment of the trip. Here we leave our team, and another day finds our party, ten in number, on foot for the ‘Smokies,’ seven miles distant, loaded down with guns, orni- thological material, fishing tackle, photographic apparatus, cook- ing utensils, and provisions. Our headquarters on Defeat Mountain, a spur of the Smoky Range, was at a cattle-herder’s camp, a small log cabin, situated at an altitude of perhaps 4000 feet, in the heart of a giant spruce and poplar forest; many trees of both species measuring six feet in diameter and fifty feet or more toa limb. Here, on a gentle slope covered with a velvety carpet of moss, partridge-berry vine, and spruce needles, we were lulled to rest by the babbling of the waters over the rocky bed of a neighboring trout brook (middle fork of Little River) ; this, with the oof-to-toot of the Great Horned Owl and the notes of a full orchestra of katydids, furnished a symphony emi- nently appropriate to its surroundings. The ‘patter of the rain on the roof,’ however, which ensued later, was a musical event not so highly appreciated, since it necessitated the crowding of ten men into a cabin ten feet square. As the sunbeams tip the crest of the ‘Smokies’ and struggle in splinters through the dark evergreen canopy about the camp, our ornithological eyes are greeted with the sight of such species 128 LANGDON ox Birds of the Chilhowee Mountains, Tenn. [April as the Hooded, the Worm-eating, Black-throated Blue, Cerulean, Blackburnian, Chestnut-sided, Black-throated Green, Black-and- white Creeping, and Canada Warblers (all taken within a few hours) ; whilst an occasional Pileated Woodpecker, or a party of Titmice or Blue Jays, add variety to the scene and sounds. Even the herpetologist might find food for conternplation in the huge rattlesnake with nine rattles and a button, killed by one of our photographic artists within a stone’s throw of the camp; and the epicure sees food of a more substantial character in the speckled beauties supplied to our table from the neighboring stream. Such localities as the one just described, at the junction of the poplar and spruce belts (altitude 4000 to 4500 feet) seemed a very paradise for the Mniotiltide and they were here found in greater numbers, both of species and of individuals, than else- where. Here, also, blackberries were in the height of their season ; the deciduous foliage was as bright and fresh as in Ohio in May and June, and insect life correspondingly abundant. With respect to the above-mentioned Warblers, it may be ob- served that their habits were not indicative of any migratory movement; on the contrary they appeared to be ‘at home’ ina summer resident sense; and the fact that the dates of observation are from two to four weeks ahead of their fall migration at Cincinnati may be considered as confirmatory of this view. Mr. Brewster’s * observations in the adjoining portion of North Carolina, during May and June, 1885, are also to be considered in this connection. Incomplete as it necessarily is, owing to lack of time and the unfavorable season for collecting, the present list fills several gaps in Mr. Brewster’s paper just referred to, viz: TZotanus solitarius, Eegialitis vocifera, Falco sparvertus, Megascops asto, Bubo virginianus, Helmitherus vermivorus, Dendroica cerulea, and D. vigorstz; and adds five species and two sub- species to the list of birds heretofore recorded from the State f ; namely: Ampelis cedrorum, Dendroica pensylvanica, D. ca- rulea, D. cerulescens, Sylvania canadensis, Dryobates villo- sus, and Vireo flavifrons alticola. * An Ornithological Reconnaissance in Western North Carolina.—The Auk, 1886, Vol. III, pp. 94-112 and 173-179. : + Vide Fox, List of Birds found in Roane County, Tennessee, during April, 1884, and March and April, 1885.—The Auk, III, 1886, pp. 315-320. 1887.] LANGDON ox Birds of the Chilhowee Mountains, Tenn. 129 For valuable assistance in making the collection, as well as in saving skins that would otherwise have been lost, the writer is indebted to his colleague, Dr. G. M. Allen, of Cincinnati; and for an enjoyable time in other respects to the members of the party in general, not forgetting our two guides, Mr. A. J. Dorsey and son ‘Jake.’ As regards the residents of the region in general, we found them intelligent, hospitable and obliging. The altitudes mentioned are estimated, and based on informa- tion derived from various sources.* The nomenclature is that of the A. O. U. Code and Check- List of North American Birds, 1886. Total number of species and sub-species noted, 63. 201. Ardea virescens. GREEN HERoN.—Little River, near Mt. Nebo; two specimens. 256. Totanus solitarius. SoLITARY SANDPIPER.—One individual ob- served August 21, at a roadside pond near Maryville, in the valley. 263. Actitis macularia. SporrepD SANDPIPER.—Three specimens seen along Little River in the ‘coves’; others at Henry’s Mill. 273. A®gialitis vocifera. KimLLpEER.—One heard in the suburbs of Knoxville. 289. Colinus virginianus. Bos-wHire.—Abundant in the ‘coves.’ Large flock of young barely able to fly, observed August 16, in Tuckalee- chee; doubtless a second brood. 300. Bonasa umbellus. Rurrep GrRousE.—One individual observed on Mt. Nebo. 310. Meleagris gallopavo. WiLp TurKry.—Although no specimens were secured by us, our guide had flushed a flock of half-grown young a week previous. Dr. T. H. Kearney, of Knoxville, also informed us that he was with a party that killed one out of a flock a few days previous, within a mile or two of our camp. ‘They are said to feed largely on ‘huck- elberries, three species of which are found in abundance on the ‘ridges.’ 316. Zenaidura macroura. MourNING Dove.—Common in wheat- stubble in the ‘coves.’ 325. Cathartes aura. TuRKEY VULTURE.—Common. 360. Falco sparverius. AMERICAN SPARROW HAWK.—Several observed in the ‘coves.’ Other species of Hawks, large and small, were noted, but at too great a distance for identification. Those most satisfactorily recog- nized were the Red-tailed and Red-shouldered. 373. Magascops asio. SCREECH Ow L.—Identified by note: one indi- vidual only; altitude 2000 feet. 375. Bubo virginianus. GREAT HorNED OwL.—One heard at 4000 feet. * Vide Safford, Geology of Tennessee, 1869; and Guyot, various papers in Am. Journ. Sci. and Arts, 1857 e¢. seg. 130 LANGDON ox Birds of the Chilhowee Mountains, Tenn. {April 390. Ceryle alcyon. BELTED KINGFISHER.—Two or three specimens observed on Little River in the ‘coves.’ 393. Dryobates villosus. Hatry WooppEcKER.—Several specimens taken, ranging from the valleys up to 2000 feet, do not differ appreciably from Ohio examples, and are referred to this form by Mr. Ridgway. 394. Dryobates pubescens. Downy WoopPECKER.—The same remarks are applicable to the present species. 405. Ceophlceus pileatus. PILEATED WoopPECKER.—-Not common, even in heavy timber, and everywhere very shy. Of the six or eight indi- viduals observed, two, male and female, were secured with some difficulty. Ranging from the valleys up to 4000 feet or more, their favorite foraging field seemed to be on the larger spruce and poplar trunks, within twenty feet of the ground, and such places were studded with bill-holes, in regu- ular rows, resembling those of the ‘Sapsuckers.’ Their notes resemble the rapid, oft-repeated chuck-up-chuck-up-chuck-up of the Common Flicker, but are lower-pitched and repeated more slowly. Of the specimens taken, one had its stomach filled with fourteen poke- berries, and the intestines deeply stained thereby a few hours after death. The peritoneal cavity of this bird contained a slender tape-worm, about 15 inches long and 1-32 inch wide; and in the sub-cutaneous tissue of the neck were two thread-like, round worms, of a pale pinkish tint and about three-fourths of an inch in length. Irides of adult male, pale yellow, finely speckled and mottled with red. 406. Melanerpes erythrocephalus. RED-HEADED WCODPECKER.—Com- mon about clearings in the foot-hills and ‘coves... Not observed above about 1500 feet. 420. Chordeiles virginianus. NIGHT-HAWK.—Five observed flying about at midday, in Tuckaleechee Cove; others at dusk on Scott Moun- tain. 423. Cheetura pelagica. CHIMNEY SwirtT.—Common as high as 5000 feet and throughout the ‘coves.’ The scarcity of houses and suitable chimneys for breeding purposes probably necessitates the resort of this species to its original homes in hollow trees. (See Brewster, of. czt.) 428. Trochilus colubris. RuBy-THROATED HUMMINGBIRD.—Common up to 3000 feet. 444. Tyrannus tyrannus. KINGBIRD.—Observed in parties of six or eight about ‘deadenings’ in the ‘coves.’ None seen in the mountains. 461. Contopus virens. Woop PEWEE.—The common Flycatcher of the region; apparently even more abundant than in Ohio. Noted every- where up to 4000 feet or more. The scarcity or absence of the Hmfzdonaces was a noteworthy feature of the region; no member of the genus being detected, though closely looked for in apparently favorable localities. 477. Cyanocitta cristata. BLure JAy.—An ornithological tramp through- out the region, in straggling parties of from three to six individuals; ranging as high as 4000 feet. 488. Corvus americanus. AMERICAN Crow.—Common in the valleys and observed up to about 3000 feet. 1887.] LANGDON ox Birds of the Chilhowee Mountains, Tenn. 131 ? 5114. Quiscalus quiscula. BRONZED GRACKLE.—Observed only in the suburbs of Knoxville. As no specimens were obtained, the subspecies can only be decided by inference—hence the (?). For evidence that this is the prevailing form in Tennessee, vzde Ridg- way, Auk, 1886, III, p. 318, footnote. 529. Spinus tristis. AMERICAN GOLDFINCH.—Common in the ‘coves,’ and ranging up to 2500 feet. 560. Spizella socialis. CHIPPING SPARROW.—The common Sparrow. Abundant throughout the ‘coves’ in cornfields, etc., anda few observed on a piney ridge at an altitude of about 4000 feet. 563. Spizella pusilla. FIELD SPARROw.—Identified by note, and in one instance only, in a little ‘cove’ at an elevation of 3000 feet. 587. Pipilo erythrophthalmus. TowHeEE.-—One specimen taken at an altitude of 2000 feet; others heard in full song. 593. Cardinalis cardinalis. CARDINAL.—Common about clearings, and observed up to 3000 feet. Though in full song, their notes were quite sibilant in character rather than full and rounded as in Ohio. 598. Passerina cyanea. INpIGO BuNrinc.— Very common in the ‘coves’ and lowlands; not observed above 1000-1200 feet. (—). Passer domesticus. EvuroPpEAN House SPARROW. — A few ob- served at Knoxville and Maryville. 608. Piranga erythomelas. ScARLET TANAGER.—One specimen, a male in immature plumage, taken at 2500 feet. 610. Piranga rubra. SumMER TANAGER.— One taken at 2000 feet; others heard. 611. Progne subis. PurrpLeE Martin.—Noted only at Knoxville and Maryville. 619. Ampelis cedrorum. CEDAR WAxwinc. — One specimen in im- mature plumage, taken at 3000 feet. 624. Vireo olivaceus. RED-EYED VIREO.—Very common everywhere up to 4000 feet. The many specimens examined failed to show the pe- culiarities in plumage noted by Mr. Brewster* in a single specimen from the Black Mountain in North Carolina. 628. Vireo flavifrons. YELLOW-THROATED VIREO. — Two specimens; Pine Mountain, at 1500 feet. One of these is a ‘first plumage’ bird, just acquiring fall dress. 629c. Vireo solitarius alticola.t MouNnTAIN SoLirary VirREO.—Three specimens taken ; one at 1500 feet, on Pine Mountain (Chilhowee Range), and two at 4000 feet, on Defeat Mountain (Smoky Range). Mr. Brewster has kindly compared these for me with the types in his collection and writes: ‘‘I am satisfied that the two are identical. In fact I find no differences of importance except such as would be expected in view of the fact that my birds are all in perfect nuptial plumage, yours in ragged, moulting summer plumage.” * Auk, III, 1886, p. 173. ¢ Vide Brewster, Auk, III, 1886, p. 111. 132 LaNGDON ox Birds of the Chilhowee Mountains, Tenn. {April On comparison with Ohio specimens of V. soltarcus, the larger size, especially of bill and wing, and the generally darker color of the upper parts in the Tennessee birds are very noticeable 631. Vireo noveboracensis. WHITE-EYED VIREO. — One specimen taken; heard several times in the ‘coves.’ 636. Mniotilta varia. BLACK-AND-WHITE WARBLER.—Very common, ranging from the valleys up to 3000 feet. 639. Helmitherus vermivorus. WorM-EATING WARBLER.—Taken in dense laurel and blackberry thickets on Smoky Range, up to 4000 feet; and about ravines at Mt. Nebo, 2000 feet. Note a feeble ch7f. 654. Dendroica czrulescens. BLACK-rHROATED BLUE WARBLER.— Rather common in dark spruce forest about the head of Little River, frequenting laurel thickets and undergrowth of poplar, beech, and sweet gum. Altitude about 4000 feet. 658. Dendroica cerulea. CERULEAN WARBLER.— Common in same localities as the last, but frequenting the higher trees. 659. Dendroica pensylvanica. CHESTNUT-SIDED WARBLER. —Two specimens; 2000 to 2500 feet, in oak woods. 662. Dendroica blackburnie. BLACKBURNIAN WARBLER.—The most abundant species of the family; ranging from 2000 to 4oco feet, and keep- ing mostly in the higher tree tops. Adults of both sexes and young of the year taken together. 667. Dendroica virens. BLACK-THROATED GREEN WARBLER.—Several specimens taken at 4000 feet, in spruce woods. 671. Dendroica vigorsii. Pine WARBLER.—One specimen only; Pine Mountain, 1500 feet. A young in first plumage just acquiring autumnal dress. 674. Seiurus aurocapillus. Oven-Birp.—Taken at altitudes ranging from 1000 to 2000 feet. 681. Geothlypis trichas. MAryLAND YELLOW-THROAT.—Common in the valleys, in the weeds bordering streams. 683. Icteria virens. YELLOW-BREASTED CHAT.—One taken at base of Mt. Nebo; others heard. 684. Sylvania mitrata. HoopED WaARBLER.—-Common in little weed patches near the springs at Mt. Nebo (2000 feet) ; and one pair observed apparently ‘at home’ ina shady ravine near our camp on Defeat Moun- tain (4000 feet), keeping chiefly on or near the ground and moss-covered rocks. Note a single clear ¢schkif, resembling that of the Cardinal but much more resonant and musical in tone. This note was repeated at short intervals (one to two minutes) for hours at a time, as the birds foraged for insects, the dark, green carpet of moss and partridge-berry vine forming an effective contrast with their bright, yellow plumage. 686. Sylvania canadensis. CANADIAN WARBLER.—A pair taken at 2000 feet, on young poplars in a laurel thicket, August 19. 687. Setophaga ruticilla. AMERICAN REDSTART.—Several observed about shady ravines, ranging from 1000 to 2500 feet. 704. Galeoscoptes carolinensis. CaTBIRD.—A few only observed, ranging from the lowlands to 2000 feet, 1887. | Scott ox Rare Florida Birds. 133 718. Thryothorus ludovicianus. CAROLINA WrEN.—Common every- where up to 3000 feet. 727. Sitta carolinensis. WHITE-BREASTED NuTHATCH.—Common, ranging from 1000 to 3000 feet. 731. Parus bicolor. Turrep Tirmousr.—Very common in the valleys and observed as high as 3000 feet. 736. Parus carolinensis. CAROLINA CHICKADEE.—Common with the preceding species, of which it was an almost constant companion, as in Ohio. No P. atricapillus observed, although carefully looked for. 751. Polioptilacerulea. BLUE-GRAY GNATCATCHER.—Common, rang- ing from the lowlands up to 3000 feet. 755. Turdus mustelinus. Woop THRusSH.—Specimens taken at 2000 and 4000 feet. 761. Merula migratoria. AMERICAN Rospin.—While standing in the cupola of the University at Knoxville, a small Hawk, resembling the Pigeon Hawk, passed close by. Following it with the eye across an ad- joining pasture, it was observed to flush a bird from a fence corner and, after a stern chase of thirty or forty yards, to seize it. A lively tussel ensued, after which the Hawk rose, heavily weighted, and took refuge in some neighboring trees. A few feathers secured at the site of the struggle have been kindly identified by Mr. Ridgway as those of a young Robin, and on these rests the admission of the species to our list, as no other specimens were observed. 766. Sialia sialis. BLursirp.—A few noted about ‘deadenings,’ in the "COVES: SOME RARE FLORIDA BIRDS. BY W. Eu D. SCOTT. Gelochelidon nilotica. GuLL-BILLED TERN.—This species appears to be rare on the Gulf Coast. The only record I have of its occurrence is a male taken at John’s Pass, Hillsboro’ Coun- ty, December 17, 1886. Chondestes grammacus. Lark Fincu.—On September 19, 1886, I saw a single individual of this species in my garden at Tarpon Springs, Hillsboro’ County. Later, my friend, Mr. J. W. Atkins, took an adult female at Punta Rossa. Mr. Atkins has kindly sent me the bird for identification. It was taken Sep- tember 26, 1886. Vireo altiloguus barbatulus. BLacK-WHISKERED VIREO.— 134 Scott ox Rare Florida Birds. [April On my trip South during May, 1886, I heard at a number of points, but particularly near Punta Rossa, the song of a Vireo that was not familiar to me. The birds always kept in the deep- est mangrove thickets, so that I was never able to procure one. But at Punta Rossa, where I met Mr. Atkins, who was at that time connected with the telegraph service at that point, we discussed the bird, and I called his attention to what I took to be one sing- ing in a mangrove swamp not far away. I was, at the time, on my way home, and being somewhat pressed for time I could not well stay to investigate the matter. Shortly after my return Mr. Atkins wrote me of the capture of four of the birds in question, ud later sent me two skins which were, as we had surmised, of this species. Both of those he sent to me were males taken on the 22d of May, 1886, near Punta Rossa. During the summer, about the middle of July, I thought I de- tected the species on a single occasion near Tarpon Springs, and I feel quite sure of this now, though unable to capture the bird at that time. I visited Tampa, in October, and on looking at some skins ob- tained by Mr. Stuart, in June, 1886, in the immediate vicinity of the city of Tampa, a single representative of this species at once attracted my attention. It was not labelled, but Mr. Stuart remembered its capture and thought it an adult male. It is now in my collection. I believe this bird to be a common summer resident on the Southern Gulf Coast of Florida. Dendroica discolor. Prairie WarBLER.—While at Punta Rossa last spring, Mr. Atkins showed me a Warbler which, though in exceptional plumage, must be referred to this species. Mr. Allen has very kindly examined it and compared it with a large series of Prairie Warblers, and the above conclusion is largely due to his careful examination. The appended descrip- tion will show the main differences in coloration between this and the typical bird. No. 129, collection of J. A. Atkins. ‘‘Punta Rossa, 16th April, 1886. Q 2” (The sex mark on the label is followed by an interrogation mark; the size of the bird, however, would seem to indicate that it is a female, if it be the species in question.) Similar to female D. dzscolor. Above obscure olive green, brighter onthe crown andrump. Sides of nape and upper tail_ coverts strongly suffused with ashy; interscapulars faintly tinged with brownish. Tail and wings about as in typical déscelor. Lores dusky; a , toe 1837.] Scotr on the Bird Rookeries of Southern Florida: 135 supraloral stripe of orange, from base of bill to eye, including upper eye- lid; a patch of orange below the eye, more intense on the right side than on the left, extending back over the upper part of the ear-coverts, and forward narrowly (on the left side only) to the rictus. Chin and part of the throat intense cadmium yellow. There is also a very appreciable tinge of this color on the yellow of the breast. The maxillary stripe is ash mixed with black. The streaks on the sides are nearly, obsolete. “Length, 4.50; extent, 6.37; wing, 2.00; tail, 1.75” (collector’s measure- ments from the fresh bird).* Mr. Atkins says that at the time he took this bird he saw another which appeared to him to be identical with it, but a careful search later in the season has failed to bring to light any other specimens. THE PRESENT CONDITION OF SOME OF THE BIRD ROOKERIES OF THE GULF COAST OF FLORIDA. BY W. EB. Di SCOTT. first Paper. On Friday, April 30, 1886, I started from the town of Tarpon Springs in Hillsboro’ County, Florida, to make a cruise of a few weeks along. the west coast, to investigate matters ornithological. It was a journey without any objective point. I had in mind only to go as far south as possible, in the time at my disposal, passing over some ground that had been familiar to me six years before. * [The specimen in question is remarkable for its small size, it being considerably smaller even than average West Indian examples of females of D. discolor; one (of several kindly loaned me by Mr. Ridgway for comparison), however, proves to be fully as small, while others are somewhat larger. Ina large series from Florida in the Cambridge Museum of Comparative Zodlogy, with which I haye compared Mr. At- kins’s specimen, none are quite so small, but the ashy coloring of the maxillary stripe, the auriculars, and sides of the nape is met with in other specimens, and one or two show traces of the peculiar ‘hyperchromatism’ displayed by the specimen from Mr. Atkins. No single specimen, however, has all of these ashy markings combined, they being found separately in different specimens. The asymetry in respect to the height- ened color on the two sides of the head suggests that the specimen in question is not only exceptionally small, but abnormal in coloration. The general effect is unique, and at first sight suggests probable specific distinctness from D, discolor.—J. A. A.] 136 Scort on the Bird Rookeries of Southern Florida. [April The boat chartered for the trip was a small sloop of about five tons measurement, called the ‘Tantalus.’ I was accompanied only by the captain of the boat, and Mr. Dickinson, my assistant. The somewhat detailed account of this journey presented in the following pages is given in the form of a diary, having as its basis the notes registered in my log of each day’s events. April 30. Left Tarpon Springs at 10 A. M., and going out of the Anclote River, our boat was headed southward. As we passed out of the mouth of the river, the buoys, beacons, and stakes that mark the channel were made very conspicuous by the numbers of Florida Cormorants (Phalacrocorax dilophus flort- danus) that were alighted on every part of the structures that afforded a roosting place. These birds have a ‘rookery’ or breed- ing and night roosting place on Lake Butler, about three miles inland from the mouth of the river, and every morning and even- ing are to be seen passing to and from the salt water of the Gulf, which is their principal fishing ground. They fly in flocks of from six to forty, and now and then a single bird or pair is to be seen passing over. At the rookery breeding fairly begins by the roth of May, though a few birds may lay their eggs a little earlier. The birds are among the very few still found in Florida that are unsuspicious, being fairly tame and familiar, passing close over the tops of the cottages and houses making up the town of Tarpon Springs in their daily flights over the land between the fresh and salt water. The two islands in the Gulf of Mexico, three miles off the mouth of the Anclote River, are known as the Anclote Keys, and are the headquarters of the fleet of Key West vessels employed in the sponge fishing. Six years ago the smaller of these two keys was a ‘rookery,’ both for breeding and roosting, for count- less pairs of birds. There were literally thousands of them. The several acres of breeding ground are closely wooded with man- grove and other trees and bushes, and each tree or bush of any size contained several nests. There were also the several kinds of Herons to be found here (I have records of Ardea herodias, A. egretta, A. candidissima, A. tricolor ruficollis, A. cerulea, A. virescens, Nycticorax nycticorax nevius, and N. violaceus as all occurring and probably breeding on this island), Cormo- rants in great numbers, and Brown Pelicans (Pelecanus fuscus). Besides, during May and June, hundreds of pairs of Frigate _ 1887.] Scotr on the Bird Rookertes of Southern Florida. be Birds (/regata aguzla) roosted here each night, though these. so far as I am aware, did not breed here. This was the state of affairs existing on the northern of the two Anclote Keys six years ago, according to my own observations, and those of Mr. Dever- eaux, who was then my assistant. This morning in passing these islands I saw but four Pelicans (they were flying by), two or three frightened Herons, and a few Gulls and Terns. It is safe to say that not a dozen pairs of Herons breed at present on the island, and that the other birds spoken of have all been driven away or killed. Once, at this time of the year, a perfect cloud of birds were to be seen hovering all day over the islands, so tame and unsuspicious that they had little or no fear of man; but now the place is almost deserted by birds and the few that are left have become, by being hunted, as wary as the traditional deer. We sailed to-day as far as Little Clearwater Pass, where we anchored and spent part of the afternoon and night. On the way down to Clearwater Harbor we passed inside of Hog Island, sit- uated to the east of it. Here another deserted heronry, mangrove island, which, when I passed it in 1880, had many Herons breeding on it,—stood a silent witness of wanton destruc- tion. At Little Clearwater Pass the birds noted were numbers of Royal Terns (Sternza maxima), Laughing Gulls and Black Skimmers, a few Brown Pelicans and Willets, and Wilson’s Plover. Westaid here all night. Saturday, May 1. The wind, which was blowing hard till late yesterday, died out in the night, but at sunrise there was almost a gale from the northwest, and we did not get away until 12.30 Pp. M., John’s Pass, fourteen miles below, being the point where we intended to harbor for the night. With a beam wind this place was soon reached, and at 3.30 p. M. the sloop was again at anchor in the little harbor inside of the Keys. It was important to reach here early, as I particularly wished to observe a rookery which has been ever present in my mind since visits to the samé point in April, 1880. At that time I made two visits of a day and night each to this same rookery, and among the myriads of birds that were breeding and roosting, the particular abundance of the Roseate Spoonbill, the Reddish Egret, and all of the common Herons, as well as the White Ibis, will never be forgotten. It is enough to state with- out going into great detail, that in one flock at that time were at a small 138 Scotr on the Bird Rookeries of Southern Florida. [April least two hundred wonderfully colored Spoonbills, and that the numbers of the other species were many times greater. The numerous islands inside of the outer keys at this point are mostly wooded with one or more of the several kinds of man- grove, and vary in area from one to several hundred acres.. The two nearest the mouth of the pass are small; the larger one may have an area of seven and the smaller of not more than two acres. They formed the site of the rookery. Looking carefully over both I could see no birds when we anchored, but as the sun began to get low in the west, a few, possibly fifty in all, shy and suspicious Herons straggled in to roost on the smaller of the two Keys, and a flock of Fish Crows ( Corvus osstfragus) were the only visitors at the larger. Most of the Herons were A. rujficollts tricolor, but there were several A. egretta, A. candidisstma, and A. cerulea, and perhaps a dozen A. rufa, and three of the so-called A. pealez. No Spoonbills, not a single White Ibis—in fact an utter transformation from the happy and populous community of only a few years before. Of other birds seen here my log only speaks of some Royal and Least Terns, a flock of Willets, and a single Kingfisher. Sunday, May 2. We were up and away early, with a pleasant northeast wind, and instead of going out of the pass again our route threaded in and out among the inner islands, passing through Boya Sieya into Tampa Bay proper. In Boya Sieya is an enor- mous mangrove island, known throughout the region as the Maximo Rookery, and also intimately associated in my mind with the name of A. Lechvallier, a Frenchman, who, when I was last at this point, had his home in a little house on the mainland of Point Pinallas, about half a mile from this rookery. Being anxious to get south as rapidly as possible I did not ex- amine Maximo Rookery carefully, but passing it only half a mile away I could see no birds. On my return, however, I made an extended search through the hundreds of acres of mangrove, and will leave the subject till then. But it may be as well to state distinctly here that I am very credibly informed that during his several years’ residence at this point, the old Frenchman and his gunners killed many thousands of the several species of birds there so abundant. These were particularly the several species of White Herons and countless numbers of the Brown Pelican. Passing on we crossed Tampa Bay to the mouth of the Manatee 1887. ] Scott on the Bird Rookertes of Southern Florida. 139 River, thence following the bay coast down to the mouth of Sara- sota Bay, and that night at six anchored at the town of Sarasota. To-day we had sailed over some sixty miles, in a region once famous for its teeming bird life, but now the birds were only con- spicuous by their scarcity. During the entire day I only noticed a few scattering Herons, one or two Man-o’-War Birds, four or five Brown Pelicans, and a few Gulls. Monday, May 3. Left Sarasota at 6.25 a.m. Day clear; wind in morning east to northeast, moderate. We sailed out through Big Sarasota Pass and were soon in the Gulf, running down the coast with a fair wind. About five miles off shore were many Brown Pelicans fishing among great schools of mullet, and a few Man-o’-War Birds sailing about in graceful evolutions. Here, too, were some Laughing Gulls, and now and then a few Royal or Forster’s Terns, in small flocks of may be a dozen individuals. This was about a fair sample of the bird life 2ll the forty miles down to Boca Grande, the principal entrance to Charlotte Har- bor. Here we entered, and going, after getting fairly inside, about two miles to the northward along the shore of Gasparilla Island, at 5.25 p.M. we anchored for the night. We were not more than a hundred yards from the shore of the island and almost at once I went ashore in quest of birds. The island is a long, low strip of sand, wooded with a heavy growth of cabbage palms and some kinds of low palmetto. Beside these were two kinds of mangrove growing profusely, as well as a perfect tangle of low undergrowth of shrubs and vines. All of the commoner small species that one would expect were represented, and I saw a single pair of Reddish Egrets, two White Ibises, and three Louisiana Herons. The bird that par- ticularly attracted my attention was a single male Bobolink, in full spring plumage. This seemed to me unusual, but I have seen large numbers of the same species in early fall, about Tar- pon Springs. They appeared on the 26th of August, 1886, at the point indicated. The first flock was small, not over twenty birds, but ina week they were abundant and in very large flocks. About the middle of October they began to disappear, and by November first all had left the region about Tarpon Springs. Tuesday, May 4. Charlotte Harbor! How many wonderful tales of the great heronries, with the myriads of birds every- 140 Scott on the Bird Rookeries of Southern Florida. [April where conspicuous, have been told of this region. Indeed, only a few years ago bird life was so abundant about the many islands dotting the harbor, that it would be difficult to exaggerate in regard to their numbers. We were up early, for I had determined to explore every island and bay about the harbor, and knew that at least a week or ten days would be a short time for the work in hand. An al/ day’s sail along the northern shore of the bay, passing mangrove islands which seemed to have been created for the home of many species of Heron, Ibis, and other water birds which once congre- gated here in vast numbers. Captain Baker, who sailed the sloop, an old sponger and fish- erman who had been familiar with all of this country for twenty- five years or more, pointed out to me among these islands four, at different points, where he assured me vast rookeries had existed. One of perhaps sixty acres he said he had seen so covered with ‘White Curlew’ that, to use his own words, ‘tit looked from a distance as if a big white sheet had been thrown over the man- groves.” And though we passed by, as I have said before, islands that plainly showed, by excrement still on the ground, that once countless numbers of birds had lived there, sailing probably over about forty miles in all, I did not see a rookery that was occupied even by a few birds, andI only saw a few stray Gulls, Pelicans, and two Herons in the whole day’s cruise. About four o’clock, p.M., we reached a little settlement at the mouth of Pease Creek, called Hickory Bluff, and I went ashore to get what information I could regarding birds. The postmaster and several other citizens with whom I talked all agreed that five or six years before birds had been plenty at the rookeries, and that it was no trouble to get hundreds of eggs to eat or to kill as many birds as one cared to. But that for the past two years birds had been so persecuted, to get their ‘Alames’ for the Northern market, that they were practically exterminated, or at least driven away from all their old haunts. I further learned that all of the gunners and hunters in the country round had up to this year reaped a very considerable income from this source. Birds were killed, and the plumes taken from the back, head, and breast, and the carcass thrown to the Buzzards. Fort Myers, on the Caloosahatchie, was the central local market for this traffic, where several buyers were always ready to pay a high sive 1887.] Scott on the Bird Rookeries of Southern Florida. I4I cash price for all plumes and fancy feathers. The force of resi- dent buyers was increased during the winter of each year by taxidermists (?), and buyers from the north, who came, in some cases at least, provided to equip hunters with breech-loaders, ammunition, and the most approved and latest devices for carry- ing on the warfare. One man, who had come down in this way for the past four years, was down south now, and regularly em- ployed from forty to sixty gunners, furnishing them with all supplies and giving so much a plume or ffa¢ skzxz, for all the birds most desirable. The prices, I was told, ranged from twenty cents to two dollars and a half a skin, the average being about forty cents apiece. All this I afterward fully corroborated, and met, personally, the gentleman in question, to whom I shall have occasion later to refer more at length. We staid at Hickory Bluff all night, as I had determined to ex- plore the Myiakka River, which, I had always heard, was a bird paradise, and I was told at Hickory Bluff that birds were still to be found there in large numbers. Wednesday, May 5. Left Hickory Bluff early, but the wind being very light and ahead, we were till nearly night reaching a point about ten miles up the Myiakka River, which is near the head of navigation for boats drawing two feet of water. The rookeries described to us as being near the mouth of the river, and where I was told birds had abounded the season before, I found to be deserted; only here and there did I see anything of bird life, and in such cases only scattering individuals of the Flor- ida Cormorant, White Ibis, and the commoner species of Herons. Along the bank of the river, where we camped in the late after- noon, were many Gray Kingbirds ( Zyrannus dominicensis) , the first I had seen on the cruise, and the first I bad noted this season. Going up the river we sailed close to three Ducks which, as they rose out of the water, I determined were Aythya marila nearcttca. Near where we anchored were a number of Sandhill Cranes (Gras mexicana) feeding and now and then uttering their peculiar cry. A few Brown Pelicans and a single Man-o’-War Bird complete the list of birds observed this day. It may be well to remark that the river is still salt at the high- est point we reached, and that it is said to be brackish forty miles from its mouth. 142 Scott on the Bird Rookeries of Southern Florida. | April Tuesday, May 6. AsI had been told at Hickory Bluff that the largest of the rookeries was still further up the river, we took the small boat serving as our tender, and early in the morning started to explore. About a mile and a half from where we had anchored, on passing a sharp bend in the river, we saw a small mangrove island fairly white with birds, most of which I present- ly discovered to be the small White Egret (Ardea candidissi- ma), and with them a number of Ardea rujicollis tricolor, and a few Ardea egretta and Ardea caerulea. The birds were in some cases still building, though some had finished their nests and had laid from one to three eggs. The Ardea cerulea, of which there were perhaps half a dozen pairs, were mainly in the blue plumage, though I saw a number in the white and parti- colored phases, and a female in this last condition, taken later in the day, proved on dissection to be breeding, having a fully de- veloped egg with hard shell in the oviduct. Up to the present time, though I had been away on the trip for a week, not a single bird had been collected. So after dinner I went to the neighborhood of the rookery, where about two hundred birds in all were congregated, and in the course of the afternoon I took some twenty birds of the several kinds above enumerated, a pair or so of each. The rookery had evidently often been disturbed before, and the birds were very shy and only to be taken at long range, flying. The whole island was wooded with mangrove and was perhaps half an acre in extent. Friday, May 7. Spent most of the morning in making the birds I had killed the afternoon before into skins, and later in the day explored the river further up for about four miles. This search was unrewarded, and so we came back to the sloop, de- termining to go out of the river and continue the exploration of Charlotte Harbor in the morning. While anchored at this point I was visited by two plume hunters, each separately, who wished to dispose of numbers of plumes of Little White Egrets and other birds they had collected. They seemed much surprised to find that I did not wish to buy the material in question, and told me that I was the only dzrd man they had met who was not eager to obtain plumes. The name of one of these men I did not ascertain, but the other was Mr. Abe Wilkerson, of whom I shall have more to say later. The prices they asked for plumes of Herons were about as follows: aos 1887.] Scott on the Bird Rookeries of Southern Florida. 143 Ardea egretta, 40 cents (the only part of the bird used being the long feathers of the back) ; Ardea candidisstma, 55 cents (in addition to the back plumes, those of the throat or breast and head are utilized); Ardea rufa, 40 cents (simply the back plumes) ; Ardea ruficollis tricolor, 10 to 15 cents (only the plumes of the back are utilized) ; Ardea wardz (plumes of breast and back), 75 cents to one dollar; Ajaja ajaja (flat skin) $2.00 to $5.00. A flat sk7x is the bird skin split underneath from the bill to the vent and skinned so that the whole is perfectly flat when dry. Generally the legs are cut off, and sometimes the wings, and even the head. These two hunters both told me of the man of whom I had heard at Hickory Bluff, and gave me much interesting information re- garding the trafic in plumes. Wilkerson told me of the birds which once inhabited the rookeries of this river in great abun- dance. He had made, he said, many a dollar from plumes ob- tained here, and spoke of the little rookery I have described above as too small to be hardly worthy of the name. He was on his way to some lakes far up the river, in the interior, where he hoped to find large rookeries of the Little White Egret, which is regarded as the best paying species. His method of obtaining birds was with a 22-calibre Winchester rifle. With this he could go into a rookery and secrete himself, and by using the lightest kind of cartridge get many more birds than with a shot-gun, as the report is hardly greater than the snapping of a branch, and is scarcely noticed by the birds. In this way he said he had been able in a large rookery down south to get over four hundred ‘plume birds’ in less than four days. On asking him about Reddish Egrets, I found he was full of information. He told me ofa rookery he had recently visited at the entrance of Matlacha Pass, where there were many of these birds, and some in the white phase. He also said he had hunted the entire coast, and that below Marko Pass, the colored phase of the Reddish Egret became uncommon, while the white phase began to be more numerous, and that the form found in the rook- eries of the Thousand Islands was the white phase, which is there quite plenty; he had never seen a colored bird there or south of there. I have this same information from a number of independent sources and consider it reliable. A word further as to the range to the northward on the Gulf Coast of the Reddish 144 STEJNEGER on the genus Acanthts. [April Egret (A. rufa). Ihave not met with it at all north of the mouth of the Anclote River, at which point it is rare. In all the rook- eries about Tampa, Old Tampa, and Hillsboro’ Bays, it is more or less common, but its representatives are almost entirely in the colored phase, and only now and then, at rare intervals, is a white bird (A. fealez) met with. (To be continued.) SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES ON THE GENUS ACANTHIS. BY LEONHARD STEJNEGER. Tue well-known Austrian ornithologist, Victor, Ritter von Tschusi zu Schmidhoften, has most courteously sent me four specimens of Acanthis cabaret from Austria, thus enabling me to supplement my former paper (Auk, 1887, p. 31) on the sub- ject with a few notes. I stated that from the examination of an Italian specimen I was ‘‘strongly inclined to think that it will be necessary ulti- mately to recognize A. rufescens (Vieill.) as different from A. cabaret.” The Italian specimen, as compared with British birds, differed chiefly (1) in being of a brighter and more ochra- ceous brown; (2) in having whitish (not pale umber brown) outer margins to the tail-feathers; (3) in having the flanks more heavily streaked; (4) in having dusky streaks across the fore neck, and (5) in having a decidedly smaller bill. The four Austrian birds show conclusively that the above characters wiil not hold as distinguishing continental specimens from British ones. They are practically identical with typical British A. cabaret, and can be matched completely, and I have British specimens of A. cabaret before me which are considerably, brighter in general coloration, and have the flanks more heavily streaked than the Austrian examples, none of which exhibit any dusky streaks across the fore neck. Of the latter two have whit- ish outer margins to the tail-feathers, while in the other two they are brownish, and as to the size of the bill, the table below de- 1887.] BREWSTER oz Three New Forms of North American Birds. 145 monstrates that the Austrian specimens have the bills larger, if anything, than the average British bird. (Compare tablesin Auk, 1887, pp. 34, 35-) This table also shows how closely Austrian and British examples agree in general size. It is hardly probable that the form inhabiting the mountains of Italy should be different from that breeding in the Austrian Alps, and I therefore now regard A. rufescens as a true synonym of A. cabaret. MEASUREMENTS. Sleek eee eases Sex to | SY | Sea | ag and Loca.ity. DaTE. cee ee | ES A = 0 5 g@ ad.* | Hallein, Salzburg, Austria. ....... Nov. 15, 1883. | 71 | 53 | 7-5 | 10 at a - She VRtist sai Shion sy ts Oct. 21, 1883. | 70 | 52 | 7-2 10 ot Mariahoff, Steiermark, Austria... .... Feb. 24, 1881. | 71 | 54| 7-5 12 Q Mallen, Salzburg crete 3) « yelie© ese a Oct. 21, 1883. | 67 | 49 | 7-0 Il Average measurements of three males . . * Throat and breast red. t+ Without red. 71 _ ~ THREE NEW FORMS OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. BY WILLIAM BREWSTER. Mr. J. M. Souruwick, of Providence, has called my atten- tion to the fact that western specimens of the Willet differ in size, color, and markings from those of the Atlantic coast. Upon testing these differences by a fairly large series I find the birds of the two regions apparently distinct, at least subspecifi- cally. The western form may be characterized as follows: Symphemia semipalmata inornata, subsp. nov.—WESTERN WILLET. Suspsp. CuHar. Male and Female, breeding plumage : — Differing from S. semi~almata in being larger, with a longer, slenderer bill; the dark markings above fewer, finer, and fainter, on a much paler (grayish- drab) ground; those beneath duller, more confused or broken, and bor- dered by pinkish-salmon, which often spreads over or suffuses the entire underparts, excepting the abdomen. Middle tail-feathers either quite immaculate or very faintly barred. 146 Brewster on Three New Forms of North American Birds, (April Measurements: Eight specimens from Larimer County, Colorado, and two from Moody County, Dakota; all adults taken in May or June; aver- age: Wing, 8.11; tail, 3.29; tarsus, 2.66; culmen from feathers, 2.46. The same birds give the following extremes: Wing, 7.88-8.26; tail, 3.10- 3.50; tarsus, 2.45-2.95; culmen from feathers, 2.28-2.70.* Types, No. 13,529, g ad., Larimer County, Colorado, May 14, 1886; No. 13.530, Q ad., Larimer County, Colorado, May 5, 1885; both in my collection. Habitat. Interior of North America between the Mississippi and the Rocky Mountains, wintering along the coasts of the Gulf and Southern Atlantic States (Florida, Georgia, South Carolina). S. semipalmata typica is brownish-olive, above confusedly and densely barred, streaked, or spotted with blackish, this giv- ing the prevailing tone to the plumage. The bars beneath are usually coarse, dark, regular, and seldom bordered with pinkish or salmon. The central tail-feathers are almost invariably crossed by three or four distinct and continuous blackish bars. The two birds do not seem to differ in respect to the white on the wings or upper tail-coverts. Among the breeding (May and June) specimens before me the differences just pointed out are nearly constant, and so pronounced that they may be seen at a glance. They are less striking in some examples taken in early spring (March and April) in South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida, several of which seem to be fair intermediates, although they may be eastern birds which have not perfected the nuptial plumage. I have a few specimens (winter and early spring) from Georgia and the Carolinas which are apparently true ¢zornata. In the plain gray and white winter dress the two forms ap- pear to be distinguishable only by size. Unfortunately, this dif- ference is not absolutely reliable as the above measurements show. Rather curiously, the young, from whatever locality, seem to be larger than the old birds. Touching briefly on synonymy it appears: (1) That the Scolopax semipalmata of Gmelin (Sys. Nat., I, 1788, 659) was based on the eastern bird. (2) That Zotanus crasstrostris Vieillot (Nouv. Dict. d’Hist. Nat., 1816, 406) was founded on a specimen (from Louisiana) * An equal number of adult eastern birds, four from Georgia, five from Northamp- ton County, Virginia, and one from Warwick, Rhode Island, average: Wing, 7.36; tail, 2.91; tarsus, 2.29; culmen from feathers, 2.19. Extremes: Wing, 7.06-7.75; tail, 2.71-3.30; tarsus, 2.08-2.42; culmen from feathers, 2.02-2.31. ; 1887.] BREWSTER on Three New Forms of North American Birds. 144 in winter plumage, in which condition, as just stated, the two forms are not certainly separable. (3) That Symphemia atlantica Rafinesque ( Journ. Phys., LXXXVIII, 1819, 417) is a xomen nudum. (4) That Zotanus speculiferus Cuvier (R. A., 1, 1817, 351) and Pucheran (R. et M. Z., III, 1851, 569) is not now deter- minable. It follows that none of these names are available for the West- -ern Willet, although it is not improbable that at least. two of them (crass¢rostrés Vieill. and speculéferus Cuv.) were origi- nally applied to it. . Most of our recent authorities describe both forms under S. semt palmata, confusing them and attributing their differences to age, season, or individual variations. I am indebted to Mr. Southwick for most of the specimens on which the above comparisons are based, as well as for pei mission to announce what is really his discovery rather than my own. Phalenoptilus nuttalli nitidus, subsp. nov. — FROSTED PoOoR-WILL. SuBsp. CHAR.—Similar to true P. xuwftfall7, but with the dark markings of the crown, back, etc., fewer and more sharply defined on a much lighter ground, the transverse bars beneath finer, paler, and less conspic- uous. FHlabitat. Texas and Arizona. Types, Nos. 13076, @ ad., and 13077, 9 ad., Nueces River, Texas, Feb. 27, 1886; F. B. Armstrong; both in my collection. This bird seems to be another example of a ‘bleached desert race.’ It is very much paler than true zz¢tal/z, with fewer, finer dark markings, which, however, are more conspicuous than in nuttaliz, owing to the generally lighter ground color. This on the forehead, sides of crown, rump, upper tail-coverts, and scap- ulars is pearly or ashy white, giving the parts a delicate frosted appearance. The chin. sides of head, and a broad band around the nape are light faded brown, whereas in wat¢tal/? they are many shades darker and (the chin and cheeks at least) often strongly blackish. That Audubon described and figured the darker bird is open to no doubt. Texas specimens show little variation, several taken in Febru- ary on the Nueces River being practically identical with a breed- ing female shot at Rio Grande City in June (No. 977, Coll. of 148 BREWSTER on Three New Forms of North American Birds. (April George B. Sennett). Arizona apparently furnishes both forms for a specimen from the Catalina Mts. (¢, No. 2177, Coll. W. E. D. Scott, April 19, 1885) is typical xz¢zdus, while six others from the same locality are referable to xattallz. The latter, however, do not average as dark as examples from further north. California birds are usually, but by no means invariably, the deepest-colored of all. It is not impossible that both zzttallz and zzf¢zdus breed in Arizona at different elevations, or one of them (zz/édus) may occur only as a migrant. The evidence at hand seems to favor the latter view. In Baird, Brewer, and Ridgway’s Land Birds (Vol. II, page 417) the female Poor-will is described as ‘‘without the white tip of tail.” This is obviously an error, for not one of the twelve females before me lacks the white, although in several it is more or less tinged with buff, and is, perhaps, also usually narrower than in the male. The material examined in the above connection includes the entire series of the National, American (of New York), and Cambridge Museums, besides those of several private collections, the whole aggregating forty-one specimens—five from Texas, two from New Mexico, sixteen from Arizona, two from Colorado, five from Utah, four from Montana, one from Nevada, and six from California. Vireo noveboracensis maynardi, subsp. nov.—KEy WEST VIREO. Supsp. CuHar. —In size and proportions similar to V. crasszrostris, the bill equally large and stout. Coloring more like that of V. xovebora- censis but grayer above, the yellow beneath paler (but of the same green- ish or lemon tinge) and equally, if not more, restricted. Wing, 2.20-2.53; tail, 1.90-2.07; tarsus, .70-.79; culmen from base, .55--65; do. from feathers, .42-.50; do. from nostril, .30-.35; depth of bill at nostril, .18—.20 Habitat. Key West, Florida. Types, Nos. 108,860, g ad., Key West, Fla., March 29, 1886, Str. Alba- tross ; 108,862, 9 ad., Key West, March 29, 1886, Str. Albatross; both in collection of National Museum. In general terms this bird may be said to combine the struc- tural peculiarities of V. crasstrostris with the coloring of V. noveboracensis. It has the long, stout bill of the former, the yellow beneath greenish instead of brownish, and essentially 1887.] Recent Literature. 149 confined to the sides as in the latter. That it is a connecting link between the two is evident, for several of the Key West specimens unmistakably approach crass¢rostr?s, while others vary in the direction of zoveboracenszs. With the latter, in- deed, the large series before me* establishes a perfect intergra- dation. This seems to be effected within a narrow latitudinal belt, all my specimens from Northern Florida being essentially similar to those from the United States at large, the intermedi- ates coming from Miami and the keys between that point and Key West. A bird from Cozumel [sland is apparently typical noveboracensis, While two Bermuda specimens show only slight, and perhaps accidental, peculiarities. Several of the Key West examples used in the above compar- ison were collected by Mr. C. J. Maynard, to whom the new bird is dedicated. RECENT LITERATURE. Sclater’s Catalogue of the Ccerebidze, Tanagridz, and Icteridze.—In the eleventh volume of the British Museum Catalogue of Birdst Dr. P. L. Sclater treats the three strictly American families Coerebide, Tanagride, and Icteride—groups to which, as is well known, he has for many years given special attention. Of the family Ccerebide (Guit-guits, or Honey Creepers), 70 species are recognized, of which 63 are represented in the collection of the British Museum by 672, specimens. The members of this family are of small size, mostly of brilliant color; some are closely related to the Mniotiltide, from which they may, however, be distinguished by ‘“‘the more slender unnotched bill and filamentous termination of the ex- tensile tongue”; others are with difficulty separable from the Tanagridz. Of the great group Tanagridz 377 species are admitted, all but 20 of which are represented in the British Museum Collection by 3413 speci- mens. Thirty-three species are referred to the genus Euphonza, 61 to the genus Cadliste, 32 to Chlorospingus, and 35 to Buarremon. The total number of genera is 59. * About one hundred and fifty specimens, chiefly from the collections of the National and Cambridge Museums. + Catalogue of the Passeriformes, or Perching Birds, in the Collection of the British Museum, Fringilliformes: Part II, containing the families Coerebidze, Tanagridze, and Icteridze. By Philip Lutley Sclater. London: Printed by order of the Trustees. 1886, 8vo, pp. xviii, 431, pll. xviii. 150 Recent Literature. [April Of the Icteride 128 species are accepted, 125 of which are represented in the British Museum by an agregate of 1409 specimens. The whole number of species treated in the volume is therefore 545, represented by 5494 species. Means’so ample, in the hands of a specialist so thoroughly competent for the task, cannot fail to give most satisfactory results. The position of the Icteride next to the Tanagride, necessitated by the scheme of classification adopted by Mr. Sharpe for the Oscines, does not meet with Mr. Sclater’s full approval, who considers the Tanagridz as very closely allied to the Fringillidz, and as being in fact ‘‘fruit and insect- eating Finches.” The Icteride, he believes, would be better placed after the Fringillidz, in the immediate neighborhood of the Sturnide. Although subspecies are freely admitted, the system of nomenclature conforms to that of the previous volumes of the ‘Catalogue.’ The treatment of specific and subspecific forms is, in general, decidedly conservative; if. however, the author had followed, in certain instances, his own expressed convictions in place of deferring to the opinion of some previous author, the results would, we believe, have been more satisfactory. Two species (Arremon nigrtrostris and Agelatus forbes¢) and three genera (Pseudodacnis, Delothraupis, and Gymuostinops) are indicated as new. Twenty-three species are figured. The families here treated could not have fallen into better hands. The authorities of the British Museum are to be congratulated on having se- cured the assistance of Mr. Sclater for this work; and we are sure ornithol- ogists will be rejoiced to learn thatanother volume of this invaluable series will be prepared by the same distinguished authority on American birds. —j. A. A. Conclusion of the Great Work on the Nests and Eggs of the Birds of Ohio.* For several years we have noted the progress of this undertak- * Collation: 1g covertitles : Part [1-23 (msc.)] | Price $5. [later omitted] | Illustrations | of the | Nests and Eggs | of the | Birds of Ohio | with Text | by | Genevieve E. Jones and Eliza J. Shulze [names later omitted.] | Circleville, Ohio | 1879 [Dates omitted after Part 5] Copyrighted by Genevieve E. Jones and Eliza J. Shulze | [Dates,Stamped or Msc. ] Illustrations | of the | Nests and Eggs | of | Birds of Ohio | with Text. | Illustrations by | Mrs. N. E. Jones | Text by | Howard Jones, A.M., M.D. | Circleville, Ohio, U. S. A. | [1879 to] 1886. | Folio. Txt. in loose sheets; pll. plain lithog. or hand-col’d; pub. in 23 Parts. Text, pp. i-xxxviii, xxxvili a-d, 41-329. Plates i-Ixviil. Part 1, July, 1879 [there was a trial or specimen part pub. Dec. 1878] pp. 41-46, pll. i-ili. Part 2, Oct. 1879, pp. 47-54, pll. iv-vi. Part 3, Jan., 1880, pp. 55-58, pll. vii-ix. Part 4, April, 1880, pp. 59-66, pll.x-xii. Part 5, July, 1880, pp. 67-70, pll. xiii-xv. Part 6, Oct., 1880, pp. 71-82, pll. xvi-xviii. Part 7, Jan., 1881, pp. 83-90, pll. xix-xxi. Part 8, April, 1881, pp. 91-98, pll. xxii-xxiv. Part 9, July, 1881, pp. 99-106, pll. xxv-xxvii. Parts 10, 11 (Double No.), pp. 107-118, pll. xviii-xxxiii (“Oct., 1881" to) Jan., 1882. Part 12, Apr., 1882, pp. 119-122, pll. xxxiv-xxxvi. Part 13, July, 1882, pp. 123-138, pll. xxxvii- xxxix. Parts 14, 15 (Double No.), pp. 139-154, pll. xl-xlv (“Oct., 1882” to) Jan., 1883. Part 16, Apr., 1883, pp. 155-166, pll. xlvi-xlviii. Parts 17, 18 (Double No.), pp. 167-190, pil. xlix-liv (“July to”) Oct., 1883. Part 19, Jan., 1884, pp. 191-206, pll. lv-lvii. Part 20, 1887.] Recent. Literature. I51 ing in the pages of the ‘Nuttall Bulletin’ and of ‘The Auk.’ It now gives us real pleasure to record the completion of so meritorious and important a publication, pushed with every painstaking through a period of eight years to a successful termination. Circumstances have been against the authors in more ways than one, which one alone would have led most persons to abandon the project. But they have steadily persevered, and the result is one which will take its place among the most original and most notable treatises on ornithology which have appeared in this country. It might be going too far to say that the work does for caliology and odlogy what Audubon’s did for its own subject; but if the drawings and writings of the latter had been confined to the birds of a single State, the comparison would hold. Several treatises on eggsand nests, more or less ambitious, have been essayed, but they have all broken down, though most- ly projected under more favorable circumstances than this one. With little encouragement from high sources, with less assistance still, and with no adequate pecuniary support, it required courage, patience, and en- thusiastic devotion to a purpose to accomplish such a result—circum- stances which, in these days of that easy book-making which results in such hard book-reading, carry us in mind back to Alexander Wilson’s appearance before the public with the first two volumes of ‘American Orni- thology’ under his arm. The work is simply admirable. Its cost may place it beyond the reach of many working ornithologists, but it should be found in our principal libraries, as we have no doubt that it will. In Ohio, at any rate, it should not be beneath the notice of the Legislature, with reference to those edu- cational institutions which are under legislative jurisdiction. Upwards of one hundred species of eggs are figured in colors by hand, usually with several specimens of each, showing the variations in size, shape and markings. Their average excellence—for they vary somewhat —has not been equalled in this country, and they are surpassed only by the best productions of foreign artists. No such series of the figures of nests has ever appeared anywhere. Nests are often introduced as acces- sories of figures of birds, as they were, notably, by Audubon, and many very pretty and effective woodcuts of these objects are extant. But these are a larger collection than have appeared together before; they are life- sized and life-colored—if such expressions be permitted. and many of them ere introduced with their accessories. In some cases the eggs rest in the nest, and the whole effect is singularly true to nature. There is room for criticism, as where is there not? But we imagine few critics would speak, Apr., 1885, pp. 207-234, pll. lviii-lx. Parts 21,22 (Double No.), pp. 235-286, pll. Lxi-Ixvi (“July to”) Oct., 1886. Part 23, Dec., 1886, pp. i-x xxviii, xx xviii-a-d, 287-3209, pll. lxvii- Ixviii. Title, etc., pub. with Part 23. Title, p.i; Dedication, p. iii; Preface, pp. v-viii; Intro- ductory, pp. ix-xxxiii, including Lists of Ohio Birds: Key to the Eggs of the Summer Residents of Ohio, pp. Xx Xiv-xxxvili, xxxviii a-d; Main Text pp. 41-314; Etymo- logical Key, pp. 315-320; Names of Subscribers, pp. 321-322; Index to Illustrations, PP- 323, 324; General Index, pp. 325-329. 152 Recent Literature. [April if the condition of their being heard were, that they should be able to do as well themselves. The text is very original, resting almost entirely upon the personal ob- servations of the authors. It has no literary merit, unless directness and clearness be such. It resists the usual temptation to prepare full biogra- phies of the birds, confining itself strictly to the subject in hand. Each article opens with general statements regarding the bird in its Ohion as- pects, continuing with the ‘locality,’ ‘position’ and ‘materials’ of the nest, descriptions of the ‘eggs,’ ‘differential points’ of the same, and concluding remarks at large. The text is almost entirely from the pen of Dr. Howard > E. Jones, and the plates have in nearly every instance been drawn from fresh material collected by this author, mainly in the vicinity of Circleville. The project was initiated by Miss Genevieve Estelle Jones and Miss Eliza J. Shulze, who determined in 1877 to make a series of colored plates. The sad death of the former young lady, August 17, 1879, and the withdrawal of Miss Shulze in April, 1880, threw the work upon the hands of the Jones family. Dr. N. E. Jones assumed the expense of the work, Mrs. N. E. Jones proceeded with the plates, Dr. Howard Jones (brother of Miss Gene- vieve) undertook the text as already said, and subsequently Miss Nellie D. Jacob of Circleville, Miss Josephine Kippart of Columbus, and Miss Kate Gephart, of Circleville, were engaged to assist Mrs. Jones in the col- oring. Had the result been but a measured success instead of a remarka- ble accomplishment, ‘great credit would have been due to all concerned. The Introductory is a general sketch of the Birds of Ohio. It appears that of summer residents there are 129; of permanent residents, 41; prob- able residents and summer residents, 42. This category is followed bya systematic, annotated list, copied from Dr. J. M. Wheaton’s work, noting 292 species known to occur in the State. A quite original and peculiar ‘Key to the Eggs’ follows. The eggs are found to be groupable by color in the following manner: I. Eggs plain. A, white or whitish; 22 spp. B, blue or bluish, green or greenish; 17 spp. C, some other plain color as buff, etc. ; 5 spp. Il. Eggs marked. A, B, C, as before, as to ground color; A, 56 spp.; B, 20 spp.; C, 25 spp. And in every case in this remarkable set of tables, the eggs are not only thus classified, but described concisely, with measurements of length and breadth, the linear arrangement in each group being according to size. It is a very pretty and effectual piece of work. Among appendicular matters is an ‘Etymological Key,’ in which Rev. S. H. McMullin undertakes to give the English equivalents of all the Latin and Greek names of the birds, and offers quite as much ornithophilo- logicality as the average bird-lover may require.—E. C. Ridgway’s Nomenclature of Colors and Ornithologists’ Compendium.* *A | Nomenclature of Colors | for Naturalists, | and | Compendium of Useful Knowl- edge | for Ornithologists. | By | Robert Ridgway, | Curator of Birds, United States National Museum. | With ten colored plates and seven plates | of outline illustrations Boston: | Little, Brown, and Company. 1886, 8vo., pp. 129, pll. i-xviii, faced by ex- planatory leaves. 1887.] Recent Literature. I 53 —Mr.Ridgway’s little manual will doubtless prove of great utility, and should meet with a hearty welcome. It consists of two parts. Of Part I, ‘Nomenclature of Colors,’ some twenty pages are devoted to ‘Principles of Color,’ and consist largely of directions as to the selection of pig- ments and their combination to form certain desired tints. This is fol- lowed by a ‘Comparative Vocabulary of Colors,’ giving the equivalent names in English, Latin, German, French, Spanish, Italian, Norwegian, and Danish, occupying nearly twenty pages more. Two pages of ‘Bibli- ography’ complete Part I, which is illustrated by ten hand-colored plates. Part II is entitled ‘Ornithologists’ Compendium,’ and is made up large- ly of a ‘Glossary of Technical Terms used in Descriptive Ornithology,’ which occupies nearly one-half of the book; it is illustrated by six plates of outline figures, three of which are devoted to the ‘topography’ or ‘exter- nal anatomy’ of a bird, two to various forms of color-marks on feathers, and one to egg-contours. Another plate gives a comparative scale of measurement standards, as the English inch, the French inch (pied du roi), and millimetres. Part II closes with a table showing ‘‘the equivalents in English inches, and decimals thereof, of every tenth of a milimetre, from 1.0 to 100.9,” and another ‘‘for converting English inches and decimals into millimetres.” The author acknowledges his indebtedness to Dr. Leonhard Stejneger not only for suggesting these useful tables but for their preparation, and for aid in compiling the comparative color-vocabulary. In Part I of the present work Mr. Ridgway has attempted a difficult task, requiring much research, a nice display of judgment, and other qualifica- tions which only experience and skill as a colorist, combined with critical knowledge of the requirements of descriptive ornithology, could give. The details of the subject afford much latitude for a diversity of opinion; and whatever the results attained, they would be more or less subject to adverse criticism, especially in regard to the proper designation of partic- ular shades of color. ‘‘Undoubtedly,” as the author says, ‘‘one of the chief desiderata of naturalists, both professional and amateur, is a means of identifying the various shades of colors named in descriptions, and of being able to determine exactly what name to apply to a particular tint which it is desired to designate in an original description.” There being no modern work of this character extant, Mr. Ridgway has very laudably attempted to supply the want. While he has supplied a standard for color nomenclature—and so far as we can see an excellent one—it fails by far, from the nature of the subject, to clear away all the difficulties, since the names of colors in current use are in many cases both vague and variable. The general adoption by future describers of the standard here set would do much to improve matters, and would give a uniform basis for color- nomenclature ; but it would be, unfortunately, highly unsafe to attempt to make the standard retroactive, and interpret by it the color descriptions of the already existing literature. But this is no fault of the present author or his system; and his work as a whole cannot fail to be extremely useful. Part II must prove especially welcome to all beginners in ornithology, to whom, however, its usefulness will be by no means limited.—J. A. A. 154 Recent Literature. [April Bryant on the Ornithology of Guadalupe Island.—In December, 1885, Mr. Bryant visited Guadalupe Island, and the results of his three and a half months’ work there is given in a paper* of 50 pages, published in the ‘Bulletin’ of the California Academy of Sciences. The only previous exploration of the island in the interest of ornithology was made by Dr. Edward Palmer, in 1875, who obtained 72 specimens of birds, representing nine species, eight of them being land birds and new toscience. To this list Mr. Bryant added 27 species, raising the total number now known from the island to 36. All but four of the species are land birds, and eight of them are peculiar to the island. Mr. Bryant’s paper opens with a detailed account of the topography, climate, and vegetation of the island, which is followed by a copiously annotated list of the species, consisting of bio- graphical notes of much interest, including descriptions of the nests and eggs of most of the resident species, of which nothing was previously known. Good series of specimens were obtained of most of the species met with, measurements of which are also included. Although Dr. Palmer seems to have harvested the ‘first fruits’ (Mr. Bry- ant failing to obtain any species new to science), Mr. Bryant’s paper ad- mirably supplements Mr. Ridgway’s papers on the bird fauna of the island, based on Dr. Palmer’s collections, and forms a highly important contribu- tion to the subject, leaving apparently little to be added by future explor- OPS) fo JG aN Ralph and Bagg on the Birds of Oneida County, N. Y.—The ‘Anno- tated List of the Birds of Oneida County, N. Y., and its immediate vicin- ity,’ + by Dr. William L. Ralph and Mr. Egbert Bagg, though not ‘‘put forth as complete,” is based on the observations of several years, and ap- pears to have been compiled in a thoroughly scientific spirit and with due care, the authority being stated for such data as are not given on their per- sonal knowledge. A few species have been included from having been found in neighboring counties, for which there is as yet no positive record for the county in question, but they are duly distinguished in the annotations, and are covered by the title in the phrase ‘‘its immediate vicinity.” Many valuable observations are accredited to Dr. C. Hart Merriam (now of Washington, D. C.), and Messrs. A. L. Brainard and A. A. Howlet, of Syracuse. The List numbers 224 species.—J. A. A. Platt on the Birds of Meriden, Conn.—Mr. Platt’s Listt appears to have strict reference to the town limits of Meriden, Conn., and to be based almost wholly on the author’s personal observations. It is briefly annotated and numbers 116 species. The list is very attractively printed, and seems thoroughly trustworthy, so far as it goes, but is obviously in- * Additions to the Ornithology of Guadalupe Island. By Walter E. Bryant. Bull. California Acad. Sciences, No. 6, pp. 269-318. (“Issued Jan. 5, 1887.”) t Trans. of the Oneida Hist. Soc., Vol. III, pp. ror-147, 1886. fA List of the Birds of Meriden, Conn, By Franklin Platt. Trans. of the Meriden Scientific Assoc., Meriden, Conn., Vol, II, 1885-86, (Feb. 1887), pp. 30-53. 1887.] PRecent Literature. I 5 5 complete. The author has wisely, however, confined his list to the species positively known to occur.—J. A. A. Maynard on ‘Five New Species of Birds from the Bahamas.’—In a paper entitled ‘Corrected Descriptions of Five New Species of Birds from the Bahamas,’ published in an obscure trade journal,* Mr. C. J. Maynard has briefly characterized ‘‘ provisionally, in advance of my [his] work on illustrations and notes of Birds of the Bahamas,” the following species as new: Pandion ridgwayt, Fallus coryt, Chamepelia bahamen- sis, Ammodramus australis, Geothlypis restricta. The Ammodramus australis is said to be ‘‘Rare in the Bahamas, but constantly resident in Florida.” Most of the species are closely allied to well-known continental forms, to which they have been hitherto, and probably will be in future, commonly referred. But whatever their fate, Mr. Maynard most un- wisely chose his medium for their publication, and was most unfortunate in the treatment his original article, published in a previous issue of the paper in question, received at the hands of the printer, it being so full of misprints, particularly in the scientific names, as to necessitate its re- publication in a corrected form; hence the title, as above cited. Mr. Maynard, not feeling sure that Columba passerina of Linnzus was not based on Bahama specimens rather than on examples from the main land, has taken the precaution to ‘‘propose the name of Chamepelia purpurea tor the larger continental dove” !—J. A. A. Shufeldt’s Contributions to Science.t—Dr. Shufeldt has recently pub- lished an annotated list of his scientific papers, numbering 123 titles. They embrace a wide range of topics, though mainly ornithological, and indicate great industry and intellectual activity on the part of their author. The list forms an exceptionally neat and well-printed pamphlet of twenty pages.—]J. A. A. Stejneger ‘On the Status of Synthliboramphus wumizusume as a North American Bird.’ Under this titlef Dr Stejneger affirms that the only specimens extant of this species from North American localities prove to be immature or winter examples of S. antiguus. He therefore believes that ‘‘Until authenticated and undoubted American specimens are found, it may be expedient to remove Syxthliboramphus wumizusume to the ‘Hypothetical List’ (A. O. U. Check List, p. 347). It isa case in many respects completely parallel to that of Cepphus carbo.”—J. A. A. * The American Exchange and Mart and Household Journal, Vol. III, No. 6, Feb. 5, 1887, p. 69. (Boston and New York.) + 1881-1887. | — | Contributions to Science | and | Bibliographical Résumé | of the Writings | of | R. W. Shufeldt, M. D., | Captain; Medical Department, U.S. Army | .... [= lines, titles]. | — | By their Author. | — | — | Press of L. S. Foster, New York. | 1887. 8vo, pp. 20. f Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 1836, p. 524. I 56 Recent Literature. [April Ridgway on New Species of American Birds, etc.—A species of Myzar- chus* supposed to be from the Orinoco district of South America, is de- scribed as Myzarchus coale7. It is said to most resemble M. nigriceps Scl., and is from the collection of Mr. H. K. Coale. A new species of Picolaf- tes (P. riker#) is describedt from near Santarem, Lower Amazon, where it was recently collected by Mr. C. B. Riker. A new subspecies of Cy- clorhis (C. faviventris yucatanensis) is describedt from three specimens taken in Yucatan. Mr. Ridgway has also described a new Plumed Partridge from Sonora,§ under the name Cadlipepla elegans benson7, based on five specimens taken by Lieut. H. C. Benson, U.S. A., in Sonora. Mr. Ridgway has also re- corded a Woodpecker|| supposed to be a hybrid between Nuttall’s Wood- pecker and Gairdner’s Woodpecker, which in ‘‘every feature of size, form, and coloration” is exactly intermediate between these two species.—J. A. A. Publications Received.—Berlepsch, Hans von. (1) On some interest- ing additions to the Avifauna of Bucaramanga, U. S. of Columbia. (Ibis, 1886, pp. 53-57; pl. iv.) (2) Kritische Bemerkungen zur Colibri-Literatur. (Separat. aus der Festschrift der Ver. fiir Naturk. zu Cassel. 1886.) Berlepsch, Hans von, und Dr. Herman von Jhoring. Die Végel der Ungegend von Taquara do Mundo Novo, Prov. Rio Grande do Sul. (Sep- arat. aus der Zeitsch. fiir gesammte Orn., 1885.) Blasius, R. (1) Ueber den Wanderzug des Tannhehers (Nucifraga caryocatactes L.) im Herbste 1885. (Braunschweigische Anzeigen, No. 164, 16 Juli, 1886.) (2) Der Dompfaff Brutvogel bei Braunschweig; Der diesjihrige Wanderzug der Sperbereule (Surnia nisoria Wolf) ; Brutplatze des Alpenseglers (Cypselus melba L.). (Ibid., No. 305, 30 Dec., 1886.) Bryant, Walter E. Additions to the Ornithology of Guadalupe Island. (Extr. Bull. No. 6, California Acad. Sci., Jan. 5, 1887.) Carpenter, Frederic H. The occurrence of the Osprey in the Fauna of Bristol County, Mass. (Publ. Bristol Co. Orn. Club, No. 2, 1887.) Dubois, Alph. Compte rendu des observations ornithologiques faites en Belgique pendant l’année 1885. (Extr. Bull. du Mus. roy. d’Hist. Nat. de Belgique, IV, 1886.) Maynard, C. J. Corrected descriptions of five new species of Birds from the Bahamas. (Amer. Exch. and Mart. III, “No. 6, p. 69, Feb. 5, 1887.) Pelzeln, August von, und Dr. Ludwig von Lorenz. Typen der ornithol- * Description of a new species of Myiarchus, presumably from the Orinoco District of South America. By Robert Ridgway. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 1886, p. 521. ¢ Description of a new species of Picolaptes from the Lower Amazon, Ibid., p. 523. { Description ofa new Subspecies of Cyclorhis from Yucatan. Ibid., p. 519. § Description of a new Plumed Partridge from Sonora (Callipepla elegans bensoni) Forest and Stream, Vol. XXVIII, No.6, March 3, 1887, p. 106. || Ona probable Hybrid between Dryobates nuttalli (Gamb.) and D. pubescens gairdnerii (Aud.). Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 1886, pp. 521, 522, -1887.] Recent Literature. 157 ogischen Sammlung des k. k. naturhistorischen Hofmuseums, Wien. (Extr. Ann. des k. k. Naturhist. Hofmuseums, I, 1886.) Platt, Franklin. A list of the Birds of Meriden, Conn. (Trans. Meri- den Sci. Ass., II, pp. 30-53, 1887.) Ralph, Wm. L., andEgbert Bagg. Annotated list of the Birds of Oneida County, N. Y., and its immediate vicinity. (Trans. Oneida Hist. Soc., III, 1886, pp. 101-147.) Ridgway, Robert. (1) Nomenclature of Colors for Naturalists, and Com- pendium of Useful Knowledge for Ornithologists. 8vo. Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1886. (2) Descriptions of an apparently new Spe- cies of Picolaptes, from the Lower Amazon. (Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., 1886, p. 523.) Salvadori, Tommaso. Elenco degli Uccelli Italiani. (Ann. Mus. Civ. di Stor. Nat. di Genova, Ser. 2, Vol. III, 1887.) Shufeldt, R. W. Contributions to Science and Bibliographical Résumé of the Writings of R. W. Shufeldt, M.D., etc., 1881-1887. 8vo. pp. 20. L. S. Foster, New York, 1887. Stejneger, L. (1) On Turdus alpestris and Turdus torquatus, two dis- tinct species of European Thrushes. (Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., 1886, pp. 365-373.) (2) Review of Japanese Birds, Part II, Tits and Nuthatches. Part III, Rails, Gallinules and Coots. (Ibid., pp. 374-408.) (3) Notes on species of the Australian Genus Pardalotus. (Ibid., pp. 294-296.) (4) De- scription of Rallus jouyi, with Remarks on Rallus striatus and Rallus gularis. (Ibid., pp. 362-364.) (5) The British Marsh-Tit. (Ibid., pp. 200, 201.) (6) On the Status of Synthliboramphus wumizusume. (Ibid.. p. 524.) (7) On a Collection of Birds made by Mr. M. Namize, in the Liu Kiu Islands, Japan, with descriptions of New Species. (Ibid., pp. 634-651.) Swinburne, Spearman. Notes on Birds observed on Voyages between England and the Cape of Good Hope. Communicated by J. J. Dalgleish. (Proc. Roy. Phys. Soc. Edinburgh, IX, 1885-86, pp. 193-201.) Agassiz Companion, A Month. Mag. devoted to the Nat. Sci., Philately, _and the interest of the Agassiz Ass., II, No. 1, Jan. 1887. American Field, XX VII, Nos. 1-12, 1887. American Naturalist, XXI, Jan., 1887. American Journal of Science, XX XIII, Jan.-March, 1887. Anzeiger, Zoologischer, Nos. 240-245, 1887. Audubon Magazine, I, Nos. 1, 2, 1887. Bird Call, The, I, Nos. 1-3, Jan.-March, 1887. Bulletin American Museum Natural History, Vol. I, Nos. 1-8, 1881-87 ; Annual Reports do., 1871-1886. Curiosity World, I, No. 6, Feb., 1887. Forest and Stream, XXVII, Nos. 23-26, XXVIII, Nos. 1-8, 1887. Hoosier Naturalist, Il, No. 4-6, Dec., 1886-Jan., 1887. Jornal de Scien. Math., Phys. e Nat. da Acad. real das Sci. de Lisboa, _No. 40-44, Jul. 1885-Dec. 1886. Journal Cincinnati Soc. Nat. Hist., IX, No. 4, Jan. 1887. Naturalist, The, A Month. Journ. Nat. Hist. for the North of England, No. 138-140, Jan.-March, 1887. 15 8 General Notes. [April Ornis, Jahr. II, Heft 1, 2, 1886. Ornithologist and Odlogist, XI, Nos. 11-12, 1886, XII, Nos. 1-3, 1887. Report of the U. S. Commissioner of Agriculture, 1886. Report of the Fish and Game Commissioners of Massachusetts for 1886. Reports of the Micr. Soc. of West Chester, Pa., onan Act of the Assem- bly of Pennsylvania, awarding a premium for the Destruction of Hawks, Owls, Minks, Weasels, etc., 1887. Swiss Cross, a Month. Mag. of the Agassiz Ass., I, Jan.-March, 1887. Proceedings Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, pt. 3, Oct.-Dec., 1886. Proceedings U. S. Nat. Mus., 1886, pp. 289-624. Zoologist, XI, Nos. 121-123, Jan.-March, 1887. GENERAL NOTES. The Common Murre (Urza trozle) and the Razor-billed Auk (Alca torda) on the New England Coast.—Among some birds received by Mr. F. B. Webster from a gunner at Eastport, Maine, December 27, 1886, I found three Murres. They were in the flesh and evidently had been dead only a few days. With them were sent one Briinnich’s Murre (Urza Zomvia), and no less than twenty Razor-billed Auks. The latter occurred in great numbers at various points between Eastport, Maine, and Prov- incetown, Mass., during November and December, 1886; ordinarily they are notcommon. The Briinnich’s Murre, usually an abundant visitor in the late autumn, has been apparently nearly wanting the past season.— WILLIAM BREWSTER, Cambridge, Mass. Capture of the Razor-billed Auk at Norfolk, Virginia.—By request of Dr. A. K. Fisher I sefd to ‘The Auk’ the foliowing note recording the capture of the Razor-billed Auk (Adca forda) in the vicinity of Norfolk, Virginia. Jam not able to state by whom it was shot, nor the date, but it was about the 15th of October. The bird was a male, in fine plumage and good condition. This, I believe, is the first one taken so far south.— FREDERICK 5S. WEBSTER, Washington, D. C. Megalestris skua.—In ‘The Auk,’ Vol. III, No. 4, Oct., 1886, p. 432, I recorded what I supposed to be the third occurrence of this species in North America. A previous record of two seen on Nantucket Shoals, Oct. 11, 1883, may be found in ‘Notes on the Habits and Methods of Cap- ture of Various Species of Sea Birds that occur on the Fishing Banks off the Eastern Coast of North America, and which are used for bait for catching Codfish by New England Fishermen,’ by Capt. J. W. Collins (pp- 13 and 14, of separate, extracted from the Annual Report of the Com- missioner of Fish and Fisheries for’ 1882, pp. 323 and 324).—WILLIAM DutcHerR, New York City. 1887. ] General Notes. 159 More News of Ardea wuerdemanni.—I have lately received from Mr. R. X. Stuart, of Tampa, Florida, four specimens of A. wuerdemannt, which were taken on the small island southwest of Cape Sable, Florida. Mr. Stuart writes me he procured six examples of this rare bird, as well as a fine series of Ardea occtidentalis, which he found breeding in Decem- ber, and obtained many eggs. Several sets of eggs of Halzaétus leuco- cephalus were taken in the same locality.k—CuARLES B. Cory, Boston, Mass. Ardea egretta in Niagara County, N. Y. — In April, 1884, I reported to the ‘Forest and Stream’ the capture of three birds of this species in the ad- joining county of Orleans, on Nov. 28, 1883. At that time I little ex- pected that I would ever have an opportunity to mention its occurrence nearer home. But on the 18th of last August two specimens were brought to me, by different persons, for identification, both taken in the town of Newfane, this county. near the village of Olcott, on Lake Ontario. I did not have an opportunity to learn the sex, but took the measurements of one of them: Length, 363 inches; wing, 154; tarsus, 6. —J. L. Davison, Lockport, Niagara County, N. Y. Further Notes on the Masked Bob-white ( Colinus ridgway?).—Mr. J. C. Cahoon, who is at present collecting in Northern Mexico, has just sent me ten specimens of the Masked Bob-white, taken February 5-8, 1887, in the province of Sonora, about fifty miles south of the United States boun- dary. The eight males included in this series show an even greater range of variation than the ten birds of the same sex so carefully described* by Mr. Allen. Two agree closely with the male figured in Mr. Allen’s plate, hav- ing similarly solid black foreheads and throats, and plain, rich cinnamon underparts relieved by only a few markings of black or white on the cris- sum and under tail-coverts. Both show traces of a white superciliary stripe, which in one extends forward to the front border of the eye, in the other to within about a quarter of an inch of the nostril. The remaining six males have the mask and underparts more or less freely sprinkled with white. Rather curiously, those which have the most white about the head show the least beneath, and those which are largely white beneath have the mask nearlyimmaculate. In the specimen representing the extreme of the former condition the crown is scarcely darker than in C. v¢rgintanus, while a white stripe, averaging about one- tenth of an inch in width, extends along the side of the head from the nostrils to the nape, passing just over the eye. The chin, also, is nearly pure white, and the throat everywhere thickly spotted with white, the only unmixed black areas being a small patch just below the eye anda ‘cravat’ about half an inch wide on the jugulum. The bird illustrating the other extreme has the central line of the abdo- * Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., No. 7, July, 1886, pp. 273-290, pl. xxiii, 160 General Notes. [April men soiled white and the remainder of the underparts behind or below the jugulum, excepting a small area in the middle of the breast, variegated everywhere with black and white, each feather having a pair of rounded white spots tipping its opposite webs, these spots being usually embraced between the horns of V-shaped, black markings. In this series the shade of the cinnamon of the underparts is in proportion to the amount of white, the cinnamon being palest in the birds having the most white, and deep- est in those which have the least. This fact has suggested to me the pos- sibility that the paler, spotted birds may be the young, and those with nearly or perfectly black masks and immaculate underparts the adults; but Mr. Allen’s theory that such variations indicate near relationship to, if not actual intergradation with, the white-throated C. graysonz is perhaps more probable. I notice, however, that all the specimens examined. by Mr. Allen (except my type, taken early in August, and an unusually deep-colored and black-headed bird) were killed in September and Febru- ary, months when young or immature birds would naturally outnumber the fully mature ones. Mr. Ridgway’s ‘‘suspicion” that C. graysoné and C. ridgwayt ‘‘may be individual color phases of the same species” seems to me the least likely hypothesis of the three, unless we may assume that the two ‘phases’ have different habitats; or, at least, that a portion of the region occupied by each phase is not invaded by the other. Mr. Cahoon found the Masked Bob-white about Bacuachi and at.a ranch some eighteen miles north of Cumpas. They were abundant (several large covies were seen and eight specimens shot in one day), haunting patches of weeds in gardens and barren ‘‘sand wastes, where. they fed on the seeds of a plant called red-root.” Their habits are hke those of C. vérginianus and their call-notes precisely similar. When scattered they lie very closely.—WILLIAM BREWSTER, Cambridge, Mass. Capture of a Third Specimen of the Short-tailed Hawk (Buéeo bra- chyurus) in Florida. — Mr. E. H. Forbush, of Worcester, has lately sent me a Buteo brachyurus which was shot by Mr. Charles E. Bailey at the head of Ten-Mile Creek (a tributary of the St. Lucie River), Brevard County, Florida, March 11, 1886. Jt isan adult female of the white-bellied form. ‘Two specimens (one in the black plumage) haye been previously recorded* from Florida by Mr. Ridgway. The occurrence of this third bird strengthens the suspicion that the species may have become perma- nently established in that State.—WILL1IAM BrewsTER, Cambridge, Mass. A Third New England Specimen of Swainson’s Hawk (Bufeo swazu- sont). — Mr. E. S. Bowler has just sent me a Swainson’s Hawk. taken at Gouldsboro’, Maine, Sept. 15, 1886, by Mr. E. Gordon. It isa young bird of the melanistic type, but not wholly black. The species is known to have occurred only twice before in New England, both times in Massachusetts Salem, winter of 1871-72 (Addex, Bull. Essex Inst., X, 1878, 22); Way- land,.Sept. 12, 1876 (Brewster, Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, II], 1878, 39).— WILLIAM BrREwSTER, Cambridge, Mass. * Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, VI, 1881, pp. 210, 212. 1887.] General Notes. 161 A Migration of Hawks at Germantown, Pa.—On the afternoons of September 21 and 29, 1886, great numbers of Hawks passed over here. They flew in a westerly direction and were observed from 2to4p.m. I did not notice them in the morning or on any of the intervening dates. On the 21sti'they came ina long line, two or three at a time; occasionally they would circle about and wait until others caught up with them and then. all would pass on together; at no time during the afternoon was I able to count more than thirty in sight at once. On the 29th a few dozen passed over as described above, and then came alarge flock containing at least two hundred and fifty Hawks. When directly overhead they divided into two flocks and began circling about, and finally passed on to the west. I could see that there were several different species in the flock, but they were too high up for me to identify them.— WITMER STONE, German- town, Pa. The Saw-whet Owl in the District of Columbia.—I have also the pleasure of recording the occurrence of the Saw-whet Owl (Wyc/ala acadica) in the District of Columbia. The first one was found by a farmer about October 3. It was lodged in the branches of a small tree, where it had evidently died; from what cause is not positively known. This bird has the habit of doing this sort of thing. A few years ago I obtained one that had died in this manner, and about the same time, I think the following year, I-had three brought to me that were found in barns dead. This experience very conclusively proves to my mind the delicate make-up of this bird and its inability to cope with the adversities of bird life. About.a week later, lam informed, two others were obtained by a farmer just outside of the District limits. I have not yet ascertained whether or not these two birds were shot or found dead, as all the others were that I ever obtained. — FREDERICK S. WEBSTER, Washington, D.C. The Imperial Woodpecker (Campephilus z¢mperialis) in Northern Sonora. — During a scouting expedition in the Apache campaign of last year Lieutenant: H. C. Benson, of the U. S. Army, found this species to be common in the pine forests of the Sierra Madre, in Sonora, within fifty miles of the Arizona boundary. Owing to lack of time and facilities he was unable to preserve specimens, but a head which he sent to the Na- tional Museum renders the identification of the species positive. This magnificent bird—the largest of all known Woodpeckers, considerably exceeding the Ivory-bill in size (the wing measuring 11.70 to 13.20 inches and the exposed culmen 2.70 to 3.60 inches)—will doubtless soon be added to the North American fauna. —RoBERT RipGWay, Washington, 1OY ES The Coppery-tailed Trogon (Z7vrogox ambiguus) breeding in South- ern Arizona.—A young male of this species, still in nestling plumage, though full grown, was collected August 24, 1885, in the Huachuca Moun- 162 General Notes. [April tains, by Lieutenant H. C. Benson, U.S. A. This capture renders it ex- tremely probable that the Trogon referred to by Mr. W. E. D. Scott in ‘The Auk’ for October, 1886, p. 425, as observed in the Chiracahua Moun- tains, was this species, which is the only one of the Red-bellied Mexican species whose range extends beyond the southern half of that country. Lieutenant Benson’s specimen, which is now in the National Museum collection, will be described in full in the ‘Proceedings’ of the National Museum for 1887.—RoBERT RipGway, Washington, D. C. Capture of a Fish Crow (Corvus osstfragus) at Wareham, Massachu- setts.—Inasmuch as my record (Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, I, 1876, p. 19) of a Fish Crow seen at Cambridge, March 16, 1875, has been treated with wholesome caution—not to say incredulity—by several recent writers on New England birds, it gives me pleasure to present a second and quite un- impeachable instance of the occurrence of the species in Massachusetts. This time the bird was actually taken ;—at Wareham, July 16, 1884, by Mr. E. A. Bangs, in whose collection the specimen is now preserved, and to whom Iam indebted for the following account of its capture: ‘‘T was fishing with my brother in Tihonet Pond and, as usual on such occasions, had my gun with me. While crossing the pond we saw two birds sitting on a tree near the mouth of a brook. From their actions I thought at first that they were Pigeons, but on getting nearer made out that they were black and resembled small Crows. We approached them with all possible caution, but they flew before we got within sixty yards. I brought down one, when the other.circled over it for a moment, but it escaped before I could reload the gun (a single barrel). The one I killed proved to be a female in full plumage.”—WILLIAM BrewsTER, Cambridge, Mass. Occurrence of Agelaius pheeniceus (L.) on the West Coast of England. —Additions to the useful ‘List of Occurrences of North American Birds in Europe,’ contributed by Mr. Dalgleish to the ‘Bulletin’ of the Nuttall Ornithological Club in 1880, will, doubtless, always be welcome in the pages of ‘The Auk.’ It affords me much pleasure to add to that list the capture of an immigrant specimen of Agelaius phaniceus (L.)—a species which has been recorded as occurring in Britain on at least a dozen occa- sions on evidence of a more or less satisfactory nature, some of the speci- mens being supposed escapes from confinement. The bird now to be recorded struck against the lantern of the Nash Lighthouse, on the Welsh Coast of the Bristol Channel, at 3 A.M. on the 27th of October last, and was intended to be forwarded to me by its captor, Mr. Henry Nicholas, one of the most valued observers of the British Association’s Bird Mi- gration Committee, but during his absence for a few moments was unfortunately carried off by the cat. Mr. Nicholas had no difficulty in identifying the bird by the aid of his books, but I at once sent him a skin of the bird (an adult) in order to test his determination of the species, and he replied ‘‘that the bird killed very much resembled the one sent ex- 4 d , 1887.] General Notes. I 63 cept that the yellow on the wings was rather paler; the tips of the wings and the back of the neck were more sooty black, and I think it wasa little larger’’;—a description indicating an immature bird, which is what we should have expected, since it is from the ranks of these youngsters that nine-tenths of the erratic wanderers visiting our shores are recruited. The late hours of the 26th of October and the early ones of the 27th would seem, from the returns, to have constituted an important ‘immigra- tion night,’ as a few particulars furnished from the schedule of the Nash Light will make manifest :—At 9.50 p.m., Missel Thrushes ( Zurdus vis- ctvorus); at 10 P.M., Bramblings (friuzgilla montifrigilla); at 10.30 P.M., Snipes (Gallinago celestis), four of which struck and were killed; at 12.40 A.M., Redwings (Zurdus tliacus), two killed; at 2 A.m., Wrens (Troglodytes parvulus), one captured; at 2.10 A.M., Robins (4r7thacus rubecula), and Black Redstart (/tu¢zeclla titys), killed; and finally at 3 A.M., the bird in which we are specially interested. The wind prevailing at the time was a strong easterly breeze; weather cloudy with passing showers of rain.—Wmn. EAGLE CLARKE, F. L. S., The Museum, Leeds, England. The Redpolls of Massachusetts.—In his ‘Revised List of the Birds of Massachusetts’ Mr. Allen includes only two Redpolls, Acanthis linaria and A. 7. rostrata. He does not give his reasons for excluding Acanthis hornemanni extlifes, but whatever they may have been, this bird has an indisputable right to a place in our fauna. Ihave exan.ined the speci- men taken by Jeffries at Swampscott, Nov. 16, 1878 (see Bull. N. O. C., IV, April, 1879, p. 121); that shot by Atkinson and recorded by Dr. Brewer-(Proc._Bos. Soc. N. H., XX, 1879, p- 270); and a bird in the Cambridge Museum, to which Mr. Allen probably referred when he at- tributed exzlzjes to Massachusetts in 1870 (Am. Nat., III, p. 583). and all three are unmistakable examples of A. &. extlifes. To this number I can add the following, none of which seem to have been previously an- nounced* : © A male in the collection of Mr. H. M. Spelman, taken Nov. 15, 1880, in Cambridge; a pair shot at Revere Beach, Mass., March 8, 1879, by Mr. Foster H. Brackett, and now in the collection of Mr. Charles R. Lamb; a pair killed at Revere Beach, March g, 1883, by Messrs. Spelman and Chad- bourne, the former of whom has the male, the latter the female; anda male shot at Nantasket Beach, Feb. 22, 1883, by Matthew Lucas, Jr., and in the collection of the present writer. All of the males just mentioned are in gray (immature ?) plumage. Besides the forms above referred to, a fourth occurs, at least rarely, in Massachusetts. This is Acanthis linarta holbellit Brehm, of which I have two examples,t shot together at Swampscott, March 26, 1883; both are males, one in gray plumage. the other a rosy-breasted adult (?). * Several of them, perhaps, were incidentally referred to by Mr. Chadbourne (Quar. Jour. Boston ZoGl. Soc., Vol. II, April, 1883, p. 31). + Dr. Stejneger has kindly examined them and confirmed my determination, I 64 General Notes. [April Thus of the five Redpolls attributed to North America at large four have been found in Massachusetts. Of these A. d‘varza visits us in abun- dance, but of course more or less irregularly; A. rostrata in smaller numbers, but still plentifully at times, as in February, 1883 (see Bull. N.O.C., Vol. VIII, pp. 95-99, recorded as 42 giothus linaria holboell?) ; A. h. exilipes in very limited numbers, and perhaps even less regularly than either of the two preceding; while A. 7. holbeliiZ is apparently the rarest of the four and possibly a mere accidental straggler. The fifth North American form, Acanthis hornemannt tyfica, has never been taken within the limits of the United States. As the recent shifting of names in this group is somewhat confusing it may be well to explain, that the <4gvothus linaria holboelli which I re- recorded* from: Massachusetts in 1883 is the Acamthzs linaria rostrata of the A. O. U. List, and the Acanthis linaria holb@liiz, now for the ‘first time reported from our State, another and very different form, much more nearly like true démzarza, from which it can be distinguished only by its greater size and longer bill. Those who care to look further into this subject should consult Dr. Stejneger’s able papers on the genus Acanthis.,|—WILLIAM BREWSTER, Cambridge, Mass. [The omission of Acanthis hornemanni extlipfes from my ‘Revised List’ was due (1) to the fact that the then latest authorities on this group did not recognize exz/zfes as occurring south of ‘‘ Arctic America and North- eastern Asia”; (2) in view of the recent radical shifting of names, and the supposed not wholly trustworthy identification of at least some of the specimens of ‘exz/zfes,’ referred to above as recorded from Massachu- setts, the omission of this form was thought to be the safer course, es- pecially as the alleged specimens were not then accessible to me for examination.—J. A. ALLEN. ] Vireo solitarius alticola in Tennessee.—In my list of birds taken in Roane County, Tennessee (Auk, III, p. 317), I record two specimens of Vireo solitarius. Mr. Ridgway has since informed me that the-specimens are typical of the new form adt/cola. Both specimens were females, and were taken at the foot of the ridge, in a grove of small pines.—WILLIAM H. Fox, M. D., Mew York City. Another Specimen of the Prothonotary Warbler in Massachusetts.— Recently when examining the collection of birds made by Mr. E. O. Da- mon at Northampton, Mass., I saw a beautiful Protonotaria citrea which he told me he killed in that vicinity on high ground, in May, 1883, and that two other specimens were shot at the same time by a friend of his. These examples, additional to those already recorded by Messrs. Brewster and Purdie (Auk, July and Oct., 1886), would seem to indicate that the species enters New England regularly.—JNo. H. Sacre, Portland, Conn. * Bull N. O. C, VIII, pp. 95-99. 7 Auk, I, 1884, pp. 145-155; ibid., IV, 1887, pp. 30-35. 1887. } General Notes. T 65 An Overlooked Specimen of Bachman’s Warbler.—Some time since, while working on the fine old Lafresnaye Collection in the Boston Society of Natural History I unearthed an interesting and valuable specimen, nothing less in fact than a Bachmian’s Warbler (Helminthophila bachmanz). This bird agrees closely with Audubon’s figure and description of the adult female, but differs from a female in Mr. Cory’s collection by having a well-marked patch of black on the jugulum, and traces of a dark band across the fore part of the crown. The body plumage is fresh and perfect, but shows no indication of a recent moult; the primaries are somewhat faded; the tail-feathers decidedly faded and worn. The label bore the inscription, ‘‘No. 4079, Dendroica virens, Gmel., N. America.” This proved to be a correct transcript of the entry under the corresponding number in the fac-simile Lafresnaye Catalogue belonging to the Society, save that in the latter ‘‘N. America” is written 77 Jenczl. Going still farther back to the scrap-book where the original Lafresnaye labels are preserved, each numbered in red ink to correspond with the catalogue just mentioned, I found ‘‘407g” on a small slip of paper, yellow with age, the writing so faded that only ‘‘Sylvicola ” can be certainly deciphered. The dash is followed by a mark resembling the sign Q (was this sign used in ornithology in Lafresnaye’s time?) but probably in- tended fora ? There is also something that looks like ‘‘orig ne?” The plain inference from these data is that the label last described was the original one belonging to this specimen, and that the person who wrote it (whether Lafresnaye or some correspondent from whom he may have had the skin) was unable to identify the bird. It is equally obvious that the locality entered in pencil in our copy of the Lafresnaye Catalogue was added, doubtless inferentially, after the specimen came into the pos- session of the Society. It follows that the origin of the bird is unknown. Can it be the female figured in Audubon’s plate? If Iam not mistaken, the latter has been lost sight of.—WuLLIAM BREWSTER, Cambridge, Mass. Remarks on Four Examples of the Yellow-throated Warbler from Chester County, S. C.—A series of four specimens, taken during September, 1886, display characters so different from those commonly ascribed to the Yellow-throated Warbler (Dezdroica dominica) of the Atlantic States as to merit special notice. The variations in each are as follows :— 1. @. Bill (from nostril), 9.2 mm. ; superciliary stripe without yellow; yellow of chin and maxille interrupted anteriorly by white. 2. @. Bill (from nostril), 1omm.; superciliary stripe, above the lores, very faintly tinged with yellow for about 4 mm.; thence immaculate to the base of the upper mandible; chin and maxillz as in the preceding. 3. @. Bill (from nostril) 9.5 mm.; superciliary stripe, anterior to eye, strongly tinged with yellow for about 4mm.; otherwise similar to the foregoing. 4. Essentially like 3, but with tinge of yellowin superciliary more pronounced. 166 General Notes. f [April In the flesh the yellow in the eye-stripe of 3 and 4 appeared sufficiently intense to warrant their being assigned to dom¢nica; but as a skin, the yellow in 3 is less prominent, and it might be referred without violence to albtlora. Unless the white adjoining the base of the lower mandible be considered diagnostic, the determination of such intermediates seems to be a matter of considerable uncertainty, depending on doubtful estimates as to quantity and intensity of the yellow in the white line above the eye. —LEVERETT M. Loomis, Chester, S. C. Discovery of the Nest and Eggs of the Western Warbler (Dendroica occidentalés).—During the past season (1886) Mr. C. A. Allen had the good fortune to find two nests of Dendrotca occidentalis in Blue Cafion, California. The first contained two eggs on June 4. It was left fora full set, but on visiting it three days later, Mr. Allen found it in a dilapitated condition, the eggs broken, and their yelks smeared over the lining, evi- dently the work of squirrels. Of the eggs, Mr. Allen writes: ‘‘I cannot give you an exact description of these eggs, but in size and appearance they resembled those of D. wstiva, only they were more heavily marked on their entire surface. I am very sorry now that I did not take them, but I wanted the full set, which, I think, would not have exceeded three, as I found a nest seven or eight years ago with three young, and another with the same number while returning from my second visit to the nest with eggs. All three nests were similarly placed ;—in ‘pitch pines,’ from twenty-five to forty feet above the ground, on thick, scraggy limbs, where they were so well concealed that it would have been impossible to find them except by watching the birds, as was done in each instance. The female of the nest that was destroyed was seen digging up fine roots from a logging road morning after morning, but I could never follow her to the nest, which I finally found by accident; happening to shoot a Douglass’s squirrel in the adjoining tree, the report of the gun started her out.” The nest with young, taken June 7, 1886, is now before me. It is com- posed of the fibrous stalks of herbaceous plants, fine dead twigs, lichens (Evernia vulpina), ana a little cotton twine, and is lined with the soft inner bark of some coniferous tree and fine long hairs, apparently from the tail of a squirrel. The bright, yellow Hvernzza, sprinkled rather plentifully about the rim, gives a touch of color to the otherwise cold, gray tone of the exterior and contrasts agreeably with the warm, reddish- brown lining. Although the materials are coarse and wadded, rather than woven, together, the general effect of this nest is neat and tasteful. It does not resemble any other Warbler’s nest that I have seen, but rather recalls the nest of some Fringilline bird, being perhaps most like that of the Lark Finch. It measures externally 4.50 inches in width by 2 inches in depth. The cavity is 1.25 inches deep by 2.50 inches wide at the top. The walls at the rim average nearly an inch in thickness. The three young taken from this nest, together with both their parents, were also sent me by Mr. Allen. The young are about two-thirds grown 1887.] General Notes. I 67 and sparsely clothed with first plumage, which above and across the breast is uniform grayish-brown, on the abdomen yellowish-white. There are two light (brownish-white) bars on the wing-coverts. If [am not mistaken, the nests and eggs just described are the first iden- tified ones that have been thus far reported, but Captain Bendire writes me that he has what he believes to be ‘‘a set of these eggs taken at the Big Meadows on the banks of the Des Chutes River near its headwaters» on my way from Fort Walla Walla, W. T., to Fort Klamath, Oregon’ June 12, 1882. The nest was placed in the crotch of a willow overhanging the water, and the parent shot, but falling into the river was carried away. The eggs have a faint grayish-green ground color; two of them are heavily spotted and blotched with lilac and dark umber brown. They are about the size of the eggs of D. @stiva, and resemble the eggs of D. blackburnie, with the exception of the ground color, the green of which is notas perceptible as in the eggs of blackburnie.”—WILLIAM BREWSTER, Cambridge, Mass. What constitutes a Full Set of Eggs?— The question as to what con- stitutes a full set of eggs, and how to determine the number with any cer- tainty, is a matter to which I desire to call attention, and, in doing so, will say that I have given the matter considerable thought, and have reached the conclusion, on account of the many nest robbers of the birds, that the larger number is the only safe one to enter as a full set. For example, say thirty nests of frst sets of a species are found, with birds sitting, as follows : Four nests with four eggs in each; six nests with three eggs in each; ten nests with two eggs in each; and ten nests with one egg in each. | In this case I would enter three and four—possibly two to four—as a full set. But in no case one to four, believing the undisturbed birds of a species do not vary much, if any, as to number of eggs laid. Say four eggs in first set, and three in the second; that is, in case the first set is destroyed, or the birds rear two or more broods ina season; for I find as a rule that the first set is the larger one. Many of the birds, especially the larger ones that breed in trees, as Hawks, Herons, etc., cannot hide their bulky nests; in fact, the branches overhead are more a protection to the thieves than to the nests when the parent birds are away; for all birds, however watchful, will, during the early stages of laying and love making, steal away from their nests a short time, for a sail or flirtation, which affords the cunning Crows, Jays, squir- rels, etc., an opportunity to come up from the lower limbs and steal the eggs unobserved, or before the parent birds can return to protect them. Such robberies, and the advancement of incubation, make the birds more watchful and closer sitters. But, with all their vigilance, I think to find a full set the exception and not the rule. It is to the interest of paid collec- tors and dealers in eggs to have the smaller as well as the larger number treated as full sets. But the odlogist at heart, whether a collector or not, can have but one desire, and that is to arrive at the facts in the case. In my ‘Revised Catalogue of the Birds of Kansas,’ I was governed in 168 Correspondence. [April giving the dimensions and coloration of the eggs by the sets examined, but I did not venture to change the number when given by other writers, lest such changes, based on my limited observation, might prove errone- ous or misleading; but the more I look the matter over, its importance to my mind increases. I therefore call attention to it, hoping to draw out, through ‘The Auk’ and other sources, the views of others.—N. S. Goss, Topeka, Kans. CORRESPONDENCE. [Correspondents are requested to write briefy and to the point. No attention will be paid to anonymous communications.| The Camera and Field Ornithology. To THE EDITORS OF THE AUK :— Dear Sirs:—A year ago last autumn I purchased me a first class photo- grapic camera with all the chemicals and appliances complete. In doing this I had three or four objects in view, in which it struck me that this instrument could be of very considerable assistance. In the first place, I was led to believe that it would prove a valuable auxiliary in my anatomi- cal work, such as the photographing of certain dissections, osteological subjects, and the reduction in size of large skeletons that I intended to have lithographed to illustrate my memoirs. Secondly, I found myself in an Indian country that was rapidly undergoing those changes which an advancing civilization is sure to bring with it, and it was my aim to pre- serve, in the way of good photographs, much that pertained to their life, habits, and mode of living in the past, etc. Lastly, however, I felt that I had a very pretty field open before me that would, if worked with patience, yield another valuable series of figures for illustrative work, and this was the photographing in their native haunts many of the wild animals of the country. During the past ten years I have seen the time when I have been near enough to have obtained good photographs, either in the mountains or on the boundless plains, of such animals as our antelope, buffalo, mountain sheep, and a great many of the smaller mammals and birds. In this letter, however, it is my object merely to say a few words in regard to the advantages to be derived from the use of the camera in field ornithology. In the first place, if we can secure good photographic nega- tives of such subjects, the rapidly-improving processes permit us to trans- fer them with absolute accuracy to either metal or stone, and if Iam not mistaken, to wood, also. Moreover, these processes are becoming cheap- er and better every year that goes by, so that it falls within the means of nearly every scientific publishing medium to reproduce such drawings 1887.] Correspondence. I 69 from the negatives, and thus secure the most accurate class of figures of living birds. ‘ Again, if we photograph, or rather print them on non-albumenized paper, they may be colored very nicely from the original subject. By the use of an ‘instantaneous shutter,’ I find that birds may be obtained in nearly all positions, and I know of no pursuit so thoroughly full of inter- est for the ornithologist as this photographing of birds in their native haunts. It requires, too, all the ingenuity at our command, to say nothing of patience, to pursue it successfully. Birds may be photographed in the most engaging of their avocations, and in the most interesting attitudes for illustrations that one can possibly imagine. Out here on the prairies we will often find an old stump or stalk, upon which a dozen or fifteen species of birds will alight during seven or eight hours, on almost any day suitable to use the camera upon them. Now all we have to do is to properly set up our instrument near this point, conceal it in such a way as not to alarm the birds, focus it sharply upon the perch where they alight, place on your ‘snap shutter,’ and fix it with a string, and then re- move yourself far enough away to pull it, when you have a subject sitting to your liking. Birds that you have wounded but slightly may be photo- graphed under the most favorable circumstances; they may also be taken while sitting on their nests; in actual flight, however swift; in pursuit of their food; in leading about their young; indeed, the list is almost an endless one. Rookeries also offer admirable subjects, and a splendid field is open at those wonderful resorts of water-birds in such places as the Bahamas or the Alaskan coasts. In the former locality, during the breeding season, I have seen the time when I could have secured excellent pictures of the majority of species in the most interesting positions possible. Even now, there are a great many of our birds that still remain to be figured, and a number that have already been produced,—yes, in some cases by so famous a master as Audubon,—that will repay reproduction. Take for instance his Myadestes townsendi; it is an exceedingly indif- ferent representation of the bird, and figures only the female besides. Moreover, it is evident from his illustration that Audubon was under the impression (he never having seen it alive) that its action was more or less akin to some such bird as a Redstart, whereas its behavior in life fails to remind us at all of any such species. If I remember correctly, my photographic outfit cost me something like $125, but very good ones, I believe, can be purchased for about $50, which will take an excellent 5 X 8 picture. The art, in its present state of per- fection. is a delightful study and brimful of interest. Never shall I forget my sensations, as, shut up in a small, dark room, lit only by the ruby lantern, I studied to develop my first plate of a living animal, taken by myself. It was a fine old Meotoma, and I can well remember my enthu- siasm as I saw his form slowly, but sharply, come out on the plate, as I rocked it to and fro in the developing tray. R. W. SHUFELDT. Fort Wingate, N. Mex., Feb. toth, 1887. 170 Correspondence. [April Classification of the Macrochires. To THE EDITORS OF THE AUK :— Dear Strs:—Dr. Shufeldt’s letter in the October ‘Auk,’ last year, requires only a few lines in reply from my side. Iam sorry that Dr. Shufeldt in ‘‘carefully reading a number of times” the sentence commencing: ‘‘internally they differ,” etc., failed to see that the whole was a case of typographical error, and still more sorry that he did not know ‘‘the kind of comparison he [I] wishes to institute between the sternum of a Swift and a Swallow,” when I referred to the bifurcate manubrium and deeply ‘‘two-notched” sternum of the latter. Dr. Shufeldt will probably believe me, when I state, that in the original, from which the sentence in question was quoted, the kind of comparison was made clear, and that the words ‘‘fozxted manubrial process and no posterior notches to the’—an entire line—has fallen out between ‘‘a” and ‘‘sterzum.” I cannot prevent Dr. Shufeldt from taking exception to the remark that the sternum is ‘two-notched’ in the Swallows, notwithstanding the fact that he admits its having ‘‘@ pazr of notches in its xiphoidal extremity,” and my own belief that ‘‘a pair of notches” and ‘‘two notches” mean ex- actly the same thing. but I must protest against his remark that ‘‘the two- notched sternum is seen in such forms as Prcus.” To the uninitiated mind it would seem to be a decided misnomer to call the sternum of Pzczs two- notched when the fact remains, that it possesses fowx notches. ‘Such forms as Picus” of course, have two notches on each side of the mesial line, but Dr. Shufeldt will probably pardon me for not calling a horse a two- legged animal, or a mana one-legged animal, notwithstanding the fact that they have respectively two legs and one leg on each side of the mesial line. But if Dr. Shufeldt calls a horse a four-legged animal, why object to calling the sternum of the Woodpeckers four-notched? In regard to the similarity or dissimilarity of the flight of the Swifts as compared with that of the Swallows or Hummingbirds, I shall only re- mark that Dr. Shufeldt’s supposition that I would never have asked, ‘‘what differences are there in the Swifts’ flight from that of the Swallows’ that should have caused such a remarkable modification towards the Humming- birds,” if I ‘thad ever had the opportunity to compare in nature the flight of two such birds, for example, as Mzcropus melanoleucus and Tachycineta thalassina,’ will not hold for the simple reason that I have had the oppor- tunity to compare in nature the flights of several species of Swifts and Swallows. Iam also familiar with the flight of the Hummingbird, and in spite of this, or rather just on account of my observations, do I reiterate that the flight of the Swift is decidedly more like that of the Swallow than it is like that of the Hummingbird. And I also insist that I am still with- out an answer to the question, What in the nature of these birds’ flight has brought about such an extraordinary similarity, osteologically, myo- logically, and pterylographically in the wing-structure of the Swifts and Hummingbirds, as compared with that of the Swallows? For surely, it cannot be denied, that the flying apparatus of Swifts and Hummers pos: ? ‘ ‘ 4 -« i . J 1887.] Correspondence. I71I sesses features and combination of features quite unique, and shared by no other birds, and especially not by the Swallows. That a Swift hovers in front of its nest before enteringit ‘like a Hummingbird over a flower,” shows certainly no special relationship, for I have seen despised English Sparrows do the same, and as for swift and precipitous flight and its in- stantaneous checking I might quote numerous birds which in their wing- structure show no analogy to that of the Macrochires. The superfictal similarities of certain structures in the Swallows’ and the Swifts’ wings can undoubtedly be traced ‘*to the modification of these structures gradually brought about by the habits or actions of the forms in question,” to use Dr. Shufeldt’s own phraseology. It is upon the recognition of the essen- tial and the unessential similarities, and of the superficial analogies and the radical affinities, that the present question hinges. Yours, very truly, LEONHARD STEJNEGER. Smithsonian Institution, December 25, 1886. To THE EpITORS OF THE AUK :— Srs:—Will you kindly allow me a little space in which to reply to Dr. Shufeldt’s comments on the footnotes of my recent paper on ‘The Affini- ties of Chetura’? At the outset let me say that I object less to the separation of Swift and Hummingbird than to the union of Swift and Swallow. As Dr. Shufeldt now concludes (or did in October last) that the Swifts are not a family of Passeres placed next the Swallows, but an order by themselves, we are less at variance than when the paper on Chetura appeared. In one and the same paragraph Dr. Shufeldt objects to my statement that Professor Huxley united the Swifts and Hummingbirds, while quoting Hux- ley’s own words, which show the statement to have been correct! (p. 86). The remark that Professor Huxley ‘‘evidently believed that Swifts were but profoundly modified Swallows” is purely an assumption; but even if it be a correct one, the fact remains that he believed them to be so very ‘‘pro- foundly modified” as to require a place in quite a different order. In view of the fact that Dr. Shufeldt has not been in Washington for over two years, it is a little surprising that he should assume to know exactly what material is contained in the collections of the National Museum. Nevyer- theless, Dr. Shufeldt is this time correct in his supposition, for at the time of writing neither Panyftizla, nor Tachycineta thalassina (T. bicolor I did have) were in my possession, although since then crania of both species have been extracted from skins, supplied by the courtesy of Mr. Ridgway, and verify my statement that the mawnzllo-palatines as figured by Dr. Shufeldt are imperfect. While my specimen of Panyptila is a poor one, having suffered from decalcification, traces of the slender maxillo-palatines still remain, and show them to be practically of the same shape as those of Chetura, Cypselus apus, and Dendrochelidon mystacea, 172 Correspondence. [April this latter bird having been kindly furnished me by Professor Henry A. Ward. Dr. Shufeldt’s very figure of Zachyczneta shows at a glance that the expanded ends of the maxillo-palatines have been broken off, and I have yet to learn that doubling the size of a drawing doubles its accuracy. I should have been very glad to have found myself in error concerning Panyptila, as it would have given me another, although slight, point of resemblance between the Swifts and Hummingbirds. The material in the National Museum has already taught me that the sternum may be notched or entire in Auks of the same species, and the same thing will be found to occur in the Loons; also, if my memory is not treacherous, in other water fowl. The reason for this is, it seems to me, very evident, while the fact itself has no bearing whatever on the present case. That Dr. Shufeldt is aware of this is shown by his haste to remark that ‘‘Of course in recording what I have just done in the preced- ing paragraph, I by no means wish it to be understood that in any way underrate the significance of the ‘notching’ of the xiphoidal end of the sternum, in the vast majority of birds.” I would also note that the entire- ty ot the posterior margin of the sternum was but one of four good char- acters pointed out. Since Dr. Shufeldt places but little reliance on the structure of the bony palate as a taxonomic character, has had his faith in the sternum shaken, and rejects the modifications of the limbs (aside from the modification of the phalanges, on which he lays considerable stress !), it would seem that but little of the skeleton was left on which to found comparative distinctions. That the ‘osteologist-in-chief’ is not conversant with a large amount of ornithological literature is unluckily too true, and he has always regarded itas a great misfortune. Still, had my commentator been less engrossed by the footnotes, he might have inferred from a paragraph almost at the very outset, that I was not es¢zrely ignorant of Dr. Parker’s opinions on the subject under consideration. In conclusion, allow me to express my surprise at the concluding para- graph of Dr. Shufeldt’s letter, the sarcastic tone of which leads me to infer that he prefers to evolve opinions which do zof compare favorably with those held by living masters in morphology. Very respectfully, FREDERIC A. LuCAs. Washington, D. C., Jan. 25, 1887. The Sense of Smell in Cathartes aura. To THE EDITORS OF THE AUK :— Szrs:—In his article in the January number of this Journal, Mr. Ira Sayles has added another instance to the already long list of fallacious ‘proofs’ of the remarkable power of scent in the American Vultures. I[gnoring the fact that there is certainly room for some difference of opinion as to what constitutes a remarkable power of smell, he sets aside as utterly , EE ———— qe 1887. ] Correspondence. 173 worthless the experiments of Audubon, Bachman, and Darwin, and offers his own chance observations as proof that these able and careful observers were entirely wrong as regards both their methods and conclusions. It seems almost superfluous to say that our critic can scarcely have read the original accounts of the experiments he condemns, or he would neither accuse so thoughtlessly nor explain so easily. As to the anatomical evidence introduced, it may be remarked that such an argument from structure to function is often extremely unsafe, even for the accomplished anatomist, and the danger is greatest where the ex- perience is least. True, Owen has shown that the Turkey Buzzard has well-developed olfactory nerves; but in the same paper (P. Z.S., V, 1837, P- 34,35) where he records this, he states that the same nerves were found to be fully as well developed in the Goose, while even in the Turkey they were fairly developed, although only about one sixth as large. Further- more, this distinguished anatomist, a part of whose testimony Mr. Sayles finds so ‘‘entirely satisfactory,” closes his paper with the remark, that ‘‘The above notes show that the Vulture has a well-developed organ of smell, but whether he finds his prey by that sense alone, or in what degree it as- sists, anatomy is not so well calculated to explain as experiment.” Again, according to Owen (Comp. Anat. and Phys. Vert., II, 132), the olfactory nerves are relatively largest, among birds, in the Apteryx; yet this bird appears to use its power of smell mainly for the detection of the worms which form its daily food, and for which it probes in the ground, thus apparently using its keen scent only at very short distances,— hardly more indeed than the length of its own bill. Turning now to the personal observations of Mr. Sayles, let us consider the evidence which he calls ‘‘positive,” yet which I regard as entirely in- conclusive. In the first place, the data given us are very incomplete, and several of the most important points recorded were observed merely by chance, and before any significance was attached to them; and one can scarcely help questioning the accuracy of many of the details of such ob- servations, especially when it is remembered that the occurrences narrated took place more than a dozen years ago, and we are not informed whether the narrator writes from memory or from notes taken at the time. It is doubtful whether, under the most favorable circumstances, the movements of Buzzards could be fairly watched at a distance of ‘‘more than two miles,” and we are not even told how this distance was determined. Again, as the observations were simply accidental, it is more than possible that single Buzzards had already reached the place unobserved by our critic, but zof without attracting the attention of the distant flock, which responded in the usual manner. In order to account for the coming of these first few individuals we have only to assume that the dogs had carried out and left exposed a few fragments of offal, which would readily be detected by any sharp-sighted Buzzard which chanced to be passing, or which may have been in the habit of visiting the plantation every morning. * *In March, 1886, the writer received from S. E. Cassino & Co., the publishers of the ‘Standard Natural History,’ a lengthy criticism of his statements about the power of 174 Notes and News. [April Finally, the fact that the birds failed to find the source of the stench, and ‘‘gave up the search” after staying about ‘‘for an hour or two,” is totally irreconcilable with the possession of such powers of scent as would en- able them to detect the same odor at a distance of more than two miles. If the space can be spared, I should be glad, in a future number of ‘The Auk,’ to discuss this subject further, and to give a brief résumé of the evidence on both sides of the question. Respectfully, Washington, D. C., March 4, 1887. WALTER B. BARRows. NOTES AND NEWS. Dr. Joun M. WHEATON, one of the original members of the A. O. U. and well known as an ornithologist, died at his residence in Columbus, Ohio, January 28, after protracted illness from consumption, at the age of forty-six. Dr. Wheaton has for many years been an occasional contribu- tor to current ornithological literature; his principal work, however, was a report on the Birds of Ohio, published in 1882, in the fourth volume of the Geological Report of the State of Ohio.* His unrivalled collection of the birds of Ohio is now at the State University. Dr. Wheaton was born at Columbus, and was educated at Davison University; he afterward studied medicine, graduating from the Starling Medical College in 1884, and immediately after entered the army as an assistant surgeon. In 1867 he was made Professor of Anatomy in the Starling Medical College. which position he held till his death. He was also a trustee of the college, and secretary of the board. Ile was a successful physician. a teacher of recog- nized ability, and held in high esteem by all who knew him. He leaves a wife and ason nine years of age. Dr. Wheaton’s death is the first that has occurred among the Active Members of the A. O. U. ConGREss has appropriated $12,000 for carrying on the work of the Department of Economic Ornithology and Mammalogy for the year ending June 30, 1888. Now thatthe adjournment of Congress has brought some relief to the Government Printing Office, it is hoped that some of the long-expected special reports of the Department will soon be put in type. scent in Vultures, as published in Volume IV of that work. The criticism, which was by Mr. Sayles, embodied all the facts since published by him in ‘The Auk,’ and much additional matter on various subjects. In connection with the particular instance cited above, it was there distinctly stated that a flock of Buzzards was no unusual sight on the plantation, and that nothing was thought of it in this case until they were seen wheel- ing about the ofex wood-shed (the italics are mine) where, during the night, the pot of offal had been upset by the dogs. * For a review of this work see Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, Vol. VIII, p. 110. © oe — ae’ 1887. ] Notes and News. 175 Tue bill authorizing an appropriation of $400,000 by the City of New York for the construction of an addition to the American Museum of Nat- ural History building has passed both branches of the New York State legislature almost unanimously and has become a law. The addition will be at the 77th Street end of the present structure, and will be of about the same size as the portion already constructed. It is expected that work on the proposed addition will be begun at an early day. Two numbers of a new monthly journal, called ‘The Audubon Magazine,’ have appeared. It is ‘‘published in the interest of the Audubon Society for the Protection of Birds,” by the ‘Forest and Stream’ Publishing Com- pany of New York. Besides being a medium of communication between the friends of Bird Protection, it is intended to interest the young in the general subject of natural history, giving, however, special prominence to ornithology. Its purposes are excellent, and, under the editorial super- vision of Dr. George Bird Grinnell, it promises to become a very acceptable and useful popular journal, covering essentially a new field, where much good may be accomplished. ANOTHER very promising addition to periodical literature devoted to popularizing natural history is ‘The Swiss Cross,’ the new official organ of the Agassiz Association. It is a monthly, edited by Harlan H. Bal- lard, President of the Agassiz Association, and published by N. D. C. Hodges (the editor of ‘Science’), at 47 Lafayette Place, New York. It is ‘devoted to spreading among the people an accurate knowledge of nature.” Three numbers have already appeared. TuarT the interest in the subject of Bird Protection is earnest and wide- spread is evinced by the number of journals which are springing up de- voted more or less exclusively to the support of the movement. Besides ‘The Audubon Magazine,’ noticed above, we have received three numbers (Jan.-March, 1887) of a monthly journalentitled ‘The Bird Call,’ publish- ed by the Pennsylvania Audubon Society, Miss A. C. Knight, President, No. 1o12 Walnut Street, Philadelphia. This Society was organized in April, 1886, and duly incorporated the following August. ‘The Bird Call’ is issued in aid of the humane work of the Society—‘‘to plead for mercy to God’s messengers of beauty, use, and song,” and to aid in *‘the cam- paign against the mandates of a cruel and senseless fashion.” We wish ‘The Bird Call’ every success in its good work. Mr. C. J. MAYNARD has issued a prospectus of ‘Illustrations and De- scription of the Birds of the Bahamas.’ The work is to be large folio in size, and published in from fifteen to twenty parts, monographic in char- acter. Each part is intended to be ‘‘an exhaustive treatise of the species under consideration, complete in itself,” and will contain a colored plate and an uncolored one, the latter devoted to the osteological and other anatomical details described in the accompanying text, which will include biographical as well as technical matter. The first part, announced as 176 Notes and News. [April now ready ‘‘contains a finely colored plate on which are represented seven specimens of the Bahama Fruit Finch (Sfzvdal’s zena), covering all stages of plumage from nestling to adult,” etc. THE antedating of papers or works on natural history is an evil to which attention has often been called, and efforts have from time to time been made, on the part of both authors and editors, to guard against misdating. These efforts, however well intended, seem not always effectual, and even may make a bad matter worse. The dilatoriness of the Government Press in issuing reports and other works relating to science is notorious; such dccuments sometimes slumbering in the form of printed sheets for months and even years, before they are distributed to the public. Their authors are powerless, as are the would-be readers of these important scientific contributions, to secure their prompt publication; they frequently do not reach the public till a year or two later than the supposed date of publica- tion borne on their title-pages. Cases of this sort are too numerous and too well-known to require specification; but it seems a pity that the Pro- ceedings’ and other publications of the National Museum should have to be added to the category of antedated publications. Presumably to fix the exact date of publication, each signature of the ‘Proceedings’ is dated with what is supposed to be the date of its issuance from the Government Printing Office; and generally the date has accorded reasonably well with the date of their reception by libraries and the specialists to whom they are sent. This, however, has not been the case of late, three or four months sometimes having elapsed between the presumed dates of publication borne on the sheets and the actual date of their distribution. In the interest of both science and veracity, it would be well to omit the dates altogether, or take some means to have them give correctly the information implied. WE are pleased to learn that Mr. Charles F. Morrison, now of Fort Lewis, Colorado, Vice-President of the Bristol County, Mass., Ornitho- logical Club, is engaged in the preparation of a complete list of the birds of Colorado, which will form ‘Publication No. 1’ of the recently organized Colorado State Ornithological Association, of which Mr. Morrison is Pres- ident pro tem. The members of the Association are codperating in the work, and excellent circulars of instruction have been issued by Mr. Morrison, calling upon them for full and carefully annotated lists of the birds of their respective localities. Doubtless good results may be safely anticipated from this carefully planned system of coéperation. Mr. THomas McItwrarrnu’s excellent little manual, entitled ‘The Birds of Ontario,’ comes to hand barely in time for this brief announcement. It form an octavo volume of 320 pages, published by the Hamilton Asso- ciation, of Hamilton, Ontario. a ee ee The AUK: A QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ORNITHOLOGY. VOL. IV. Jur, 1887: No. 3. DESCRIPTIONS OF SIX SUPPOSED NEW SPECIES OF BIRDS FROM THE ISLANDS OF OLD PROVIDENCE AND ST. ANDREWS, CARIBBEAN SEA.* BY CHARLES B. CORY. Lampornis hendersoni, sp. nov. Sp. Cuar.—Similar to Z. Prevost; but bill much shorter and back green instead of bronzy; the bluish black patch on the throat longer and narrower, the top of the head shows a faint ash tinge. Adult & (Type, No. rorgo, Coll. C. B. Cory) :—Upper plumage bronzy green, a slight ash tinge on the top of the head; a stripe of bluish black down the centre of the throat, becoming blue on the breast, bordered on either side by grass green, showing bronzy green on the sides of the neck; a tuft of white on the thighs; upper surface of central tail-feathers dark bronze green, outer feathers brownish purple, showing rufous in some lights, edged with dark blue; most of under surface of tail-feathers purple when held in the light; quills dark brown; bill black, about two-thirds as long as that of revostz. ‘ Length, 4; wing, 2.65; tail, 1.50; bill, .78. Female (No. 10196, Coll. C. B. Cory) :—Upper parts similar to the male; throat white with a broad black stripe passing down the centre, becoming dark bluish green on the lower throat and upper breast; under surface of tail-feathers tipped with white and _ bor- dered sub-terminally with dark steel blue. Habitat. Old.Providence Island. [*An author’s edition of 250 copies of this paper was published May 28, 1887.—EDD.] I 78 Cory, Descriptions of New Species of West Indian Birds. [ July The immature bird has a patch of bright green on the centre of the throat separated by a narrow white stripe from the deep chestnut brown which borders the sides of the throat and breast ; most of the tail-feathers are broadly tipped with white, showing a sub-terminal band of dark blue. Vireosylvia canescens, sp. nov. Spe. CHar.—Resembles Vireosyluia grandior Ridgw., but is ashy instead of greenish on the back, and lacks the olive on the flanks and the yellowish crissum; tail-feathers not green. Adult & (Type, No. 1o1gs5, Coll. C. B. Cory) :— Head ash gray, becoming dull grayish olive on the back; a superciliary stripe of dull, buffy white, bordered by a narrow streak of brown on the sides of the crown; a malar stripe of dull brown. Underparts white, faintly tinged with olive; crissum dull white, showing a slight yel- lowish tinge at the vent; quills and tail brown, showing a tinge of olive on the outer webs of the inner feathers. Length, 5.60; wing, 3.50; tail, 2.60; tarsus, 80; bill, .7o. Flabitat. St. Andrews Island. Icterus lawrencil, sp. nov. Sp. CHar. —Similar to Zcterus bairdi ; but having the upper plumage and especially the upper tail-coverts more olive. General plumage apparently darker. Adult & (Type, No. 10193, Coll. C. B. Cory) :—Above yellowish olive, showing a faint brown tinge on the head and nape, nearly absent in some specimens; rump and upper tail-coverts yellowish olive, like the back; throat black, the black passing in front of the eye extending to the nostril; rest of underparts pale orange yellow; wings black, the coverts pure white, forming a broad white wing- patch; tertials and secondaries heavily edged with white, primaries showing a faint indication of white edging on the inner feathers. Tail black, narrowly tipped with dull white. Length, 7.80; wing, 4.40; tail, .37; tarsus, 1; bill, .80. Flabitat. St. Andrews Island. I take pleasure in dedicating this beautiful species to Mr. Geo. N. Lawrence, of New York. Mimus magnirostris, sp. nov. Sp. CuHar.—Bill very large; breast and throat showing a faint tinge of reddish brown, lacking in some specimens. Adult & (Type, No. 1o1g2, Coll. C. B. Cory) :—Upper plumage 5 * 4 1887.] Cory, Descriptions of New Species of West Indian Birds. 179 slaty gray, showing a brownish tinge on top of the head ; underparts white, tinged with orange brown on the throat and breast; tail brownish black, tipped with white, narrowly on the two central feathers but gradually becoming heavier, until the outer feathers have the terminal third and outer web white; quills brownish black, faintly edged with white; bill and feet black. Length, 11.50; wing, 4.85; tail, 5.75; tarsus, 1.40; bill, 1. Habitat. St. Andrews Island. The orange brown coloration of the throat and breast is apparently nota constant character, as several specimens before me show it but slightly and two not at all. Engyptila neoxena, sp nov. Sp. CHar.—Resembles Engyftila collaris, but is more olive on the back, and lacks the violet metalic collar, which is apparently replaced by green; the general color of the upper parts more closely resembles that in &. jamaicensis, but the specimens of the latter bird now be- fore me have the top of the head purplish, showing a greenish gloss on the occiput, while in &. neoxena the top of the head is white shading to ash gray. Adult & (Type, No 10194, Coll. C. B. Cory) :—Top of head white, shading into gray on the occiput; chin and throat white, becoming pale purple or violet on the breast; sides of the neck and breast showing metallic purple mixed with metallic green when held in the light; feathers on the upper back showing metallic green, faintly tinged with purple; back dark olive; belly dull white; rest of plu- mage resembling that of &. codlarts. ; Length, 9; wing, 4.75; tail, 4; tarsus, I. Habitat. St. Andrews Island. But two specimens of this interesting bird were taken and both were badly prepared. It is possible that a larger series would show it to be not specifically separable from EE. jamaicensts. Dendroica flavida, sp. nov. Sp. Cuar.—Resembles Dendroica rufivertex, but has the orange brown on the head more restricted and paler; throat unspotted, or very nearly so; underparts, including sides and flanks, heavily striped with rufous brown. Adult & (Type, No. 1o1gt, Coll. C. B. Cory) :—Top of the head orange brown showing yellow in front of the eye; nape, back and upper tail-coverts yellowish olive ; throat bright pale yellow, touched with one or two indistinct pencilings of brown, rest of underparts 180 Cory, Birds of Old Providence and St. Andrews. [ July yellow, heavily streaked with rufous brown; wings dark brown edged with yellow; tail-feathers brown, heavily marked with yellow on the inner webs and faintly edged with it on the outer. Length, 4.75; wing, 2.35; tail, 2; tarsus, .S0; bill, .30. Habitat. St. Andrews Island. A LIST OF THE BIRDS. TAKEN BY MK. ROBERT HENDERSON, IN THE ISLANDS OF OLD PROV- IDENCE AND ST ANDREWS, CARIBBEAN SEA, DURING THE WINTER OF 1886-87.* BY CHARLES B. CORY. Old Providence. Dendroica palmarum (Gvel.). Dendroica coronata (Zzzz.). Compsothlypis americana (Z7uzz.). Seiurus noveboracensis (Gywel.). Seiurus noveboracensis notabilis (Grzzz.). Seiurus aurocapillus (Zzzz.). Seiurus motacilla ( Vzez//.). Certhiola tricolor Aidgw. Vireo approximans /t/dgw. Vireosylvia grandior Azdgw. Spiza americana (Gme/.). Euethia bicolor (£z7.). Tyrannus tyrannus (Zzzz.). Elainea cinerescens Adgw. Lampornis hendersoni ods. Coccyzus minor (Gwel.). Melopelia leucoptera (Z7zv.). Columba leucocephala Zzzz. Actitis macularia (L2zzz.). Ardea virescens (Lzzz.). Ardea cerulea (Zzzz.). Ardea tricolor ruficollis ( Gosse). Fregata aquila (Lizz.). * [An author's edition of 250 copies of this paper was published May 28, 1887.—EDD.] 1337.] Lioyp ox Birds of Western Texas. ISI Sula piscator (Zzzz.). Puffinus auduboni /izsch. St. Andrews. Mimus magnirostris 7odcs. Galeoscoptes carolinensis (Zzvz.). Mniotilta varia (Lzzz.). Dendroica flavida xodcs. Seiurus noveboracensis (Gwc/.). ?Certhiola tricolor /r7dgw. Vireosylvia canescens zodvs. Vireo noveboracensis (Gmel.). Euethia bicolor (Zzzz.). Icterus lawrencii zod¢s. ?Elainea martinica (L277.) Sphyrapicus varius (Lzzz.). Ceryle alcyon (Lzzz.). Engyptila neoxena zodvs. Actitis macularia (Z2zv.). Ardea virescens (Zzzz.). Ardea tricolor ruficollis (Gosse). Fregata aquila (Z/xz.). Sula piscator (Z7zz.). BIRDS OF TOM GREEN AND CONCHO COUNTIES, TEXAS. BY WILLIAM LLOYD. THE present paper deals principally with the avi-fauna of the valleys of the Concho River and its tributaries east to the Colorado River. It also includes the birds of the plains west of the Pecos River, and north to the Texas and Pacific Railroad, and some few noted incidentally south in Crockett and Edwards Counties, andin Nueces Cation. The district has a general and nearly equal elevation of nearly 2000 feet above the sea-level, and 152 Lioyp oz Birds of Western Texas. [ July is well watered. Spring and Dove Creeks, with the South Concho, flow into the Middle Concho, which unites with the the North Concho at San Angelo, Tom Green County (Lat. 31° 22', Long. 23°, 19' W.), and forms the Main Concho, which, after a general easterly course of about forty-five miles, receiving Kickapoo, Lipan (Euterpe on map), Duck, Mustang, and Horse Creeks, falls into the Colorado River, in the extreme east of the county. The creeks are well timbered with pecan, elm, hack- berry, a species of walnut, and willows, etc., and have well defined bottoms of an average width of about fifty yards, but fre- quently are half a mile wide, densely grown with scrub mesquit, smnall groves of hackberry, wild china, and other small trees, over- run with poison ivy, and laden with parasitic mistletoe. At the heads of the larger creeks is generally a considerable growth of various small oaks, while the hillsides are covered with shin-oak and a species of laurel; and in Tom Green County the head draws of the creeks are full of cedar groves. There are no hills worth noting in Concho County, where the surface is level prairie, gently rolling and broken only by the creeks and dry ravines. It was once treeless but is now being rapidly covered with dwarf mesquit ; in many places there is not even a shrub; other parts are well grown with cat-claw, algarita, chapparal, wahilla (a kind of evergreen), and nopal catcus. In summer it is covered with hundreds of flowering plants, of which the ver- bena and lupin are most numerous. Tom Green County is more broken and has well-defined chains of hills dividing the upper water courses. They are not timbered, however, and, like the Castle Mountains on the plains. exercise no appreciable in- fluence onour birds. The Pecos River is entirely devoid of tim- ber, with exception of the ubiquitous button bush, and has no bird-life whatever peculiar to it, owing no doubt to the alkaline nature of its waters. There is a lake of fresh water on the plains which I have never examined. About a dozen species of catcus occur. A swamp on the head of South Concho is the only ground of the kind in the district ; this has some very large live oak studding its borders, and water oak in it. Acres of thistles, in various places in both counties, form in winter admirable feed- ing grounds for various birds. The soil is very fertile, and un- derlaid with limestone, of the middle Eocene. Stock-raising was, until the last few years, the only pursuit; now farms are 1887.] Lioyp oz Birds of Western Texas. 183 numerous, and an increasing area is in Cultivation every year, on which are raised millet and sorghum for the winter use of stock. The prevailing wind throughout the year is from the south, tempered in winter every ten days (on an average) by a brisk norther that drives all the birds to the river and creek bottoms. The temperature in winter, though once recorded as below zero, is for December and January 35° in the morning, 45° to 70° at noon, and 4o° at dusk. The winter of 1886-57 was exceptionally mild; the temperature has not gone below 10°, and it sleeted once, with a register of 20°. In spring the average temperature is 70° to 80° at noon, rising to 95° in April, and in summer touches 102°. I have carefully hunted each creek with the sole exceptions of Grape Creek and North Concho—the latter scarcely touched— and have been to Pecos River four times, along the line of the Texas and Pacific Railroad, across the sand-hills, and south into Crockett County and beyond. After I became an observer for the Mississippi ValleyDistrict I noted arrivals every day carefully, as follows :— fall, 1884, Main Concho, near mouth; February to June, 1884, Middle Concho; fall, 1884, South Concho and Plains ; 1885, spring, on Spring Creek ; fall, on Kickapoo, Lipan, Main Concho, Middle Concho, and Plains; 1886, fall, Lipan and Main Concho, besides visiting all the other localities at vari- ous periods. The record, besides including the following (about 240 species and varieties), should, I have no doubt, contain various others noted north and south of me, as the Blackburnian Warbler, Ground Dove, Prairie Falcon, etc., but as I have not been able to record them for the last three years, with Messrs. Sennett’s, Brown’s, Goss’s, and Ragsdale’s (Colorado City) lists to guide me, I have thought it best to make no remarks about them. Whilst having no new species or varieties to describe, my list considerably extends the range of the species named, while others are frequently first records for Texas, as the Western Goshawk, Wright’s Flycatcher, Woodhouse’s Jay, Black-chinned Hum- mer (?), Townsend’s Warbler (?), and Lewis’s Woodpecker. Iam under great obligations to Mr. Everett Smith, who first kindly aided me in my efforts to locate birds of this district, and later to Mr. Ridgway, whose time I am afraid I have considerably imposed upon by my frequent questions as to the status of species 184 Lioyp on Lirds of Western Texas. [ July here and elsewhere, and for the last three years to Prof. W. W. Cooke, who has revised my names frequently and given me every assistance in his power in preparing my list. Lastly to Mr. John A. Loomis, of Silvercliff Ranche, I am indebted for much assis- tance in my later work in Concho County, and who has been able to extend my list considerably, especially among the Game Birds and Raptores, as will be noted in connection with various birds mentioned in the list. The arrangement and nomenclature is that of the A. O. U. Check-List. 1. Podilymbus podiceps. PiED-BILLED GREBE.—Tolorably common in winter. 2. Urinator imber. Loon.—Two seen in the winter of 18So. 3. Hydrochelidon nigra surinamensis. BLAcK TERN.—Tolerably com- mon during the fall migration. 4. Anhinga anhinga. ANHINGA.—Tolerably common during the fall migration on South Concho. 5. Phalacrocorax dilophus floridanus. DouBLE-cRESTED CORMO- RANT.—One shot in the fall of 188o. 6. Pelecanus erythrorhynchos. Wuitre PeLican.—Rare in spring and fall. 7. Merganser americanus. AMERICAN MERGANSER.— Common in winter. 8. Lophodytes cucullatus. HooprEp MerGanser.—Common_ in winter. g- Anas boschas. MALLARD.—Abundant in winter. 10. Anas obscura. BLack Duck.—Tolerably common in fall. 11. Anas strepera. GADWALL.—Abundant in early winter. 12. Anas americana. BALDPATE.—Tolerably common in winter. 13. Anas carolinensis. GREEN-WINGED TEeAL.—Abundant during spring and fall; a few remain through the winter. Arrives earlier than other Ducks. 14. Anas discors. BLUE-wINGED TEAL.—Abundant during spring and fall; a few remain through the winter. Arrives with the last, earlier than other Ducks. 15. Anas cyanoptera. CINNAMON TEAL.—Rare in fall. 16. Spatula clypeata. SHOvELLER.—Common during spring aud fall. 17. Dafila acuta. PinrarL.—Tolerably common in spring and fall. One female shot in June, 1881. 18. Aix sponsa. Woop Ducx.—Migrant in fall; not observed in spring; winters on the Rio Llano. 19. Aythya americana. RED-HEAD-—Common in winter. 20. Aythya vallisneria. CANVAS-BACK.—Tolerably common in early winter. 21. Aythya affinis, LirrL—E Scaup Ducx.—Tolerably common In winter, ») | ur 1887.] Lioyp oz Birds of Western Texas. 185 22. Aythya collaris. RING-NECKED Duck.—Common in Concho County; some observed in Tom Green County. 23. Charitonetta albeola. BurrLe-HEAD.—Rare; shot in the spring of 1886, in Concho County by Mr. Loomis. 24. Erismatura rubida. Ruppy Duck.—Rare;seenonly during spring migration. 25. Chen hyperborea. Lesser SNow GoosE.—Tolerably common during the spring migration. 26. Anser albifrons gambeli. AMERICAN WHITE-FRONTED GOOSE.— Tolerably common in winter. 27. Branta canadensis. CANADA Goosge.— Tolerably common in spring and fall. 28. Branta nigricans. BLACK Brant.—Rare. Shot only in Tom Green County in the winter of 1884. 29. Dendrocygna autumnalis. BLACK-BELLIED TREE-DUCK.—Rare in fall on South Concho. 30. Dendrocygna fulva. FuLvous TREE-puck.—Tolerably common during the winter of 1884, on the North Concho. 31. Olor buccinator. TRUMPETER Swan. — Tolerably common in winter. 32. Phoenicopterus ruber. FLAmINGo.—Accidental visitor in August, 1881, and July, 1882. 33. Botaurus lentiginosus. Birrern.—Common fall migrant. 34. Botaurusexilis. Least Birrern.—Common fall migrant. 35. Ardea herodias. Great Biue Hrron.—Resident; breeds, but nest not found. 36. Ardea candidissima. SNowy HERoNn.—Resident; breeds, but nest not found. 37- Ardeaccerulea. LirrLe Heron.—Resident; breeds, but nest not found. An abundant fall migrant. 38. Grus americanus. Wuoorinc CRANE.— Rare spring and_ fall migrant. 39. Grus mexicana. SANDHILL CRANE.—Abundant spring and fall migrant. ; 40. Porzana carolina. Sora Rait.—Rare spring migrant; abundant in fall. 41. Fulica americana. Coor.—Common for nine months of the year, and possibly breeds, as I have seen them in June and July. 42. Phalaropus tricolor. WILSON’s PHALAROPE.—Tolerably common spring migrant; not found in the fall. 43- Recurvirostra americana. Avocer.—Common fall migrant. 44. Philohela minor. AMERICAN Woopcock.—Rare in fall and win- ter on Middle Concho River. 45. Gallinago delicata. Wuitson’s SNirE.—Common. Seen every month in the year. No nests or eggs found. 46. Macrorhamphus griseus. DowircHer.—Tolerably common in the fall. Arrives early in September. 186 Lioyp on Birds of Western Texas. a: tihaty. 47. Micropalama himantopus. STi_T SANDPIPER.—Common in fall; arrives September 3 to 5. Rare in spring. 48. Tringa maculata. PicroraAL SANDPIPER.—Common spring and fall migrant; arrives in spring April 27 to 29; in fall in September. 49. Tringa bairdii. Bairp’s SANDPIPER. —Common spring and fall migrant, ariving in spring May g and 10, and in fall August 30, leaving about October 20. 50. Tringa minutilla. Least SANDPIPER.—Common in spring and fall; arriving in spring April to to May 12; and in fall from July 20 to October 1. 51. Tringa alpina. Dunriin.—Only one observed; shot by Mr. Loomis on Kickapoo Creek, October, 1886. 52. Ereunetes occidentalis. WrSTERN SANDPIPER.— Common in spring and fall, arriving in spring April 10 to May 12; in the fall from September 4 to October 20. 53. Totanus melanoleucus. GREATER YELLOW LEeGs.—Common in spring and fall, arriving August 30, some remaining through the winter. 54. Totanus solitarius. SoxrirAry SANpDpiIPER.—Tolerably common from September 5 to 22; a few only remaining till October. Rarely noted in spring. 55- Bartramia longicauda. BARTRAMIAN SANDPIPER.—Abundant fall migrant, arriving the first week in July, and numerous until September 30. In spring tolerably common, arriving April 19. 56. Tryngites subruficollis. Burr-BREASTED SANDPIPER.—One shot in a flock of Mountain Plover, August 31, 1886, by Mr. Chester Loomis. 57. Actitis macularia. SporrED SANDPIPER.—Abundant; a few stay to breed; no nests found. 58. Numenius longirostris. LoNnG-BILLED CuRLEW.— Arrives August 7 to 12, and is frequently found in large flocks. Some remain to winter, and are again abundant in spring. 59. Squatarola helvetica. BLACK-BELLIED PLover.—One shot by Mr. Ridge Goodrum, August 31, 1886, is the only record for the district. 60. Charadrius dominicus. GoLDEN PLOveR.—AII the birds of this species I have seen were shot by Mr. J. A. Loomis, who states that they are tolerably common in fall. 61. A®gialitis vocifera. KiLLDEER.—Abundant resident. Found eggs March 9, 10, and April 24. In winter they take to the open prairie in flocks of six to ten. 62. A®gialitis montana. Mounrain PLover.—Abundant migrant in spring and fall. Arrives in flocks August 31 (earliest date), and some re- main to winter. 63. Colinus virginianus texanus. TEXAN Bos-wHire.— Abundant resident. Raise two broods. Nest, a depression lined with dried grass at the roots of small bushes, generally ‘algarita’. Eggs six to fifteen. Earliest clutch found May 6 (twelve eggs); latest August 10 (fourteen eggs). Range extends west toPecos. In winter they frequently associate with the Blue Quail. 1887. ] Lioyp ox Birds of Western Texas. 187 64. Callipepla squamata. SCALED PARTRIDGE.—Abundant resident. A depression under a bush, generally unlined, serves as a nest. I believe only one brood is raised here, as the latest clutch found was May 18 (15 eggs) ; earliest clutch April 26 (12 eggs). This notice, I believe, extends the range considerably to the eastward, as the bird is found as far east as the Colorado River. Locally known as the Blue Quail. Most abundant between Castle Mountains and Pecos River, in a sort of fine, loose, sandy soil. 65. Cyrtonyx montezume. Massena PARTRIDGE.—Resident in Tom Green County, on the plains near Castle Mountains, and east to within about 20 miles west of San Angelo, on Middle Concho. Also noted in Crockett and Edwards Counties, nearly due south. No nests found. Known as the Black Partridge. The new A. O. U. ‘Code and Check- List’ gives its habitat as Northwestern Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and Northwestern Mexico. I have traced it as far south as a line east of Eagle Pass, in Nueces and Frio Cafions; so Western Texas may also be included. 66. Tympanuchus pallidicinctus. Lesser PRAIRIE HEN.— Winter visitor; seen in October and November in Concho County, and also in winter on Middle Concho in Tom Green County. Abundant near Colo- rado City on the Texas and Pacific Railroad: I believe this record extends the range to the south-west. Westward it was abundant to the foothills ofthe Davis Mountains. Said to have been driven from the Pan Handle counties by the numerous prairie fires. 67. Meleagris gallopavo mexicana. MexIcAN TurRKey.—Resident. Once very abundant on every creek, but now rarely to be met with. I a depression in a patch of low bushes—May flushed a hen from her nest 29, 1882, containing eight eggs; but I have frequently heard of them further south with ten to fourteen eggs. Another brood was raised on a small rushy island in Brady Creek, in the eastern part of Concho County, the young running about June 1, 1883. 68. Ectopistes migratorius. PASSENGER PIGEON.—Though not ob- served in this immediate district, an immense roost was noted in the winter of 1881, near the head of Frio Canon. The settlers informed me that they had been there all the winter, eating acorns on the hills, and passing and repassing morning and evening in myriads. It was about February 1,1882, that I saw them. 69. Zenaidura macroura. MourNinG Dove.—Abundant resident. In winter more local, but in large flocks, when they frequently change their roosting place, as a friend (Mr. Loomis) suggests, in consequence of be- ing disturbed by the numerous Owls. He first noticed the fact by noting where they roosted, so as to shoot them as they came in, and returning three or four nights after they had altered their resting place, and did so again and again. They raise two if not three broods, as I found a nest containing two fresh eggs of this species the 2oth September, 1886, the latest date I have recorded for any eggs. The earliest date is April 26. They frequently use old Mocking Bird’s nests. 188 Luioyp on Birds of Western Texas. [ July yo. Cathartes aura. TurkKEY VULTURE.—Arrives March 17 (earliest date recorded), and remains abundant through the summer, breeding in caves, but frequently on the bare edge of a bluff. Clutches found contain only two eggs (one, doubtful whether this ornext, having three). First one found May 6; last one June 10. Leave in September. After trying various experiments, I notice that although they may smell their prey finally, they often seize and devour it before it has time to smell. These Vultures, the Carrion Crows, and Ravens frequently line the trees or posts waiting for a sheep to die, if in an exposed place. 71. Catharista atrata. BLACK VuLTURE.—Arrives March Io to 20, and nearly equals the last in numbers. Breeds ow bare rocks—-June 13, 1884, two eggs. 72. Elanus leucurus. WHITE-TAILED KitTEe.—Rare fall visitor. 73. Ictinia mississippiensis. Mrssissipp1 Kirk.—Common in fall, in flocks of two to ten. A few must breed, as I have noted them in all the summer months. 74. Circus hudsonius. Marsu Harrirr.—Abundant resident. No nests have been found referable without doubt to this species. A great pest to the poultry yard. I have seen them eating carrion. One at the present date (January, 1887), frequently eats the carcasses of birds I have skinned, standing on the ground for that purpose. Generally they fly off with their prey, but eat iton the ground. The Sharp-shinned Hawk turns the wire-fence barbs to account, and the Cooper’s occasionally will join the Marsh Harrier in eating a fresh-skinned carcass. 75. Accipiter velox. SHARP-SHINNED HAwKk.—Abundant in fall; less so in winter. An excessively bold Hawk. I have seen it fly away with a pullet as big or bigger than itself, so heavy that its legs dragged the ground. 76. Accipiter cooperi. Coorer’s HAwk.—Another pest of the poultry yard. One flying after some tame Pigeons flew with force through a win- dow in the barn, and was picked up stunned. Abundant in fall; less so in winter, 77. Accipiter atricapillus striatulus. WesTERN GosHAwKk.—I shot a male that was digesting a Meadow Lark, in December, 1885, and saw its mate several times. 78. Buteo borealis calurus. WersTerN Rep-TAIL.—Abundant resident. Breeds from April 22 to May 22. Full clutch, three eggs. Feeds on prairie-dogs, cotton-tails, jack rabbits, and occasionally brings a Scaled Quail to its young. The plumages vary greatly, some birds having very dark under-parts,—but I believe they are referable to this variety. 79. Buteo lineatus. Rep-sHOULDERED HAwk.—Resident; rare. Breeds (May 10, 1882, three eggs). I have never seen them in winter, but my friend, Mr. Loomis, has several specimens shot by him in November and December, 1885. 80. Buteo abbreviatus. ZoNE-TAILED HAwk.—Fall visitant. One noted September 10, 1884. 81. Buteo albicaudatus. WHITE-TAILED I!\wK.—Fall and winter tr Se, is ois ' 1887. } Lioyp ox Birds of Western Texas. 159 visitor. I sent a description of this Hawk—seen often before and since— to Mr. Ridgway who says it probably is of this species. S82. Buteo swainsoni. Swarnson’s Hawk.—Resident. Abundant in summer. Breeds in low trees in ravines. in wild china or hackberries, or on the top of bluffs in similar trees. Clutch, three eges later ones, conan strange to say, have only two. Thus nests found March 1, April 1, 4, and | 6, had each three eggs, while nests found May 1, 2, and 20, had only two. The young are extremely handsome and seem to go through several changes of color, from light creamy to almost melanistic specimens. This. like the Red-tail, is clumsy, and unwary. It can, however, sail with great swiftness for several miles without flapping its wings, Goesin large flocks sometimes; one seen at Fort Davis, February, 1886, had 200 in it. 83. Archibuteo ferrugineus. FrRRUGINEOUS RoUGH-LEG.—This spe- ; cies (abundant in winter) was first brought to my notice by Mr. Loomis, who has had great success in killing them in several phases of plumage. It may breed—a point to be ascertained shortly. 84. Halizetus leucocephalus. BaLtp EaGLie.— Abundant resident. } Breeds, March to May. A couple were seen repairing a nest this Chirist- | mas, 1886, with cane stalks, and my informant says one bird is now sitting. is The nest is in a high pecan, but others are found in mesquit, ten to fifteen a feet high. m 85. Falco columbarius. PIGEON HAwKk.—Winter visitor. Common be in Tom Green County, in 1883-84. 86. Falco sparverius. AMERICAN SPARROW Hawk.—Abundant resi- ¥ dent. Nests in old Woodpecker holes in mesquit and live-oak. Nest with young found May 1, 1885; eggs found as late as July 1 (1884). Clutch, seven to eight. A flock of about fifty observed in September, 1885. in Concho County. 87. Polyborus cheriway. AupUBON’s CARACARA.— Resident in the eastern part of Concho County ; a few visit the western half in fall; none seen in Tom Green County. Breeds. Nest found in live-oak, about eighteen feet from the ground, with three eggs, April 24, 1881. Thesame nest was used for two years after. Though in the southern part of ‘Texas they prey on carrion, in Menard and Concho Counties they hunt prairie dogs in couples. Not at all alarmed (as yet) at the ‘human form divine.’ 88. Pandion haliaétus carolinensis. AMERICAN Osprey.—My authority for this as a fall visitor is Mr. Loomis, who noted one last fall (1885) on Kickapoo Creek. 4 89. Strix pratincola. AMERICAN BARN OwL.—Resident; rare; breeds. No nest found, but young met with in San Angelo, July, 1885. Seen in Concho County, in August, 1885. Known as the Monkey Owl, or Monkey-faced Owl. go. Asiowilsonianus. AMERICAN LONG-EARED OwL.—Two specimens shot in the fall of 1886, and others noted. | gt. Asio accipitrinus. SiHORT-EARED OwL.—Tolerably common in fall; rare in spring. g2. Syrnium nebulosum. BARRED OWL.—Seems to be common on the 190 Lioyp on Birds of Western Texas. [ July main streams, but, like nearly all other Owls, is far oftener heard than seen. No nests found, but undoubtedly a resident. May be var. @dlen?. 93. Megascops asio mccallii. TEXAN ScREECH OwL.— Abundant, at least in winter, on the river. Their notes can be heard from September 10 until March 1o. 94. Bubo virginianus subarcticus. WESTERN HoRNED OwL.—Abun- dant resident. Breeds from February 20 to end of May, in hackberry or mesquit on prairies, and in holes in the large pecans on rivers. I have rarely found more than two eggs in one clutch; three, however, occur in about one nest in six. Feeds on poultry, skunks, and rabbits, and is often on wing during the day. The birds seem to grow lighter with age. 95. Speotyto cunicularia hypogea. Burrowinc OwL.— Abundant resident. Breeds from April 1 to May 10, in old deserted dog-holes. Fly by day as well as night. I have found remains of Bell’s Vireo, Sav- anna Sparrow, and other birds in their holes.. In winter they hibernate, going in according to the severity of the weather. They appear just be- fore the first migrants. I have noted them for several years, retiring December I to 10, and appearing March 1 or 2. 96. Crotophaga sulcirostris. GRoovE-BILLED ANI.—Fall visitor. One was shot by Mr. Loomis in October, 1885. I saw several, but did not pro- cure any, in October, 1886. This record extends the range of this species considerably to the north, Mr. Sennett recording it for the Lower Rio Grande. 97. Geococcyx californianus. ROAD-RUNNER.— Abundant resident. Breeds from March 30 to May 10. Nest a huge structure in the middle of a bush, in thickets or dry ravines. Clutches number four, seven, six, five, five, eight, nine; average six. 98. Coccyzus americanus YELLOW-BILLED Cuckoo.— Abundant in summer. Arrives first week in May; departs middle of September. My notes for 1884, 1885, r886, respectively, give September 14, September 15, September 14, as latest records. First nest found June 2; last, July 30. Full clutches four-five. | Nests in low hackberries, or high pecans. The nest is avery flimsy structure, of about twenty straws crossed, and so poorly put together that after-a high wind eggs of both this bird and the Mourning Dove are frequently found on the ground, in pieces. 99. Coccyzus erythrophthalmus. BLACK-BILLED Cuckoo.—Spring and fall migrant. Not found west of Concho County. too. Ceryle alcyon. BeLTeED KINGFISHER.-— Abundant resident. Found in spring in small flocks. No nests found. tot. Ceryle cabanisi. TrExAN KINGFISHER.—Not detected on Pecos or Concho Rivers. Found in Nueces and Frio Cafions, in Edwards County. In the latter cafion in company with the Belted Kingfisher. 102. Dryobates pubescens. Downy WooprecKer.— One shot on Middle Concho, in Tom Green County, January 1883. 103. Dryobates scalaris. TExAN WooppecKEeR.—Abundant resident. Breeds April 16 to May 28. 1887. | LioypD ox Birds of Western Texas. IgI 104. Sphyrapicus thyroideus. WILLIAMSON’s SAPSUCKER.—Irregular winter visitant. Tolerably common during the winter of 1883. Like all migrating Woodpeckers here, they are very local and may be common in places overlooked by me. Found on North Concho, and also in Nueces Cafion, in Uvalde County. 105 Melanerpes erythrocephalus. RED-HEADED WoopDPECKER. — Irregular visitant. One shot August, 1885, and another seen but not se- cured. Only noted on Kickapoo Creek. 106. Melanerpes torquatus. Lrwis’s WooprEcKER.—Winter visitor, to the heads ofcreeks that rise inthe plains. Tolerably common on Spring Creek. This record considerably extends the range of this species south- ward, and is the first (undoubted) notice for Texas. 107. Melanerpes carolinus. RED-BELLIED WoopPECKER.—Tolerably common winter resident on Main Concho. 108. Melanerpes aurifrons. YELLOW-NAPED WoopPECKER.—Abun- dant resident. Breeds in holes in mesquit, pecan, and live-oak, from April to to May 14. Clutch six. I have traced this bird west to the Cas- tle Mountains, near Pecos River, in Tom Green County, and north to line of Texas and Pacific Railroad, so its range is considerably extended from that given in the A. O. U. ‘Check-List,’ which merely gives Southern Texas, etc. None found west of Pecos River. 10g. Colaptes auratus. FLicKer.— Winter visitor. Tolerably common, but excessively wild. 110. Calaptes cafer. RED-SHAFTED FLICKER.—Winter visitor. More common than the last and less wild. I have found it due south as far as Frio Cafion, in Uvalde County. Arrives in fall from September 20 to October 6. Latest seen April 17. Intermediate or ‘hybrid’ specimens between this species and the last occur in winter. 111. Antrostomus vociferus. WHIP-POOR-WILL.—Summer resident. Found only in the eastern part of Concho County. 112. Phalenoptilus nuttalli. Poor-wiLt.—Abundant summer visitor. First seen in 1884, March 6; in 1885, March 20. Last seen in 1884, Nov- ember 23; in 1885, October 8. Breeds, andI have undoubtedly found eggs, but stupidly thinking they should be speckled, I thought they were Dove’s and left them. Its note is easily imitated. Midnight is their favorite hour on moonlight nights. They lie close in shubbery during the day, or on open flats, and are not easily fiushed. Mr. Loomis last year told me they rested on limbs of trees on the creek during the day, to test which statement I went with him and we flushed several as stated. 113.- Chordeiles texensis. TEXAN NIGHTHAWK.—Abundant summer visitor. Arrives last weekin April, in flocks, and at once mate. Raise two broods, and breed on little gravelly ridges on bare ground. Clutch alwaystwo. Eggs found May 14, 29, 30, June 1, 30, and July 4. Departs first week in October. 114. Trochiluscolubris. RusBy-THROATED HUMMINGBIRD.—Abundant summer visitor, arriving April 10-11. I have noted nests only in May, but Ig2 Lioyp on Birds of Western Texas [ July it must breed earlier. In fall (September) the eastern migrants are abun- dant for a week in Concho County; not detected in Tom Green County. 115. Trochilus alexandri. BLACK-CHINNED HUMMINGBIRD —Abundant summer visitor. Males arrive April 1; common April 7. Seen in flocks during the fall migration (September 21 to 28). Raise two broods. Nests found from May 12 to July 2. Mr Nathan C. Browne first added this species to the Texas avi-fauna; he found it at Boerne, and surmised that it bred to the north of that place, so its range is thus much extended beyond its previously known habitat, z. c., ‘Pacific coast region, from California east to Arizona, and Utah, and southward.” 116. Milvulus forficatus. ScIssOR-TAILED FLYCATCHER.—Abundant summer visitor. Earliest arrival March 14; not common until ten days later. Departs, main body, about October 20; a few linger till the first severe norther. Breeds commonly on prairies in mesquit thickets, but often in high pecans. First nest May 6, clutch 5; latest July 16, clutch 5. In ten nests examined only one clutch was 4. 117. Tyrannus tyrannus. KinGcBirp.—Fall visitant. Two recorded in fall of 1886. 118. Tyrannus verticalis. ARKANSAS KINGBIRD.-—Spring migrant. I noted a pair June 1, 1885, in Tom Green County, which had evidently stayed to breed. 119. Myiarchus crinitus. GREAT-CRESTED FLYCATCHER.— Summer visitant. Arrives May 31 (probably before); breeds. Nest found in a hole in a mesquit, June 8, 1884; five eggs. Very abundant migrant dur- ing September. 120. Myiarchus cinerascens. ASH-THROATED FLYCATCHER.—Abun- dant summer visitor. Arrives the day after or same day as the Scissor- tailed Flycatcher, 7. e., after the first cloudy weather in middle of March. Departs a month before the Scissor-tail, but one or two linger for a fort- night after the bulk go. Last seen October 7. Breeds in holes of trees— generally in old Texas Sapsucker holes— and clutches range from 4 to 7 ; ordinary clutch 6. First clutch found May 9; last, June 9. 121. Sayornis pheebe. Pua:Be.—-Resident; rarein summer and winter; common in fall. Nests on rocky ledges in caves; clutch 4 to 6. First nest found April 4; last, May 4. Does not winter in Tom Green County, 122. Sayornis saya. Say’s Puaspe.—Tolerably common winter resi- dent. First arrival, October 10; departs April 13. Ranges east as far as the Colorado River, Texas. 123. Sayornis nigricans. BLAck PHa@spe. — Rare summer visitor. Found only in Tom Green County, on Spring Creek. Arrives end of March. Breeds April 4; one clutch found, 6 eggs; nest on a ledge. 124. Contopus borealis. OLIvE-sIDED FLycATCcHER.—Fall migrant; tolerably common in September. Not observed in spring. 125. Contopusvirens. Woop PrweEe.—Summer visitor. Not observed until May 5; last seen October 21. Tolerably common on South Concho, in Tom Green County, where it breeds. No nests were found, but young 1$87.] (Hay, the Red-headed Woodpecker a Floarder. 193 were shot in June. Common in Concho County for two months in the fall. 126. Contopus richardsonii. WrsTerN Woop PrEwer.—Two shot in fall of 1886, in Concho County. 127. Empidonax pusillus. LItrTLe Friycatcuer.—Tolerably common summer visitant. Breeds. Young shot. 128. Empidonax pusillus trailli, TramLi’s FrycaTcHER.— Spring migrant in the western half of Concho County, and I believe it breeds— a point I thought I had already ascertained, but as there may be some doubt, I cannot positively record it yet as breeding. 129. Empidonax minimus. Lrastr FLiycarcuer.—Tolerably common summer visitant. Abundant in fall. Have shot young; no nests taken. Arrival noted April 27, 1885. 130. Empidonax hammondi. HAMMoND’s FLYCATCHER. Fall migrant. Rare in Concho County; tolerably common in Tom Green County and the most abundant Emf/donax across the Pecos River. 131. Empidonax obscurus. WRIGHT'S FLYCATCHER.— Rare fall mi- grant. Secured twice in Tom Green County. 132. Otocoris alpestris arenicola. Desert HoRNED Lark.—Abundant winter visitor. Arrives October 20; departs March 6. This is the only Horned Lark noted for either county. None occur in summer to my knowledge, although I have looked especially for them. ( To be continued.) THE RED-HEADED WOODPECKER A HOARDER. TE OIG EA We Tue Woodpeckers are eminently an insect-eating family, and their whole organization fits them for gaining access to situations where the supply of their normal food is perennial, if not always abundant. There are, however, in all probability, few members of the group that will not, when opportunities are offered, fore- go their accustomed animal diet and solace themselves on soft fruits and luscious berries; and when the blasts blow cold, and the soggy limb is frozen hard, and the larva no longer betrays its location by its industry, the few Woodpeckers of the species which brave our winters are, no doubt, glad to avail themselves of such dry forms of nutriment as grains, seeds of grasses, and the softer nuts. Notwithstanding the many sagacious traits exhibited by birds, it is, to judge from the books, rather unusual for them to lay up 194 Hay, the Ied-headed Woodpecker a Hoarder. {| July a store of food for a period of scarcity; and yet it is probable that when we have thoroughly learned their modes of life many will be found to do this. One Woodpecker, Alelanerpes formi- ctvorus, a near relative of our Red-headed Woodpecker, has long been known as a hoarder of treasures, and an interesting account of its habits is given in Baird, Brewer and Ridgway’s ‘Birds of North America.’ This species is accustomed to dig small holes in the trunks of trees, and to drive into each hole with great force a single acorn. ‘‘Thus the bark of a large pine forty or fifty feet high will present the appearance of being. closely studded with brass nails, the heads only being visible.” It has, by some, been denied that these acorns are collected for food ; and it is quite probable that many more are stored away than are ever eaten. It is even related that these birds sometimes hide away in trees collections of small stones. But there are evidences that sometimes, at least, the acorns are utilized. Instinct probably leads the bird to overdo the business of hoarding, just as human reason in a similar direction often misleads its possessors. Our Red-headed Woodpecker betrays its kinship to the Cali- fornia species by the possession of somewhat similar habits. Its propensity for hoarding does not appear to have escaped the observation of many persons who make no claims to being or- nithologists, and yet I find in no scientific work that I have been able to consult any notice thereof. Gentry, who describes minutely the habits of this species, says nothing about this trait. ‘The Birds of North America’ contains no statement concern- ing the food of the species; and concerning the hoarding habits of the California Woodpecker they are spoken of as being ‘‘very remarkable and, for a Woodpecker, somewhat anomalous.” Along with the great abundance of grains and fruits of the past year, there has been, in Central Indiana at least, an immense crop of beech-nuts; and the Red-heads have appeared to be animated with an ambition to make the most of their opportu- nities. From the time the nuts began to ripen, these birds appeared to be almost constantly on the wing, passing from the beeches to some place of deposit. They have hidden away the nuts in almost every conceivable situation. Many have been placed in cavities in partially decayed trees; and the felling of an old: beech is certain to provide a little feast for a bevy of children, Large handfuls have been taken from a single knot- 1887. Hay, the Red-headed Woodpecker a Hoarder. 195 hole. They are often found under a patch of the raised bark of trees, and single nuts have been driven into the cracks in bark. They have been thrust into the cracks in front gate-posts: and a favorite place of deposit is behind long slivers on fence-posts. I have taken a good handfull from a single such crevice. That sharpest of all observers, the small boy, early discovered the location of these treasures. In a few cases grains of corn have been mixed with beech-nuts, and I have found also a few drupes apparently of the wild-cherry and a partially-eaten bitter-nut. The nuts may often be seen driven into the cracks at the ends of railroad ties; and, on the other hand, the birds have often been seen on the roofs of houses, pounding nuts into the crevices be- tween the shingles. In several instances I have observed that the space formed by a board springing away from a fence-post, has been nearly filled with nuts, and afterwards pieces of bark and wood have been brought and driven down over the nuts as if to hide them from poachers. These pieces of bark are sometimes an inch or more square and half an inch thick and driven in with such force that it is difficult to get them out. In one case the nuts were covered over with a layer of empty involucres. Usually the nuts are still covered with the hulls; but here and there, where the crevice is very narrow, these have been taken off and pieces of the kernels have been thrust in. An examina- tion recently of some of these caches showed that the nuts were being attacked by animals of some kind. The Red-heads are frequently seen in the vicinity of these stores and they sometimes manifest great impatience at the presence of other birds. That other birds and animals of any kind disturb these caches I do not know, but it is quite probable that they do. Since it might be questioned whether or not the Woodpeckers use for food the nuts thus stored up, I concluded to apply a test that would probably decide the matter. To-day (Jan. 7.), after the prevalance for sometime of severe weather, I shot two Red- heads and made an examination of the contents of their alimen- tary canal. In the gizzards of both were found considerable quantities of the more or less broken kernels of what appeared to the unaided eye to be beech-nuts. I then made microscopic sections of the pieces and compared them with similar sections of beech-nuts, and the two sets of sections were identical. The Red-headed Woodpecker certainly eats beech-nuts. In the giz- 196 Scott on the Birds of Arizona. | July zards there was also some kind of hard vegetable matter that I could not determine, and some coarse sand; but there were no remains of insects. The laying up of such abundant stores of food for winter use, in so many places easy of access, and the precautions taken to conceal them, all show a high degree of intelligence in these birds. The above observations were made in the village of Irvington, near Indianapolis, Ind. ON THE AVI-FAUNA OF PINAL. COUNTY, ‘WITH REMARKS ON SOME BIRDS OF PIMA AND GILA COUNTIES, ARIZONA. BY W. E. D. SCOTT. With annotations by F. A. Allen. (Continued from p. 24.) 137. Coccothraustes vespertina. EVENING GrosBEAK.—The only lo- cality at which I met with this species was in the pine wood region of the Santa Catalina Mountains, November 26-29, 1884, as already noted. (See Auk, Vol. II, No. 2, p. 174, April, 1885.) 38. Carpodacus purpureus californicus. CALIFORNIA PURPLE FINCH. —During several years of collecting in the region under consideration, this species was not met with; and, therefore, I must assume that it is not of regular occurrence. But during the fall of 18385, beginning early in November, I found large flocks in the cafion near my house in the Cat- alinas. The first flock, noticed on November 11, was, as far as could be ascertained, composed of birds in immature plumage and mostly females. On November 30, I took a male in full plumage, the first I had noticed. All through December and January they were common in both phases of plumage, but a perceptible diminution of adult males was noticed early in February. About the middle of February the species began to disappear. This is the only point where I have noticed their occurrence. They fed almost exclusively on the ripe seed-balls of the sycamore, this season very abundant. [Among the birds received from Mr. Scott are 12 adult males, 5 young males in the plumage of the female,and 18 females. These appear to differ in no appreciable way from California examples. Mr. Scott’s 1887. ] Scott ox the Birds of Arizona. 197 record, as above, is the first for the Southern Rocky Mountain region. As he suggests, their appearance there is doubtless unusual, and doubt- less to be considered as a temporary incursion from the Pacific coast region. —J. A. A. 139. Carpodacus cassini. CASSIN’s PuRPLE Fincu.—The first records I have of this species were made in the pine region of the Catalinas late in November, 1884. (See Auk, Vol. II, p. 173.) Later in the same year they were present near my house, feeding on the young buds of cotton- wood. My notes speak of them as not uncommon through February and March at this point, females and immature birds largely predominating. The latest note of 1885 is on April 27, when, at the same locality, a single one was seen and taken, moulting. I did not meet with them in the moun- tains afterward, but saw a large flock, many in aduit plumage, at Tucson, February 19, 1886. 140. Carpodacus frontalis. House Fincu.—An abundant summer resident, breeding both about Tucson and in the Catalinas up to an alti- tude of about 6500 feet. They are present about Tucson in smaller num- bers during the colder months. This is also true of the species in the lower foothills of the Catalinas, though here they are not nearly so com- mon in winter as about Tucson. The regular migration brings them back to these mountains in large numbers late in February. At first they are in flocks of considerable size, but soon pair and by the third week in March begin nesting. ‘The nesting site is usually in a cholla at no great distance from the ground. I have records of nests, however, sixty feet from the ground in sycamores, and in almost every variety of bush and tree. 141. Loxia curvirostra stricklandi. MrxicAN CrossBi_L.—During my visit to the Catalinas in November, 1884, I did not meet with any Cross- bills, though careful search was made. But ona subsequent visit to the same locality, November 3-8, 1885, I found the species abundant and quite generally distributed throughout the pine woods. They fed almost exclu- sively on the seeds of the pine and seemed to affect the vicinity of streams or brooks, constantly going to drink. Now and then I noticed single birds alight on the ground, apparently in search of seeds that had been dropped. [Fifteen specimens were sent to me by Mr. Scott. They were forwarded to Mr. Brewster for examination in connection with Professor Dyche’s specimens obtained at Lawrence, Kansas, and form a part of the Arizona material referred to by Mr. Brewster in his note to Professor Dyche’s paper published in ‘The Auk,’ Vol. III, pp. 260-261.—J. A. A.] 142. Spinus tristis. AMERICAN GoLpFINCH.—My records of this species are very limited and were all made near my house in the Cata- linas. They are as follows: December 19, 1885. Flock of three, two males and a female; all adult and in winter plumage. December 30, 1885. Took two adults, —all that were seen. February 4, 1886. Took a single female. So far as Iam aware, Mr. Brown has not found this species about Tuc- 198 Scotr on the Birds of Arizona. { July son. All the individuals that I have seen were feeding on the ripe seed ball of the sycamore. [Six specimens in winter plumage are strikingly different from the eastern bird in corresponding plumage. The white edging of the feathers of the wings and tail in the Arizona bird is much broader; the dorsal surface is much lighter, the yellow of the throat is much purer, lacking almost wholly the greenish shade seen in the eastern bird; the white of the belly is purer, with a faint fulvous instead of grayish shade; the sides are washed with a paler shade of fulvous brown, in quite strong contrast, however, with the almost pure, solid white of the abdomen and lower tail- coverts. If summer specimens should show correspondingly paler tints in comparison with eastern examples, as they are almost sure to do, the Arizona form is quite as well entitled to recognition as a subspecies as are several of the pallid forms of Sparrows which have been accorded this rank.—J. A. A.] 143. Spinus psaltria. ARKANSAS GOLDFINCH.—This species, as well as its close ally, Spénus psaltria artzone, seems in the Catalina region to be rather nomadic and never very common. The following records from my note book will show the manner of their occurrence: Pepper Sauce Canon, Catalina Mountains, September 16, 1884. One taken, No. 893, an adult male. The testes in this individual were fully as large as in the height of the breeding season. The birds are rather common. Several seen to-day. Same locality, January 12, 1885. Noted; rare. Same locality, March 19, 1885. No. 1916, male; has the testicles as fully de- veloped asin the breeding season. Same locality, April 16, 1885. Pair taken (No. 2172, male; No. 2173, female), apparently mated. On_dissec- tion both proved to be adult, though the male is not in full plumage. Probably psaltria. They were about to breed, as the testicles of the male were fully developed and the eggs of the female were, some of them at least, half formed and would have been laid at an early day. Same locality, February 10, 1886. Male in full plumage taken, the first seen in two months. The only one noted; feeding on cottonwood flowers. Same locality, July 18, 1884. A number of young seen to-day, fully fledged and no longer with parents. No. 567, young male taken. Same locality, May 5, 1885, No. 2418, female, young of year. I have been unable to find the nest of this species and am puzzled as to its exact breeding habits, especially with regard to time of year, but a care- ful consideration of the above notes leads me to believe that the period of breeding extends over a considerable portion of the year. 144. Spinus psaltria arizone. ARIZONA GOLDFINCH. —This sub- species is much more uncommon in the Catalinas—the only point where I have:met with it—than the foregoing. Indeed, I find it difficult to dis- tinguish the transition from true psadfrza to this form, and again from this form to Spzvus psaltria mexicanus. Alone each seems distinct. A series placed together renders it doubtful where to draw the dividing lines. All of the examples that I can refer to this subspecies were taken near my house in the Catalinas, as follows: 1887. ] Scott on the Birds of Arizona. 199 No. 68, ¢ ad. June 13, 1884. Is very dark and intense in color, forming a near approach to mexicanus. No. 2663, @, May 28, 1885. Typical arizone.. No. 2566,-4, May 19, 1885. Typical artzone. This very meagre material is all that has come under my immediate notice. 145. Spinus lawrencei. LAwRENCE’s GOLDFINCH.—This species I have not met with, but a female was taken by Mr. Herbert Brown on February 28, 1886, to which he kindly called my attention soon after its capture. Mr. Brown also saw the male bird but was unable to get it. 146. Spinus pinus. Prine Fincu.—A rather common, and at times an abundant fall and winter visitor in the Catalina Region, ranging as low as an altitude of 3500 feet. The first fall record I have is October 28, and I have seen them as late as April 16. This was in the vicinity of my house, at an altitude of about 4500 feet. During the winter of 1885-86 this species was associated with flocks of Carpodacus purpureus califor. nicus, feeding on the fruit of the sycamore, and was rather common all through the season. [The considerable number of specimens of this species sent by Mr. Scott, are uniformly somewhat lighter colored than eastern examples, but the difference is much less than that noticed above as occurring between eastern and western specimens of SAznus trist’s.—J. A. A. ] 147. Calcarius ornatus. CHESTNUT-COLORED LoNnGspur.—On_ the mesas of the foothills of the Santa Catalinas, near American Flag (altitude about 3500 feet), I took a single individual of this species, and saw a large flock on November 11, 1885. These are the only times that it was met with. 148. Poocetes gramineus confinis. WESTERN VESPER SPARROW.— In general a fall and spring migrant in the Catalina region, which is the only point at which I have notes of their occurrence. During these sea- sons they are quite common, and a few winterin the same locality. I saw a small flock and took a male (No. 1635) in Mesquite Cafion, altitude 3500 feet, January 24, 1885. On March 12, 1885, there were many every- where on the mesas of the Catalina foothills. 149. Ammodramus sandwichensis alaudinus. WersTERN SAVANNA Sparrow.—Mr. Brown informs me of the occurrence of this species, rather sparingly, about Tucson in fall, winter, and spring. I have not met with it myself. [I have received from Mr. Brown a specimen taken in the Rincon Moun- tains, Arizona, May 8, 1886.— J. A. A.] 150. Ammodramus savannarum perpallidus. WersTERN GRASSHOP- PER SPARROW.—Apparently a rather uncommon resident on the mesas of the foothills of the Catalinas. The following are all the references to it contained in my note book: Hills above Old Hat Cafion, altitude 3750 feet, January 29, 1885. Took an adult female (No. 1682); saw no others, but observed another on January 24 in Mesquite Cafion, at a somewhat lower altitude. Both of these were found in thickets of cat-claw mesquite and zo¢ in a grassy region. Same locality, March 22, 1885. Took a female (No. 1946), the only one seen. 151. Chondestes grammacus strigatus. WESTERN LARK SPARROW. 200 Scott on the Birds of Artzona. [ July —Though resident about Tucson, and at the lower altitudes of the region under consideration, they are common in the Catalina region, where they range up to about 5000 feet, only during the warmer months, and I have not met with them at all in the winter. A few were noted in the hills above Old Hat Cation on May 11, 1885, the first of the season. They breed in this locality, and though I have found no nests, I have taken the young fully fledged in the first plumage. 152. Zonotrichia leucophrys. WuITE-CROWNED SPpARROW.—This spe- cies, in comparison with the next, is apparently rare. I have met with it in September, February, and May, in small numbers, associated with the next. 153. Zonotrichia intermedia. INTERMEDIATE SPARROW.—Observed from the last week of September till late in May. The greater part seen in September were in immature plumage. 154. Spizella socialis arizone. WerSTERN CHIPPING SPARROW.—My notes in regard to this form are all from the Catalina region. They indi- cate that the species is rare in summer, and abundant during the fall, winter, and spring. Mr. Brown has found it common about Tucson in winter. Inthe Catalinas the birds seem to frequent the bottoms of the wider cafions, feeding on seeds of various grasses, and congregating in large flocks, sometimes numbering several hundred individuals. In March they begin to take on the spring plumage. [The series of 46 specimens of this form sent by Mr. Scott are mostly in winter plumage, but the considerable number of spring specimens well sustains Mr. Brewster’s remarks (Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, Vol. VIII, pp. 190- 191) respecting the differences that may be regarded as characteristic of the western race of S. soc¢alzs.—J. A. A. ] 155. Spizella pallida. CLAyY-coLORED SpAkRow.—I have met with this species only at Mineral Creek, in October and November, and in March. 156. Spizella atrigularis. BLACK-cHINNED SpARROW.—Apparently a very rare species throughout the area under consideration. I met with it at the head waters of Mineral Creek on several occasions in October, 1882, and once in the Catalina region, Feb. 26, 1885. 157- Juncohyemalis. SLATE-cOLORED JuNco.—A rare species, though of regular occurrence in the Catalina region, which is the only point where I have met with it. I took a male (No. 1576) in Old Hat Cafion, Jan. §, 1885, the only one seen. It was associated with a large flock of other Juncos, the prevailing form being ¥. hyemalts oregonus. I also took a male Feb. 10, and a female Feb. 11, 1886, near my house. [The two specimens sent are quite indistinguishable from eastern exam- ples.—J. A. A.] 157a. Junco hyemalis oregonus. OREGON JuNco.—The commonest form of Junco in the Catalinas during the colder months. They arrive about the last of October and remain till about April 1. 158. Junco annectens. PINK-sIDED JuNco.— This does not seem .a very common form in the Catalinas, the only peint where I have observed 1887.] Scott on the Birds of Arizona. 201 it, but the specimens obtained seem to be very characteristic. I generally found it associated with oregonus, but have seen small flocks of this species alone, notably in the pines of the Catalinas, altitude 10,000 feet, from Nov- ember 3 to § inclusive, 1885. They were rather common in Pepper Sauce Cafion during the later part of February, 1886, but I did not detect their presence in the pine region above alluded to in April, 1885. 159. Junco caniceps. GRAY-HEADED JuNco.—Next to oregonus, this is probably the more common form of Junco, in the foothill region of the Catalinas during the colder weather. My notes indicate that it arrived about my house in the Catalinas October 15, 1884, and became common ina few days. It was abundant in the pine region during my visit, from November 26 to 29, 1884. During January and Feburary, 1885, I saw it almost daily near my house, and late in the latter month noted it as par- ticularly abundant. It was, however, uncommon during the winter of 1885 and 1886 in the same locality. Ihave taken this form later in the spring, at and about my house, than any of the other Juncos, but did not find itin the pines of the Catalinas in April. 160. Junco cinereus palliatus. Ari1zONA JuNco.—I have discussed the occurrence. of this species in the pine woods of the Catalinas in a former number of this journal (Auk, Vol. II, pp. 174, 354-355), where it is referred to as Funco cinereus. It remains to be added that I also found it in the pine forests of the Pinal Mountains, above Mineral Creek, where it was apparently rare. This was late in October, 1882. In the cafions of the foothills of the Catalinas, and about my house, it is the earliest form to appear in the fall, and a few remain during mild winters. But during the winter of 1885-86, which was severe, I only detected it on a single occasion, February 10, 1886. 160a. Juncocinereus dorsalis. RED-BACKED JuNCcO.—Two Juncos taken in the Catalinas near my house are fairly referable to this form, though No. 1522, a male, had the bright colored sides of the ¥. cénereus palliatus. The following are the records of the two birds in question taken from my note book: Pepper Sauce Cafion, Catalinas, January, 7885, altitude 4500 feet. Took an adult male (No. 1522), which in color is typical of this subspecies, but with bright yellow irides. April 7, same locality, took a female (No. 2122). [The very interesting series of Juncos in Mr. Scott’s collection num- bers 197 specimens, of which 2 are referable to hyemalis, 80 to oregonus, 27 to annectens, 35 to caniceps, 3 to dorsalis, and 50 to palliatus. These numbers may doubtless be taken as a fair index of the relative abundance of these forms in the region under consideration. The specimens refera- ble to oregonus and annectens call for no special notice. About one-third of the caniceps series show more or less red on the crown, corresponding in tint to that of the back. In several it tinges, more or less strongly, fully one-half of the crown; in others it is restricted to a few well-defined streaks. That it is not a seasonal feature is shown by its presence in May specimens as well as in October ones. It is also traceable in a few specimens of falizatus. There is thus a tendency toward the develop- ment of a red crown in at least the canzceps form. 202 Scott on the Birds of Arizona. [ July Of the three specimens of dorsalis one has the bill wholly black and of exceptionally large size. The fAalliatus series presents much variation in respect to the extension of the red upon the secondaries and the wing-coverts, from those showing but a slight trace of it on these parts, and thus barely separable from dorsalis, to those having the greater coverts and inner secondaries as red as the back. In short, the intergradation between these two forms is shown to be complete by the specimens in Mr. Scott's series. In early spring specimens of both caxiceps and falléatus, the red of the dorsal region is of a much lighter and brighter tone than in autumnal specimens.—J. A. A.] 161. Amphispiza bilineata. BLACK-THROATED SPARROW.—A _ com- mon resident in the foothill region of the Catalinas, and also abundant about Tucson. It breeds commonly at both points, and generally at suita- ble elevations and localities throughout the region under consideration. In the Catalinas, up to an altitude of 4500 feet, it is rather more abundant in spring and fall than during the breeding season or in the winter. At this point the breeding season begins early in March, and continues well into the latter part of the summer. A male taken near my house, August 16, 1884, had the testes developed to fully as great an extent as at any time during the breeding period. The number of eggs varies from two to five, three or four being the general complement. The nests are built near the ground in some low bush or cactus, and occasionally on the ground. By the 1st to roth of May in the Catalina region the first broods of young have left the nest and parent birds, and go about in small flocks of from five to twenty. The amount of black showing on the throats of young male birds varies greatly; in some it is hardly to be distinguished, while in others it is conspicuous, though not as brilliant as in the adult birds. There is every possible gradation between these two extremes; and young females often show traces of the black throat-marking. The species is very familiar, and being so common, and haying a pleas- ing song, it may fairly be considered as occupying about the same relative position in the Fringillidz of the region that the familiar SA7zella soctalis does in the East. [Mr. Scott’s series of 58 specimens includes 18 in first plumage. They wholly lack the black of the throat and face, but the white superciliary and maxillary stripes are distinct; the whole dorsal surface is of a lighter, more ashy brown, and the feathers of the interscapular region are obscurely streaked centrally with dusky; throat whitish, often with faint touches or streaks of dusky; whole breast streaked with blackish, more or less heavily in different individuals ;in some the streaks being narrow and indistinct, in others broad and heavy. The tail is less intensely black, the white edg- ing of the outer webs and the white spot on the inner web of the outer feathers in the adult are usually wholly wanting; the latter is sometimes present, but much reduced in size. Adults in the fall have the brown of the dorsal surface deeper than in spring and summer, but there is apparently no sexual difference in color. J. A. Al 1887. ] Scotr oz the Birds of Arizona. 203 162. Amphispiza belli nevadensis. BELL’s SpARROw.—This species is only mentioned once in my notes as occurring in the Catalina Moun- tains. This at an altitude of 5-oo feetin late September, 1884. Mr. Her- bert Brown considers it as nota common bird about Tucson in winter, where he obtained a male, November 2, 1884, and a female, December 28, 1884. I noticed quite a number on the low mesas near the San Pedro, November 22, 1884. 163. Peucza carpalis. RUFOUS-WINGED SPARROW. —In the foothills of the Catalinas this is at times, particularly in late fall and early spring, acommon species. During the warmer months, though met with now and then, I cannot consider it as being common, and have been unable to find its nest. In this region, which is the only point where I have met it, it occurs from about 3000 up to 4500 feet, in flocks of from four to twenty individuals, and is not infrequently associated with S. soczalis artzone, having very similar habits. 164. Peuczea ruficeps boucardi.— The bird is present in the Catalina region all the year, ranging more or less commonly down as low as 3000 feet in winter, and up into the pine woods during the warmer months. I met with it casually at Mineral Creek, where it was apparently rare. Mr. Brown has no records of it from about Tucson. The song is very pleas- ing, and the bird is quite tame and familiar, coming to feed on grain and crumbs daily about my house. This species has been discussed quite fully in former papers of this journal (Auk, Vol. II, p. 354, and Vol. III, p. 83), to which the reader is referred for further details. [Mr. Scott’s series of 46 specimens, 40 of them adult, shows that among the latter there is much seasonal variation in color. In autumnal and winter specimens the yellowish brown wash of the lower surface is much stronger than in spring (April) specimens, this color becoming still paler in specimens taken in June. The browish chestnut in fall and winter birds loses later its vinaceous or purplish tinge, becoming deep reddish brown in the breeding season, with the ashy bordering of the feathers more restricted. The bill also becomes darker. It is thus quite easy to recognize approximately the date of collecting, without reference to the label, from an inspection of either the dorsal or ventral surface of the specimen. The young in first plumage have the feathers of the breast and flanks narrowly streaked with dusky, the streaks being most distinct on the breast. The general color of the lower parts differs little from that of the adult. Above the head, neck, and interscapular region are ashy brown, each feather broadly centered with dusky. The wings and tail are nearly as in the adult.—J. A. A.] 165. Melospiza fasciata fallax. DESERT-sONG SPARROW. — The only point where I have observed this species is in the immediate vicinity of Tucson, where it is apparently resident, though most common during the spring months, and where it breeds. Mr. Brown’s observations coin- cide, I believe, with the above statement. I have no definite data in regard to time of nesting, but have heard the birds singing in late January. So . 204 Scorr ox the Birds of Arizona. [ July far as I am aware they are not so familiar about houses as the Song Sparrow of the East. 165 a. Melospiza fasciata montana. MOUNTAIN SONG SPARROW. — This form of Song Sparrow I noticed not uncommonly on the San Pedro River in January (26-29), 1886. I have also seen it in the vicinity of Tuc- son on two occasions, both in the winter. Mr. Brown has found it to be a rather irregular visitor and generally uncommon about Tucson during the winter. 166. Melospiza lincolni. LincoLn’s SpARROow. —A regular, though not very common, spring and fall migrant in the Catalina Mountains, and a few probably winter in this locality. 167. Pipilo maculatus megalonyx. Spurred Townrr. —A common resident in the Catalinas, where it breeds at altitudes above 5000 feet, and ranges, except in the severest portion of the year, to the highest points. Breeds in the vicinity of my house in May and June. Young, fully fledged in the streaked plumage, were taken about the middle of July. (For further reference to this form, see Auk, Vol. II, No. 4, p. 355.) 168. Pipilo chlorurus. GREEN-TAILED TOWHEE.— A common spring and fall migrant, and a few winter in the Catalinaregion. Most abundant in Septemberand April. I met with it at Riverside and at Mineral Creek, and have also seen it about Tucson. Ido net think it breeds within the region in question. 169. Pipilo fuscus mesoleucus. CANoN TowHEE.—A common resident throughout the entire region, and ranges up to the pine forests in the warmer months. The first nests were found in the Catalina region (alti- tude 3500 feet) about the middle of March, from which time the breeding period extends well into July. [A young bird in first plumage lacks the chestnut crown-patch; the rump and upper tail-coverts are decidedly rufous, contrasting with the back; the wing-coverts are tipped with yellowish white, forming two narrow wing-bars; the throat, whole breast, and flanks are distinctly streaked with dusky. —J. A. A.] 170. Pipilo aberti. Asert’s TOWHEE.— Occurs as a resident about Tucson and at Florence, which are the only points where I have person- ally observed it. It is by no means as common as the last, and does not, so far as I am aware, enter the foothills or range up into the moun- tains. The height of the breeding season about Tucson is in the latter part of May and early June. 171. Cardinalis cardinalis superbus. ARIZONA CARDINAL. — This form seems to have a very general distribution throughout the area treated of, ranging up to about 5000 feet in the mountains. It is perhaps most common in the foothills at an altitude of 3500, and is particularly con- spicuous, both by its very brilliant plumage and clear, melodious song. This does not seem very different from that of the typical bird save that it has possibly greater volume. In the Catalinas I find them most common in cafions where there is considerable growth of juniper, and the same holds true at the point where I observed them on Mineral Creek. 172. Pyrrhuloxia sinuata. Texan CarpinaL, —Rare or casual in 1887.] Cox on Rare New Brunswick Birds. 205 the foothills of the Catalinas. I have observed it here on only two occa- ° sions. Rather common, especially in early spring, about Tucson. Mr. Brown found it commonly in the Quijitoa country in the winter of 1884 and 1885. I did not observe it at either Florence or at Riverside. 173. Habia melanocephala. BLACK-HEADED GROSBEAK. — At Mineral Creek, altitude sooo feet, this species was breeding in small numbers during the summer of 1882. The only other point where I have met with it is in the Catalina Mountains, where it undoubtedly breeds at the high- est altitudes, and where after the first of July it rapidly becomes abundant as low down as 3500 feet. Mere I found it in large scattered flocks, during July, August, and September, 1884, feeding on all the small wild fruits and seeds that are abundant at this time of year. Its arrival at this same locality was first noted May 1, and it remains till about the first week in October. I took a remarkably fine albino of this species on August 15, 1884, in Pepper Sauce Cafion, Catalina Mountains. 174. Guiraca cerulea. BLUE GROSBEAK. — The only records I have of this species are kindly furnished me by Mr. Brown, who finds it rather rare about Tucson late in May and early in June. 175. Passerina ameena. LAzuLi BunrinGc. — Observed at Mineral Creek in August, 1882. Took a young male (No. 624) in Pepper Sauce Cafion (4500 feet), July 27, 1884. ‘These are the only records I have made of the species. Mr. Brown has found it breeding, but not common, about Tucson, where it is most frequent during the spring migration. 176. Spiza americana. DicKcisseL. — The only record of this species is furnished by Mr. Herbert Brown, who took a female near Tucson on September 11, 1884, and later kindly showed me the bird in his collection. 177. Calamospiza melanocorys. LARK BuNTING. This species, if it does not breed within the area under consideration, is present almost the entire year and sometimes is to be met with in enormous flocks. I find in my notes large flocks noted near Florence, Dec. 10-20, 1883. On the mesa, above Pepper Sauce Cafion, Catalinas (altitude 4ooo feet), I saw Aug. 17, 1885, two large flocks, composed of adult and young in about equal numbers, the adult males still in full plumage. A small flock was seen in Old Hat Cafion, Catalinas (4000 feet), on March 10, 1885 — first of the spring migration. A number of large flocks were noted on the plains about Tucson, Feb. 19, 1886. ( Zo be continued.) RARE BIRDS OF NORTHEASTERN NEW BRUNS- WICK. BY PHILIP COX, JR. BeEForE entering upon the subject of this paper, it is well to say something concerning the character and climate of this cor- 206 Cox on Rare New Brunswick Birds. [ July ner of the Dominion (Newcastle on the Miramichi River), as the reader will then be better able to appreciate the facts pre- sented. Snow falls here about November 1, and winter can be said to begin about the 2oth ofthe month. Soon pond, lake, and river are ice-bound, and field and forest clad in their winter robes. The snowfall increases until about the middle of March, when it lies to the depth of from three to six feet; and during all this time the thermometer is hardly ever above zero. A temperature of from 15° to 30° below is often reached, and for weeks and weeks the average may be 18°; but, strange to say, our climate does not seem severe, nor do our people complain of the cold. This is largely due to the surprising dryness of the air, and the absence of raw winds. Our days are bright, our nights, starry ; the auroral displays are of surpassing grandeur, while the re- markable uniformity of the temperature is not the least striking feature of our climate. About the 20th of March, the sun’s increasing power begins to be felt, and the snow would henceforth waste away rapidly were it not for cold east winds which at this time begin to blow from off the floating ice-fields of the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and neutra- lize the action of the sun. Thus spring creeps on very slowly, or rather we have no spring atall, inthe general meaning of the term ; for it is frequently the 1st of May before our fields are bare, and then warm summer is upon us. Thus summer and winter meet, as it were, on friendly terms, shake hands, and getalong tol- erably well without the interference ofa meddlesome third person. By the side of some ice-layer or snow-drift, the Mayflower, tril- lium, and other plants are often found in bloom, marking the sud- den transition of climate. In this latitude a cold winter generally presupposes a warm summer, but luckily for our country we are an exception to this rule ; for no other locality, perhaps, in the Dominion of Canada can boast of such cool, refreshing weather as the shores of the Miramichi and far-famed Baie des Chaleurs. Of this fact our neighbors to the south and west are becoming aware; for thou- sands of them flock every summer to our little towns and villages to enjoy the delicious coolness and health luxuries of our sea- side homes. And what visions of pleasure and happiness must they fondly recall after such a visit! Bright, sunny ‘days, tem- 1887. ] Cox on Rare New Brunswick Birds. 207 pered by gentle sea breezes, sweet, fresh and cool, like the fanning of unseen wings; a sun, wondrously large and red, rising from behind the sea, and as if cooled by its morning bath, lacking all day its usual ‘‘ardent frown”; a sky unflecked with a cloud by day, and deeply blue by night, studded all over with twinkling stars; the mellowed whiteness of a moon soaring high through an azure canopy, flooding meadow and forest with her silvery beams, or lighting up the breeze-rippled surface of the sea in long flickering lanes, like fairy paths leading to dreamland; a distant mountain rearing its huge form higher and higher from out the softened shades of night and anxious to catch the first glimpse of returning day; a health-laden breeze from the sea meeting a warmer one from the land and mingling its purity and strength with the odor of flowers from lawn, meadow, and forest ; the waves at their feet murmuring the mysterious soul- language of eternity, and blending with the equally plaintive rustling of leaves overhead; who that has once seen, felt, and enjoyed all this will not yearn for it again? Here, too, come students of nature to investigate her vigorous northein life—her handiwork in sea and air, lake and river, moun- tainand valley. The botanist findsa rich, interesting field, for in addition to the varied flora of forest, plain, and shore, he can fairly revel at ebb tide in a comparatively unexplored world of sea-ferns and Alge. Bay and river, too, teem with fish, from the lordly salmon to the quaint, delicate sea-needle ; and molluscan life in myriad forms inhabits the sea-bottom, or in death yields to the waves palaces of pearl to be strewn on the sand beaches—a gift of beauty from the lovely unseen. It is with the bird life, however, that I and the readers of ‘The Auk’ are most concerned. Over this region an immense bird- wave rolls twice every year; now harbingers of sweet songs, rippling waters, and flowery banks; then forerunners of winter’s icy reign. The varied character of surface makes it a favorite resting ground and breeding place of very many species. On all sides are extensive forests of evergreens ; while sloping hills, clad with deciduous trees, marsh and upland, swamp and meadow, mud flats and sandy shore, resound with the rustling of wings, shrill piping notes, or sweet warbling songs. During the migration the broad, shallow lagoons of the Mir- amichi Bay, protected from the disturbing winds and waves o 208 Cox on Rare New Brunswick Birds. { July the ocean by long winding sand bars, or ‘beaches,’ swarm with Geese, Brant, Ducks, Cormorants, Gulls, Terns, etc., converting this locality into the finest shooting ground to be found anywhere on the Atlantic coast of America, where hundreds of sporting gentlemen resort every year. Moreover, an additional charm attaches to it as an observing station because of its proximity to the Baie des Chaleurs, the generally accepted northern coast limit of the Canadian Fauna, and many interesting problems in ornithology, respecting the range of several species, may be worked out in this section. Having premised so much, I will now proceed to deal with the subject of this sketch. About the roth of January, 1884. some farmers in the neigh- borhood of Nequac, an Acadian village on the northern shore of Miramichi Bay, observed what they took to be a stray Turkey, feeding almost daily around their houses and farmyards. Think- ing it belonged to some villager, they did not molest it It was remarked, however, that the bird did not roost at night about the outbuildings ; it generally disappeared at sunset, no one knew whither ; but early next morning #t would be found industriously turning over refuse and manure, apparently as tame and con- fiding as an ordinary domestic fowl. It would permit a person to approach within six or eight feet before seeming to notice his presence ; then it would flutter to the nearest post, returning to the ground almost immediately. Its decided preference for gar- bage became at length the subject of discussion in the neigh- borhood, and several, among whom was Mr. Ruben Vienneau, began to grow skeptical abeut the stranger’s genus. It was pointed out, however, that the Turkey had a well known weak- ness for flesh food, and was not particularly exact, sometimes, about the quality either; but Mr. Vienneau, having witnessed some of the stranger’s wondrous gastronomic feats in swallowing wholesale large quantities of disgusting offal, refused to be con- verted from the apparent error of his ways. He continued to watch its movements and habits with mere suspicious eyes. The hooked beak, long middle toe, and absence of the noisy ‘gobble’ were all noted and discussed, and finally the bird began to lose caste. Many plans were taken to effect its capture, but in vain. ‘Childlike and bland’ when feeding, even stupidly indifferent sometimes, it seemed capable, however, of exercising a surprising 1887.] Cox on Rare New Brunswick Birds. 209 amount of caution; and no eflorts or devices of its enemies could induce it to enter trap, cage, or barn. A crisisat length arrived. A sheep had died a few days before, and on January 29, Mr. Vienneau descried the ‘Turkey’ on the carcass, feeding on the en- trails. This was the last straw that broke the back of his tot- tering faith. ‘*C’est Poiseau du diable,” exclaimed the excited Frenchman, as he seized a gun and shot the impostor dead. Through the timely thoughtfulness of Mr. Anthony Adams, merchant of Nequac, the bird wassent to John Nevins, Esq., police magistrate of the town. Justice Nevins takes a lively in- terest in ornithology, and has one of the finest private collections in New Brunswick. It proved to be a veritable Turkey Buzzard ( Cathartes aura),and Mr. Vienneau’s ‘‘l’oiseau du diable” now occupies a prominent place in that gentleman’s cabinet. Towards the middle of last September, I was astonished at learning that another. Turkey Buzzard had been captured by Mr. David Savoy, of Black Brook, one of the numerous lumber-milling villages on the estuary of the Miramichi, and about twenty miles in a direct line from Nequac. The bird was. when I saw: it, on exhibition in Chatham, a small town, situated about half-way between Newcastle and Black Brook. Mr. Savoy described the manner of its capture ; how he had hung up a salmon net todry, and the bird had in some way become entangled in it. It was yery wild he said, when first taken, but in three weeks a great change had come over it; for when I saw the bird, it was feed- ing in a yard with ordinary poultry, which took no more no- tice of its presence than they did of one of themselves. I noticed, too, that the sight of one eye had been destroyed, and the ball was withered and sunken. Its domestication seemed largely due to food alone ; for, as ob- served above, the creature was wild when first captured, but upon being fed grew remarkably docile, and made no further attempt to escape. When describing its manner of eating, espe- cially the first meal, Mr. Savoy ruefully shook his head. That wasenough. If the creature had to be fed on meat, it must be got rid of; as long as he kept it, he had a veritable white elephant on his hands. One day he observed it greedily devouring some unsavory garbage. He was horrified, but smiled asa thought of relief came to him; the butcher’s slaughter-house was at hand, and immediately Buzzard stock took a boom. Even after stufl- 210 Cox on Rare New Brunswick Birds. [ July ing itself with offal, it would feed indiscriminately on the grain, potatoes, etc., cast to the barn-yard fowls, seemingly never sat- isfied. I saw it also by night, perched a few feet above a stable floor ; and in the presence of alamp it acted very much like an ordin- ary fowl, except that it manifested a desire to hide its head from the glare of the light. During the whole period of its captivity, extending over three weeks, the bird made, it would seem, no attempt to fly ; and this fact, added to its apparent stupidity, in- - clined me to believe that it had received some injury. I pur- chased it from the owner, who killed and sent it to me. Upon skinning the specimen, I discovered the cause of the blindness, for a small shot, probably a No. 6, was found imbedded under the edge of the iris of the withered ball. ‘The pellet was encysted, and very much oxydized, showing it had been lodged there some time. Moreover, two similar pellets were detected, one under the skin on the left side, the other on the arm of the left wing ; while the arm of the right wing had lately been pierced by a large shot, ploughing the muscle open and passing through the fleshy part of the shoulder, forming an ugly wound. The surrounding parts were very much discolored and inflamed. Such an injury must certainly have destroyed the bird’s power of flight, and ac- counts, to a certain extent, for its apparently rapid domestica- tion, and the aversion it showed to flying, but does not bear out the alleged manner in which it was captured. This poor creature had evidently had a rough experience. Its was the checkered career ofa tramp Ishmaelite, with every man’s gun against it; and we cannot help regretting that its flight to these boreal regions to escape its southern tormentors, resulted so fatally to itself. I am also informed by a gentleman who saw the bird after it was killed, that a Turkey Buzzard was shot five years ago in the vicinity of Kingston, Kent Co., about forty miles southeast of this town, and near the seashore. The only other records known to me of their occurrence in northern localities, along the Atlantic sea-board are those of two taken in Massachusetts in 1863, and one reported from St. Stephen by Mr. Boardman, date not given. Nequac and Black Brook are, however, two hundred miles north of St. Stephen, and the differ- ence in average summer temperature is even greater than would 1887.] Cox on Rare New Brunswick Birds. Deray be inferred trom the difference of latitude; for the latter place is within the influence of the warm Bay of Fundy waters, whereas the former are upon a coast washed by colder Arctic currents. Why this species should be found here more frequently than to the south of us is an interesting problem for ornithologists. I cannot suggest an explanation. ‘The common food supply seems neither more inviting nor abundant. Our coasts, it is true, abound more in fish, and maritime garbage would likely be more plentiful, but I am not sure that these birds show any marked predilection for this kind of diet. On the fifth of last April, 1 was walking on the railroad track, in the vicinity of the town, shortly before sunset, when I came across three birds which were entire strangers to me. They were feeding at the time on the side of an embankment that,, owing to its southern aspect, was already bare of snow; and as they flitted to the ground and returned to the telegraph wires, their blue backs and wings flashed brilliantly in the rays of the setting sun, causing me to think at first of the Jay; but no, these pretty strangers were but half his size. Fearing to approach too closely, lest they might take flight, I attempted to observe them for some time at a distance; but not having my field-glass, it was very unsatisfactory, besides curiosity kept urging me nearer and nearer. Presently, and to my great relief, it dawned on my mind they were paying very little, if any, attention to me, being wholly intent on foraging ; and thus I was enabled to ap- proach within a few yards, whence I made out more clearly the color of the plumage. Judge of my feelings of astonishment and incredulity, when their general characteristics suggested Szalia stalis—the Eastern Blue Bird, which I had merely read of, but had never seen. Impossible! Up inthis cold dreary north on the fifth of April, with the whole country, field and forest, covered with a mantle of snow three feet thick! Surely I must be snow or color blind! Look again. Observe their rapid, but graceful descent, the accuracy with which they drop on their prey, and their almost immediate return. How quietly and still they sit on their perch, until some moving object attracts their attention; how familiar and confiding: they do not seem to notice my presence at all. If they are apprehensive of danger, and move off a little, the distrust is concealed under the appearance of business, seemingly making a longer flight to 212 Cox on Rare New Brunswick Birds. [ July pounce upon some insect. O yes, there can be no mistake about the birds’ identity, those bright blue backs. wings, and tails, the reddish-brown breasts, the quiet demeanor, the feed- ing habits, all belong to but one, the Blue Bird; but will not the identification be discredited by professional ornithologists, since it. was. the- work of an. amateur? As far as I knew . the species had never been reported farther north tnan the vicin- ity of St. John, and but. rarely from there; Newcastle, however, was 150 miles from St. John, and almost directly north. . These seemed to me strong reasons for taking one, but alas; I had no gun. By this time the sun had set. The air began to grow. chilly ; my interesting companions ceased feeding, and commenced chirping to one another, as if discussing, what next? Presently a decision was reached; for the three rose on the wing, and were soon lost in the gathering shades of the dark pine forest. The gray dawn of the morrow found me, gun in hand, hasten- ing over the strong crust field, across which even a Goliath could have strode in safety. Everywhere silence reigned, disturbed only by the hard snow crunching under my feet, and echoing from the nearest pine clad hills. The dark green of the woods had, during night, given place to a silvery covering of frost which transformed the whole forest into a mass resembling a great white cloud, thrown against the horizon of a blue sky. From the early chimney tops, columns of pale smoke were rising into the still morning air, so tall and graceful and white as to seem like delicate marble pillars support- ing the arched dome overhead. But that which claimed most of my attention, and filled me with alternate hope and fear, was, shall I see again my feathered visitors of the evening before? When IL reached their feeding ground nothing was to be seen. I waited long and anxiously. Presently the sun rose large and red, and shook. his brilliant rays in profusion over the snowy landscape. Soon the whole forest was aglow, flashing and sparkling as if set with a million gems, but, like some fond dream or hope of the young heart. it soon vanished, leaving nothing except the dull reality. In a few minutes the hardy Crossbills ventured forth from their night retreat, and with sharpened appe- tites, began breakfasting on the cones, whispering to one another all the'time. A Pine Grosbeak and Purple Finch, a solitary 1887-] Scott on the Bird Rookeries of Southern Florida. 213 Robin, and an occasional Jay added in turn their voices to wake up the slumbers of bird life. What blue fash Wat is) itr Yes, there are the three pretty objects of my curiosity, perched on the telegraph wires where I last saw them, as quiet and easy of manner, as confiding and thoughtless of danger, and even more beautiful than on the evening before. I had killed hundreds of birds in my life: I had never felt such an absorbing interest in one before; yet on no occasion did I ever raise my gun with so much reluctance to take a life. And when at length I held in my hand ‘a beautiful life- less form, heard its two little friends, companions of its long journey and dreary nights, whispering to one another, methought, in mournful tones ; when I saw them rise in the air, uttering a loud shrill note that sounded in my guilty ears like the curse of betrayed innocence, and fly away never to be seen by me again, my heart grew heavy, and I almost cursed that professional in-— credulity which drives an amateur into acts of needless cruelty. And even now as I raise my eyes from the paper, and look upon the graceful form, perched on a tiny stand, ornamented more than usual as if to make some restitution for the destruction of its life, the motionless presence recalls the events of that sunny April morning, and stirs anew the feeling ofregret and pain. THE PRESENT CONDITION OF SOME OF THE BIRD ROOKERIES OF THE GULF COAST OF FLORIDA. BY -W. E. Di SCORT. Second Paper. Saturpay, May 8. We were up and away early. Sailed out of the Nyakka River and along the northwest shores of Charlotte Harbor as far as Cape Haze ; saw very few birds, and those only the commoner species. From Cape Haze we crossed the harbor to the mouth of Matlacha Pass, the wind blowiny almost a gale from the west. 214 Scott on the Bird Rookeries of Southern Florida. [ July This pass is between the mainland and Pine Island, the largest of the islands in Charlotte Harbor. On the way over my atten- tion was attracted by large flocks of Man-o’-war Birds, which, with an ease and grace that surprised me, were fishing in the rough water during a very strong wind. There were hundreds of them in all phases of plumage. We reached our destination—the island which Mr. Wilkerson at about four o’clock, and at once came to anchor. A few Herons were had told me was the breeding place of Reddish Egrets to be seen from time to time flying to the island, and presently I took the small boat and went ashore to reconnoitre. This had evidently been only a short time before a large rookery. The trees were full of nests, some of which still contained eggs, and hundreds of broken eggs strewed the ground everywhere. Fish Crows and both kinds of Buzzards were present in great numbers and were rapidly destroying the remaining eggs. I found a huge pile of dead, half decayed birds, lying on the ground which had apparently been killed fora day or two. All of them had the ‘plumes’ taken with a patch of the skin from the back, and some had the wings cut off; otherwise they were uninjured. I counted over two hundred birds treated in this way. The most common species was the Reddish Egret, though there were about as many Louisiana Herons; the other species were the Snowy Heron, Great White Egret, and the Little Blue Heron in both phases of plumage. There were also a few Pelicans, White Ibises, and one or two Great Blue Herons. I remained there till almost dark, but did not fire at any of the few frightened Herons (about fifty in all), which came to roost on the island. Among these I noticed a few Reddish Egrets and two of the so-called Peale’s Egrets, but most of the birds were the commoner species of Heron. This was the rookery that Mr. Wilkerson had spoken of; within the last few days it had been almost destroyed, hun- dreds of old birds having been killed and thousands of eggs broken. Ido not know ofa ‘hore horrible and brutal exhibition of wanton destruction than that which I witnessed here. I shall have to refer to this point later, as I visited it again in about a week, and there learned from a man I met further details of the slaughter, the results of which I had witnessed. Sunday, May 9. This morning Capt. Baker went with me in the small boat to explore in detail the neighboring islands. We 1887. | Scott ox the Bird Rookeries of Southern Florida. 215 found a lamentable scarcity of birds, and the Captain assured me that ten years before, when on fishing trips in these same waters, and at about the same time of year, the whole region fairly teemed with bird life of all kinds. About 12 o’clock we returned to the sloop and got under way, going through the pass in the direction of Punta Rossa. After sailing along for some six or seven miles we came in sight of a small island where many Brown Pelicans were breeding or about to breed. We anchored and went to the island in question to have a closer look at the inhabitants. The Pelicans, of which there were some forty or fifty pairs, were just beginning to build. There were also some Reddish Egrets, a few of which were in the white phase of plumage. Beside these were many Ardea ruficollis tricolor, some Ardea candidisstma, and a few Ardea egretta. None of the Herons, save a pair of Ardea virescens, had begun to build; the others were only looking the ground over. I fancied that some of them had been driven to this point from the large rookery found deserted the evening before. I watched the rookery till dark, not firing at anything; a great many Herons of all the kinds above enumerated, as well as one pair of A. herodias, many Florida Cormorants, White Ibises, and additional pairs of Pelicans came to roost at the island. All of them were very shy and suspicious, being startled by the slightest noise or movement, and none of the birds would come near the island until the small boat had returned to the sloop. Just at dusk six of the so-called Peale’s Egrets came in and alighted on the mangroves close by me. I learned later that the birds on this island had been much persecuted by gunners, and that thousands of all the species seen here had formerly bred and roosted at this point. Also that at one time many Roseate Spoonbills (Azaza ajaja) had made this a roosting place. Monday, May ro. In the morning we camped on the island, about half a mile away from the rookery, and during the day I added to my collection seven Reddish Egrets, one Peale’s Egret, and four other Herons, including a fine A. herodias. Among the Reddish Egrets taken were three specimens which showed a very considerable admixture of whzte feathers on the head, throat, and breast, thus approaching the Peale’s Egret type; and there is no question in my mind but that the two phases are forms of the same species. For further remarks on this matter 216 Scotr on the Bird Rookeries of Southern Florida. [July I refer to certain notes made by Mr. James Henry Devereux in Tampa Bay and published by me in the ‘Bulletin of the Nuttall Ornithological Club,’ Vol. VII, 1881, p. 20. While hunting to-day I heard repeatedly the song of a Vireo that was new to me, but as the birds were shy and kept in the densest mangrove swamps, I was unable toy procure one. Thanks, however, to Mr. Atkins, then at Punta Rossa, but now of Key West, I later identified the species as the Black- whiskered Vireo ( Véreo altzloquus barbatulus), as I have already recorded (Auk, Vol. IV, April, 1857, pp. 133-134). During the afternoon there were countless Man-o’-war Birds flying over in enormous ftocks, and at great height. Tuesday, May 11. The Captain and Mr. Dickinson went to Punta Rossa for water and letters, and I spent the day making into skins the birds killed late yesterday. About 5.30 in the evening I went to the rookery, but though I sent the boat back to our camp, and though not a gun had been fired in the heronry during the day, the birds were so alarmed by the little shooting I had done the day before, that but very few birds save Brown Pelicans came to roost at the rookery. I mention this to show how very wary the birds had become, and how weli they knew the meaning of the report of a gun. I took only seven birds dur- ing the time between half past five and dark. Wednesday, May 12. Wishing to visit again the rookery before mentioned, the Captain and myself started in the small boat early this morning, leaving Mr. Dickinson in charge of the sloop and camp. We had only some seven miles to go, and reached our destination about noon. On the way through the islands there were many Reddish Egrets and other small Herons, but all were very shy and had evidently been much hunted. After getting some dinner and making a sort of camping place for the night on one of the islands, we went, about the middle of the afternoon, to the rookery. The condition of affairs here was much the same as I have already described, except that not having been disturbed for a few days, the birds were beginning to come back to the ground in considerable numbers, and many Louisiana Herons were building, and some had nests with one or two eggs. We found, in camp at the rookery, Mr. Frank Johnson, of Mound Key, whose postoffice address is Punta Rossa, Florida, —— ea 1887. ] Scott on the Bird Rookeries of Southern Florida. 217 and who is a professional ‘bird-plumer.’ He had returned to this point this afternoon, having been here a few weeks earlier, when he had found the birds very numerous. He was hunting plumes, particularly of the Snowy Heron, American Egret, and Reddish Egret, as they brought the highest prices, but he killed to sell to the ‘taxidermists,’ as he called them, ‘‘almost anything that wore feathers.” He said he wished there was some law to protect the birds, at least during the breeding time, which would not be violated. He added, however, that as everybody else was ‘pluming’, he had made up his mind that he might as well have his share. He was killing birds and taking plumes now for Mr. J. H. Batty, of New York City, who employed many men along the entire Gulf Coast from Cedar Keys to Key West. When asked what Mr. Batty purchased, it was again ‘‘almost anything that wore feathers, but more particularly the Herons, Spoon- bills, and showy birds.” Mr. Batty was, he told me, well known all along the Gulf Coast, and had made regular trips to this region for the past three winters or more. He was the gentleman I heard of at Hickory Bluff, who bought birds, travelling about the coast in a small schooner and supplying the native gunners with breech- loading shot guns and ammunition. Mr. Johnson had bought a gun of Mr. Batty and was using it whenI met him. One barrel of this gun was for shot, 12-guage, and the other was a small bore rifled. This last, Johnson explained to me, he used for Pelicans and other wild birds, and as it made so little noise, was serviceable in getting the smaller Herons at close range in the rookeries. I shall give ilater more details of Mr. Batty and his method of working, as I met him and stayed about for some five or six.days where he was killing birds. Togo on with Mr. Johnson. He had lived about here for many years, and told me of the enormous rookeries and breeding places that had formerly been the homes of the birds of this region. Now most of them were entirely deserted, and the number of those still resorted to by anever | decreasing population were yearly becoming smaller; that it was easy to find thousands of birds, five or six years back, where absolutely none existed now. My own observation leads me to agree with this statement, but, in fact, the destruction must have been greater than can be realized. 218 Scotr on the Bird Rookertes of Southern Florida. [ July Mr. Johnson told me of the extermination of a Brown Pelican Rookery, near where he lived, which is a very fair example of the atrocities that have been and are still being committed to ob- tain ‘bird plumes.’ It seems that the year before the Brown Pelicans selected a small mangrove island near to that on which Mr. Johnson lived, and about eighty or a hundred pairs made nests, laid eggs, and hatched out their young. Johnson had not touched the birds or disturbed them, as he proposed to let them rear their young. But one afternoon when Johnson was absent from home hunting, the old Frenchman before referred to, A. Lechevallier, came in with a boat. and deliberately killed off the old birds as they were feed- ing the young, obtaining about one hundred and eighty of them. The young, about three weeks old, to the number of several hun- dred at least, and utterly unable to care for themselves in any way, were simply left to starve to death in their nests, or to be eaten by raccoons and Buzzards. It is needless to say that the birds never came back to that rookery. There were very few birds that came in to roost at the rookery where we were, and I killed only one Reddish Egret. I paid Johnson two dollars not to shoot, so that I might get a good idea of the birds, both as to kind and number that roosted there. Johnson went with us back to the camp, and it was during the evening that he gave the information transcribed above. Thursday, May 13. Going back to the sloop this morning I saw very few birds; in the afternoon I went out to the roosting place and killed two Reddish Egrets; one of them had large patches of white feathers on the throat, neck, breast, and back. A flock of them in the pure white phase (A. Zealez) flew by me, just out of gun shot, during the afternoon. These birds are not at all uncommon at this locality, but are not so numerous as at points further south. They are well known by the ‘plume hun- ters’ as ‘mufHled-jawed Egrets’, and sound and flat skins of them command good prices. I saw, in a rookery at the north entrance to Matlacha Pass, among a great pile of other birds that had been recently killed and their plumes removed, twelve of this phase that were easily recognizable, having had only the skin of part of the back, neck, and head taken off. For the last few days I have noted Black-bellied Plover in full plumage, going north in considerable flocks. These were, - 1887.] Scotr on the Bird Rookertes of Southern Florida. 219 I think, undoubtedly Charadrius sqguatarola, although no spec- imens were obtained. I am much impressed with the great numbers of the far northward breeding birds which are present still in large numbers at points about here. At any of the passes or outside beaches I see daily and in large flocks such birds as Charadrius squatarola, Egialitis semipalmata, Are- naria tnterpres, Macroramphus griseus, Tringa canutus, T. minutilla, 7. alpina, Calidris arenarta, etc. These I carefully identified and made almost daily notes of their occur- rence until the 25th of May. After that observations were made of Macroramphus griseus in large flocks as late as June ro. Friday, May 14. Spent the day in waiting for some of the larger birds to dry—so as to pack them—and in hunting for the Black-whiskered Vireos, which appear to be common but par- ticularly wary and difficult to see in the thick mangrove. Saturday, May 15. Packed up everything in readiness to continue course to-morrow, leaving birds to dry until the last moment. Sunday, May 16. Left early this morning, and going south about four miles, anchored again off two large mangrove islands just inside of the south end of Pine Island. Here were more birds breeding than at any point where we had thus far cruised. These were principally Brown Pelicans, and there must have been at least two hundred pairs or more. The nests were in most cases finished, and many of them contained eggs. The Florida Cormorants also had nests in considerable num- bers, and beside these a few pairs of Great Blue Herons were breeding on the island. No other birds were breeding here. There were many thousands of Man-o’-war Birds that made this a roosting or resting place, and many of them were here more or less through the day, their numbers being greatly augmented every night. They were in all phases of plumage and generally moulting. The birds are said not to breed anywhere on the Gulf Coast, except at two points near Key West, and the breeding season, judging from the examples of the birds obtained, was past by two or three months. These birds haunt the Pelican and Heron rookeries, preying on the fish brought to the young birds, and are as truly parasitic as the Jaegers. Often, too, I have seen 220 Scott on the Bird Rookertes of Southern Florida. | April them chasing the small Gulls, obliging them to give up fish just caught. _Again they are to be seen in the wake of a school of porpoises, taking whatever comes in their way, such as muti lated fish and the like. In the nests of the Great Blue Herons in the rookery, four nests in all, I was surprised to find young birds. In most cases they were nearly ready to fly, but one nest contained chicks not more than two weeks old. This, taken in connection with the fact of their having half grown young as early as February 7, at Tarpon Springs—a point more than a hundred miles north — is indica- tive of a long breeding season—at least five or six months—and the probability that two broods are hatched. However, this late breeding may not be normal, for the birds are all so harassed and driven about by plume hunters, that their plans for breeding are evidently greatly disarranged. Perhaps the following facts will make this more apparent to the reader and corroborate the above statement. I have several times taken the different species of Herons and Egrets at roosting rookerzes where there was not a single nest, and far away from any known breeding ground, which had in their ovaries fully developed eggs with shells on. Some of them had evidently laid one or more eggs and, being severely frightened by hunters, had deserted their breeding grounds. At such rookeries I have frequently found broken eggs lying on the ground, though there would be no nests on the island and the birds would only come to roost late in the afternoon and leave very early in the morning. Again during the late summer and early-fall months of the present year I have twice found inland rookeries where the nests still contained some eggs and where there were young birds of all ages. One such case was near Tarpon Springs where several hundred birds were breeding, August 26, 1886. At this date there were unhatched eggs in the nests, besides young in all stages, from those just hatched to those ready to fly. The birds were mainly Ardea ce@rulea, though there were a few A. ruficoll’s tricolor, and A. candidissima. At the rookery last mentioned before this digression, I spent the day after eleven o’clock, and asI did not fire a gun during the time there was ample opportunity to examine the various species that were breeding, and those that came to roost there at 1887. | Scott ox the Bird Rookeries of Southern Florida. DAG night. Among the latter were many Reddish Egrets, a few of which were in the white phase, and all of the common Herons and Egrets in small numbers. Monday, May 17. Obtained a number of Man-’o-war Birds as they flew by our anchorage, the weather being stormy. The day was about consumed in making them into skins. All of these birds were moulting and some of them I took to be young of that year. Tuesday, May 18. Spent about as yesterday, save that I was all the afternoon at the rookery, where the birds seem to have increased in numbers, especially at roosting times, and I think that some other breeding place, not very remote, having been attacked by the plume hunters, numbers of the birds have been driven off and have escaped to this point. Wednesday, May 19. Packed up all the birds collected at this and other points, all having been unpacked to dry, and started in in the afternoon for Punta Rossa, some six miles distant. Ihave omitted to state that our camp for the past few days had been on the north point at the mouth of the Caloosahatchie River and at least a mile away from the rookery. Arriving at Punta Rossa at about four o’clock, I soon made the acquaintance of Mr. J. W. Atkins, the assistant telegraph operator at this point, the cable for Key West and Cuba having its starting point at Punta Rossa. Mr. Atkins is much interested in birds, and hasa good col- lection of skins made in the main just about Punta Rossa. His collection embraces most of the commoner species of smal! birds that occur in the vicinity, and I noticed such rare birds as Cape May Warblers, and a single Mangrove Cuckoo, taken at Punta Rossa. Here we obtained the Dendroica discolor de- scribed at length in ‘The Auk’ for April, 1887 (p. 134). Thursday, May 20. We waited for the mail to arrive and about 10 A.M. started again on our cruise, this time going to the east of Pine Island, and kept a northerly course ; for, wishing to look over some of the ground in more detail on the way back, I had determined to go no further south. At Punta Rossa to-day I again met Mr. Abe Wilkerson, who had just returned from his trip to the Myakka Lakes, where he did not meet with much success, for though he found large rookeries, the birds had been so persistently hunted they had become very wild. He had about seventy-five ‘plumes,’ I believe, as the result of the trip, 222 Scott on the Bird Rookeries of Southern Florida. { July mostly of the Snowy Heron. He told me that the Mexican Buz- zard, as he called it, was common in the region where he had been and showed me a skin of one that he had killed. The bird was Polyborus chertway, and it breeds in this area, at least such is my conjecture from birds of the year that have been sent to me from the vicinity of the headwaters of the Myakka River. Wanting a good pilot and a man conversant with the country I hired Mr. Wilkerson to make the trip with me back to Tarpon Springs, and besides the work he did I gained much valuable information concerning the condition of the breeding grounds further south, and the decrease in birds during the past few years. Without going into too great details, it was substantially the same as the facts gathered from Frank Johnson, Mr. Atkins, and others, and is a story of almost a war of extermination. To-day we passed a large rookery known as the Boca Grande Rookery, and here I saw a few ‘Pink Curlews,’ as the ‘plumers’ call Ajajsa ajaja, but as there was a constant discharge of guns, and as the war seemed to be going on without any appearance of ceasing, we passed on without stopping. The principal birds seemed to be Man-o’-war Birds and Brown Pelicans, and though there were large numbers of each, Captain Baker said that when he was fishing for a season at this point a few years before, there were hundreds of birds of all kinds at this rookery where there was one now. We kept on our course north and, sailing up along the east coast of Pine Island, crossed over the mouth of Charlotte Harbor and anchored for the night at a deserted fishing station just south of Big Gasparilla Pass. It was quite dark when we anchored here, so I saw no birds. But during the afternoon and until dark large flocks—hundreds—of Gulls, which I thought were mostly Larus atricilla, passed close to the water, not fishing but evi- dently migrating northward. Many of these birds were in im- mature plumage, and I shall have occasion to refer to them again later in connection with other species observed. (To be continued.) fe 1887.] Cory on the Birds of the West Indies. 222 4 ELE BIRDS OF THE WEST INDIES, -INGLUDING THE BAHAMA ISLANDS, THE GREATER AND THE LESSER ANTILLES, EXCEPTING THE 1 SeAMDsS. Or TOBAGO AND: TRINIDAD. BY CHAREES B. CORY. [Continued from p. 120.] Famitry PHASIANIDZ. Genus Numida Linn. Numida LINN£US, Syst. Nat. I, 1766. oe HEEL meleagris LINN. Numida meleagris LINN. Syst. Nat. I, p. 273 (1766).—Gossr, Bds. Jam. p. 325 (1847).—-DeNny, P. Z. S. 1847, p. 39 (Jamaica).—Sa..z, Pp. Z. S. 1857, p. 236 (San Domingo).—Sct. P. Z. S. 1861, p. 80 (Jamaica).—ALBRECHT, J. f. O. 1862, p. 204 (Jamaica).—Marcu, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1863, p. 303 (Jamaica).—BRYANT, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. XI, p. 97 (1866) (San Domingo).—GuNDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p. 397 (1866).—-SuNDEv. Oefv. K. Vet. Akad. For. 1869, p. 601 (Porto Rico).—Lawre. Pr. U. S. Nat. Mus. I. p. 487 (1878) (Barbuda).—A. & E. Newron, Handb. Jamaica, p. 117 (1881).—Cory, Bds. Haiti & San Domingo, p. 16 (1885); 2d. List Bds. W. I. p. 24 (1885). Common in Cuba, San Domingo, Jamaica, Porto Rico, and Barbuda. - 5 % : Ortalida ruficauda is mentioned as occurring in the Grena- dines, and is supposed to have been introduced (Lawr. Pr. U.S. Nat. Mus. I, p. 278 (1878). Famity TETRAONID2. Genus Colinus Less. Colinus Lesson, Man. d'Orn. II, p. 190, 1828. “Golinus cubanensis (GouLpD). Ortyx virginianus D’ORB. in La Sagra’s Hist. Nat. Cuba, Ois. p. 182 (1840).—SuNpDEv. Oefyv. K. Vet. Akad. For. 1869, p. 601. 224 Cory ox the Birds of the West Indies. '{ July Ortyx cubanensts GouLD, Mon. Odont. (1850).—Cas. J. f. O. 1856, p. 337- —Brewer, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 307 (1860).—ALBRECHT, J. f. O. 1861, p. 213.—GuNDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p. 303 (1866).—Gray, Handl. Bds. II, p. 273 (1870).-—GunbL. J. f. O. 1874, p- 300; 2b. 1875, p. 293; 2b. 1878, p. 161; 2b. Anal. Soc. Esp. Hist. Nat. VII, p. 350 (1878). Ortyx cubensis Sci. & SALV. Nom. Avium Neotr. p. 137 (1873). Ortyx virginianus var. cubanensis Bp. Bwr. & RipGw. Hist. N. Am. Bds. III, p. 468 (1874). Colinus cubanensis Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 24 (1885). Sp. CHAR.—Upper portions of throat and superciliary stripe white; band of neck passing from the mandible, under the eye, down the sides of the neck; breast and lower portion of throat black; back chestnut, variegated with dull brown; the feathers on the nape heavily spotted with white; under parts variegated, dull brown, rufous, white, and dark brown; sides of the body dull rufous, heavily spotted with white and black; primaries dull brown. The female differs from the male in having the white stripe and throat tawny buff, and in lacking the chestnut on the breast toa great extent. : Length, 8; wing, 4; tail, 2.50; tarsus, 1; bill, .45. Hapirat. Cuba and Porto Rico. Colinus virginianus (LINN.). Tetrao virginianus LINN. Syst. Nat. I, p. 277 (1766). Ortyx virginiana GossE, Bds. Jam. p. 328 (1847).—Cory, Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, VI, p. 154 (1881) (Haiti). Ortyx virginianus A. & E. NEwTon, Ibis, 1859, p. 254 (St. Croix).—Bry- ANT, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 120 (1859) (Bahamas).—Sct. P. Z. S. 1861, p. 80 (Jamaica).—ALBRECHT, J. f. O. 1862, p. 205 (Jamaica).—Marcn, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1863, p. 303 (Jamaica).—Lawere. Pr. U. S. Nat. Mus. I, pp. 237, 487 (1878) (An- tigua).—Cory, Bds. Bahama I..p. 142 (1880).—A. & E. NEwron, Handb. Jamaica, p. 117 (1881).—Cory, Bds. Haiti & San Domingo, p- 138 (1885). Colinus virginianus Cory, List Bds. W.1. p. 24 (1885). Sp. Cuar. Male:—Above rich brownish red, mottled with black; crown black, shading into brown at the base of the skull, and mottled with black and white on the nape; a white superciliary line passing from nostril to nape; throat white, bordered broadly with black; upper breast and sides reddish brown, shading into white on the belly, the , feathers thickly banded with black; crissum reddish brown; tertials and some of the wing-coverts edged with yellowish white; bill en- tirely black. 1887.] Cory on the Birds of the West Indies. eA Female:—Resembles the male; the white of the head and throat replaced by tawny, without black edging. Length, 8.50; wing, 4.50; tail, 2.50; tarsus, 1; bill, .52. Hasirat. Bahamas, Haiti, San Domingo, Jamaica, St. Croix, and Antigua. The forms represented in the different islands vary considera- bly, and itis possible that they represent good geographical races. The Bahama bird differs from that found in Florida in having heavy chestnut stripings on the side much broader than in the Florida birds. The black on the throat is more restricted; the lower throat showing considerable chestnut, separating the black from the upper breast ; the red on the back is paler. The feath- ers on the underparts are very heavily banded with black, about equalling some specimens of florédanus in this respect, but the underparts are never mottled gray as in some specimens of caéa- mensts. The Bahama bird differs even more from that found in San Domingo, which has the underparts covered with narrow black arrow-shaped markings, somewhat obsolete in the female ; the male having a patch of black on the throat succeeded by pale chestnut ; the general chestnut coloring is paler than in the Baha- ma bird. GrEnus Eupsychortyx Gou tp. Eupsychortyx Goutp, Mon. Odontophorine, p. 15-16, 1850. Type, Tetrao cristatus LINN. Eupsychortyx sonninii (TEmm.). Perdix sonninit Tem. Pig. et Gall. III, p. 451 (1815); 2b. Pl. Col. 75 (1820-29). Eupsychortyx sonnimi Newton, Ibis, 1860, p. 308 (St. Thomas).— Cas- stn, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1860, p. 378 (St. Thomas).—Cory, Revised List Bds. W. lI. p. 24 (1885). Ortyx sonninti NEWTON (REINHARDT), Ibis, 1861, p. 114 (St. Thomas). Sp. Cuar. Male:—Face dull white ; head crested ; feathers of the crest dull buff brown; throat and superciliary stripe passing down the sides of the neck dull brownish red; sides of the neck mottled with black and white; upper back mottled with reddish brown, buff, and black ; rest of upper surface marked with chestnut, black, and gray, mar- gined with buff; tail slaty dotted and marked with buff and dark brown; primaries brown; chest grayish, mottled with brown; rest 226 Cory on the Birds of the West Indies. [ July of under surface, sides, and under tail-coverts chestnut brown, the feathers dotted with white; bill black. Female:—Yop of the head and crest brown; throat and super- ciliary stripe dark gray, tinged with pale brown; flank marking paler than in the male; general plumage somewhat paler than in the male, and the black patches somewhat heavier. Length, 7.50; wing, 4.30; tail. 2.55; tarsus, 1.30; bill, .54. HABITAT. ot Lhomas: In 1860 Professor Newton mentions this species as occurring in St. Thomas. The bird undoubtedly still exists in the Island of St. Thomas. I have lately seen a specimen in the collection of Mr. Geo. N. Lawrence, from that Island. It was probably in- troduced from South America. Cassin writes (l.c.), ‘*Mr. Swift has had the kindness to inform me that this species was introduced into the Island of St. Thomas some years since; from Venezuela, and that it has now become of frequent occurrence, quite naturalized, and rearing young freely throughout the Island. The present specimens are exactly the species figured by Mr. Gould under this name, and identical with specimens in Acad. Mus. labelled ‘Venezuela’ and ‘Cu- mana.’ ” Famity GEDICNEMID. GeENus CEdicnemus T'EMM. Gdicnemus TEMMINCK, Man. d’Orn. 1815. GEdicnemus dominicensis Cory. (Edicnemus dominicensis Cory, Journ. Bost. Zool. Soc. I, p. 46 (1883) ; vb. Auk, I, p. 4 (1884); 2b. Bds. Haiti and San Domingo, p. 140 (1885); 26. List Bds. W. I. p. 25 (1885).—THompson, Auk, II, p. 110 (1885). Sp. Cuar. Male:—Top of the head, back, wing-coverts, and tail brown ; feathers with very pale edgings, giving a mottled appearance to the back; the tail-feathers showing a band of dull white, succeeded by a broad black tip; breast slaty becoming dull white on the throat; abdomen white tinged with very pale rufous; a line of black passing from the top of the eye, along the sides of the head to the neck; under surface of wings white, becoming dark brown at the tips; the shafts of the feathers on the breast and throat dark brown, form- : : a 1887. | Cory on the Birds of the West Indtes. 227 ing numerous hair-like lines on the surface of the plumage; legs and feet greenish yellow; upper mandible black; under mandible green at the base, shading into black at the tip. The sexes appear to be similar. Length, 14.50; wing, 8.50; tail, 3.75; tarsus, 3.75; bill, 1.50. Hasirar. San Domingo. Famity CHARADRIIDE. Genus Charadrius LINN. Charadrius LINN&US, Syst. Nat. I, roth ed. p. 150, 1758; 2b. 12th ed. p. 253, 1766. oe = . . ae Charadrius dominicus Mutt. Charadrius dominicus MULy. Syst. Nat. Suppl. p. 116 (1776).—Cassin, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1864, p. 241 (Jamaica).—A. & E. NewrTon, Handb. Jamaica, p. 115 (1881).—Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 25 (1885). —WELLS, List Bds. Grenada, p. 7 (1886). Charadrius virginianus Gosse, Bds. Jam. p. 333 (1847).—Gunopt. J. f. O. 1856, p. 423 (Cuba).—A. & E. Newron, Ibis, 1859, p. 255 (St. Croix).—Marcu, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1864, p. 66 (Jamaica).— GuNDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat.’Cuba, I, p. 358 (1866).—Lawre. Ann. Lyc. N. Y. VIII, p. 98 (1567) (Sombrero).—GuNnpL. J. f. O. 1875, p. 332 (Cubay-—Lawre. Pr. U. S. Nat. Mus. I, p. 67 (1878) (Do- minica) ; 7. p. 197 (St. Vincent); zd. p. 238 (Antigua); 7b. p. 241 (Barbuda) ; 76. p. 276 (Grenada) ; 7d. p- 461 (Gaudeloupe).—GuNDL. Anal. Soc. Esp. Hist. Nat. VII, p. 381 (1878) (Porto Rico). Charadrius marmoratus LEMB. Aves Cuba, p. 105 (1850).—BrEWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 308 (1860) (Cuba). Charadrius virginiacus ALBRECHT, J. f. O. 1862, p. 205 (Jamaica). Charadrtus pluvialis SUNDEV. Oefyv. K. Vet. Akad. For. 1869, p. 588 (St. Bartholomew). Charadrius pluvialis americanus SUNDEV. Oefv. K. Vet. Akad. For. 1869, p. 602 (Porto Rico). Charadrius fulvus var. virgtniacus Cory, Bds. Bahama I. p. 145 (1886). Antilles in Winter. Soneratois squatarola (Linn.). Tringa squatarola Linn. Syst. Nat. I, toth ed. p. 149 (1758); 2d. 12th ed. p- 252 (1766). Tringa helvetica LINN. Syst. Nat. I. p. 250 (1766). Vanellus squatarolus D’ORB. in La Sagra’s Hist. Nat. Cuba, Ois. p. 242 (1840). 228 Cory on the Birds of the West Indies. { July Squatarola helvetica GossE, Bds. Jam. p. 333 (1847).—Bryant, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 121 (1859) (Bahamas).—ALBREcHT, J. f. O. 1862, p. 205 (Jamaica).—Marcn, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1864, p. 66 (Jamaica).—GuNpDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat Cuba, I, p. 358 (1866) ; 2d. J. f. O. 1875, p. 232 (Cuba).—Lawr. Pr. U. S. Nat. Mus. I, p. 197 (1878) (St. Vincent).—GunpDL. Anal. Soc. Esp. Hist. Nat. VII, p. 380 (1878) (Porto Rico).—Cory, Bds. Bahamas I. p. 144 (1880).—A. & E. Newron, Handb. Jamaica, p. 115 (1881).—Cory, List Bds. W. I. p..25 (1885).—WEeELLS, List Bds. Grenada, p. 7 (1886). Charadrius helveticus BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 308 (1860) (Cuba). Found in winter in the Bahamas, Cuba, Jamaica, Porto Rico, St. Vincent, and Grenada. Genus A®gialitis Loire. Egialitis Bor, Isis, 1822, p. 558. “Egialitis vocifera (Linn.). Charadrius vociferus Linn. Syst. Nat. I, 1oth ed. p. 150 (1758).—D’OrB. in La Sagra’s Hist. Nat. Cuba, Ois. p. 246 (1840).—BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 308 (1860) (Cuba).—SunpeEv. Oefv. K. Vet. Akad. For. 1869, p. 602 (Porto Rico). Egialitis vociferus Gossk, Bds. Jam. p. 330 (1847).—ALBRECHT, J. f. O. 1862, p. 205 (Jamaica).—Marcu, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1864, p. 66 (Jamaica).—Cory, Bds. Bahama I. p. 145 (1880); 2. Bds. Haiti & San Domingo, p. 141 (1885) ; 7b. List Bds. W. I. p. 25 (1885). Oxyechus vociferus GUNDL. J. f. O. 1856, p. 424 (Cuba) ; 7b. Repert. Fisico- Nat.. Cuba; I, -‘p:' 350) (7866) 570... 1675 ,) Dp: 333 (Cuba); 7. Anal. Soc. Esp. Hist. Nat. VII, p. 382 (1878) (Porto Rico). gialites vociferus SALLE, P. Z. S. 1857, p- 236 (San Domingo).—Bry- ANT, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 121 (1859) (Bahamas).—NeEw- TON, Ibis, 1860, p. 307 (St. Thomas). Charadrius (4igialitis) vociferus BRYANT, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. XI, p. 97 (1867) San Domingo). LEgialitis vocifera A. & E. NEwron, Handb. Jamaica, p. 115 (1881). Oxychecus vociferus WELLS, List Bds. Grenada, p. 7 (1886). Recorded from the Bahamas and Greater Antilles. ne ee : ; fEgialitis wilsonia (Orp). Charadrius wilsontus Orv, ed. Wils. IX, p. 77 (1825). — Lems. Aves Cuba, p. 106 (1850).—Brewer, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 308 (1860) (Cuba). 1887. | Cory on the Birds of the West Indies. 229 Egtalitis wilsonius BRYANT, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 121 (1859) (Cuba).