A957

Birds

I

THE

flviealtafal Magazine.

BEING THE JOURNAE OF

THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY

FOR THE STUDY OF

FOREIGN AND BRITISH BIRDS.

Edited by

C. S. SIMPSON AND H. R. FILTMER,

Under the direction of the Executive Committee
of the Council.

VOR. II.

NOVEMBER, 1S95, to OCTOBER, 1896.

JSiigbton :

Printed for the Society by
W. T. MOUCTON & Co., 4, CHURCH STREET.

1896.

THE

Bvtcultural ®a§a3met

BEING THE JOURNAL OF THE

AVICULTURAL SOCIETY.

VOL. II. — NO. 13.

NOVEMBER, 1895.

THE BITTERN AND THE HERONS.

By J. Lewis Bonhote.

I have found few birds so interesting in captivity as the
family of Herons f Ardeidce) . There are few birds more grace¬
ful, or that will become so familiar with their master. Of course
they are not cage-birds in the ordinary sense of the word ; but
anyone with a small piece of ground at the back of his house
can easily keep them, and will, undoubtedly, find a fund of
amusement in watching them and their habits.

The size of my aviary is 15 feet by 8 feet by 6 feet high,
having a pond 3 feet bj^ 2 feet, 1 foot deep at one end. It is
provided with two good broad perches.

In this aviary I have kept for some eighteen months, one
Bittern ( Botaurus stellarisj , one Night Heron f Nycticorax griseusj
and three Purple Herons ( At dea purpurea) . I should, however,
not advise anyone to keep more than one species in an aviary, as
they are very much given to fighting. My birds have their
respective portions of the aviary, and any intrusion beyond
these imaginary limits is at once strongly resented. The Purple
Herons own one end, the Bittern the other, and the Night Heron
one perch. The food of these birds in confinement is fish ; it is
best procured by arranging with the fishmonger for him to let
you have the cuttings and cleanings of the fish, for which he
will probably make you no charge.

The Bittern was formerly well known in the fens of the
Eastern Counties ; but it has now become very scarce, partly
owing to increased drainage and cultivation, and partly owing
to the persistency with which the birds visiting us in winter are
shot. There can, I think, be little doubt that, were these winter
immigrants unmolested, a few pairs would remain to breed on
our islands every year.

'*** The copyright of every article in the Avicultural Magazine is the property of the
Author, and no article may be reprinted or reproduced, in whole or in part, without
the Author’s previous consent.

When wild, the Bittern is a very skulking species,
remaining motionless all day with its head high in the air,
and only wandering abroad at night in search of its food : which
consists of frogs, mice, fish, snakes, etc.

In captivity, it is at first shy, then tame, and finally
aggressive. I have known mine to run and strike at me with
its beak, when feeding it. L,et me here warn aviculturists, when
handling any of these birds, to be very careful of their long and
pointed bill, for they have a habit of drawing in their neck and
shooting it out with considerable force capable of inflicting a
severe wound. But to return ; the Bittern, like all Herons, has no
feathers growing from the back of the neck, the feathers in front
being elongated and meeting behind : which gives him, when
the feathers are ruffled, a large frill in front. The eyes of the
Bittern look downwards and forwards, consequently, when his
beak is pointing upwards, he can still see comfortably in front
of him. We will now suppose a Purple Heron to be innocently
walking on the edge of the Bittern’s “ preserves.” The- Bittern
has been resting in a corner, his beak pointing straight upwards,
and his neck drawn into his shoulders. On seeing the enemy,
he lowers his beak to the horizontal position, draws up his neck
and expands his frill ; he then draws in his neck again, ruffles all
his feathers, spreads out his wings, shifts about uneasily on his
legs, utters a low croak and charges the Heron, shooting out his
beak at the same time, and at once assumes his first position with
head erect and expanded frill, ready, if necessary, to repeat the
movement. The Heron has, until the time of the charge, taken
no notice of the Bittern ; but now, uttering some hoarse croaks,
he deals vigorous stabs in quick succession at his opponent,
bringing his other companions to the rescue. Then the Bittern,
finding himself attacked on all sides, retires to his corner, and
the Hei'o-ns do likewise. When taking exercise, which is not
often, the Bittern has a slow, sneaking walk and holds his head
very high.

In the extensive reed-beds of Holland and other parts of
Kurope, the Bittern makes its nest, generally in April, but
sometimes earlier. The nest is composed of dry reeds, etc., and
is placed low down among thick herbage. The young are
hatched after 25 days incubation, and do not leave the nest until
able to shift for themselves. The so-called “ boom ” of the
Bittern is the note uttered by the male bird during the breeding
season. The general colour is a pale buff, irregularly marked
with black ; legs and feet, green.

The Purple Heron is a very rare visitant to our shores,

3‘

although it still breeds in considerable numbers in Holland and
some parts of France, hike the Bittern, it feeds on fish, etc.,
chiefly at night, remaining concealed in the thick reeds all day
long, with its long snake-like neck drawn close into its shoulders.

In captivity it is a sluggish bird, rarely rousing itself
except when called to rescue a friend in distress.

When hungry, the Purple Herons will often stand motion¬
less, looking down into the pond in the vain hope of seeing
some dinner. On the arrival of the food, they all stretch out their
necks and come round the person feeding them, uttering hoarse
croaks. It is astonishing what large pieces they can swallow
whole ; they have no idea of pulling the fish to pieces, it must
go down whole or not at all. Having got a piece of fish well
into the mouth, they keep the neck stretched straight up and
allow the food to slide slowly down the throat.

Sometimes two of them will seize hold of the same piece
of fish, and a regular tug of war ensues, which lasts sometimes
for ten minutes, both holding on with great pertinacit}\
Occasionally, one of these tugs will be commenced at the
beginning of feeding-time, and they become so engaged that,
were the}^ not separated, there would be no food left by the time
their sport is ended.

They are fed once a day, generally about 4.30 p.111.

The Purple Heron cannot stand a very severe cold : so
the directors of Zoological Gardens tell us ; I, however, carried
mine safely through the severe cold of last winter, without any
artificial heat. They were kept shut up in a wooden shed,
having a floor raised one foot from the ground and thickly
covered with sawdust. By the end of the frost they were rather
weak, and had it continued would, I fear, have succumbed. In
the adult stage they are remarkably handsome birds, and being
unable to improve upon the description in Mr. Howard Saunders’
invaluable manual, I reproduce it in full: “The crown and long
plumes glossy purplish black ; cheeks and sides of the neck
fawn colour streaked with bluish black ; back and wing coverts
dark slate grey ; elongated filamentous dorsal feathers chestnut ;
tail grey ; neck reddish buff with a line of black down each
side, terminating in a mass of chestnut, grey, and black elongated
feathers ; under-wing coverts chestnut ; breast rich maroon red ;
thighs rufous ; bill yellow.

The remaining occupant of the aviaiy, the Night Heron,
is an annual though scarce winter visitant to our shores,
and is another of those species which would probably breed
occasionally with us, were a little more forbearance used by

4

those whose only thought, on seeing a strange bird, is to
exterminate it as quickly as possible.

Its colonies breed on trees in swamps or among groves,
and are especially numerous in China, where they are held
sacred. It is the most active of the species I have described,
and, were it not so, it would never get a living in its present
quarters. It is most amusing to watch it mark a piece of fish
from its perch, whence it darts upon it suddenly, seizes it, and is
up on the perch again before the Purple Herons have realized
what has happened. It is also the tamest, and comes up in a
confiding way to feed from one’s hand. It had a mate, which was
killed by the Purple Herons a few days after it arrived ; con¬
sequently I should never advise the keeping of it, or indeed
any other species, with so pugnacious a bird as the Purple
Heron. The sexes are alike in plumage, and the general colour
is greenish black above and whitish underneath.

There are several other species of Heron which have
been taken in our Islands, none of which, save the Common
Heron ( Ardea cinerea), are of common occurrence. On this
last-mentioned species I might be permitted to say a few words,
although I have had no personal acquaintance with it in captivity.

It breeds in colonies in almost every county in England,
and is far less liodturnal than the other species. The nests are
placed on the topmost branches of tall trees in woods, generally
in the vicinity of running water whence it procures its food. It
is the largest of our British Herons (having a total length of 36
inches) and is also one of the prettiest.

In confinement it is, I am told, exceedingly pugnacious, and
will therefore require to be kept by itself ; in other respects it
adapts itself very well to captivity, and will require the same
attention as the other species.

Of the other species visiting England, we have the Great
White Heron ( Ardea alba) and the Little Egret (Ardea
garzetta), which have, in some places abroad, been nearly
exterminated, owing to the ruthless way in which their breeding
haunts are ravaged for the sake of the ‘aigrettes’ for ladies’
hats. These aigrettes are the elongated dorsal plumes worn by
the adult in the breeding season only.

The Buff-backed Heron ( Ar'dea bubulcus) and the Squacco
Heron (Ardea ralloides ), both Southern species, have occurred
as irregular migrants; also the Little Bittern ( Ardetta viinuta ),
the smallest of the family, which has undoubtedly on one or two
occasions bred in England, and is very common in some parts
of Germany and Holland.

5

RARE FOREIGN BIRDS*

(SECOND SERIES)

I.— THE GREY-HEADED SPARROW.

Passer diffusus (Smith).

By Arthur G. Butter, Ph.D.

At the present time there are a few specimens of the
Grey-headed Sparrow in the market, they having been sent over
with African Weavers and Singing-finches. The male bird, in
full breeding plumage, has a smoky grey head with black
beak and hazel eye ; there is a slight indication of a white
moustachial streak from the base of the mandibles below the
cheek, but it is only emphasised by the slightly greyer chin and
fore-throat ; the mantle and shoulders are clear brown ; the
back, wings and outer tail-feathers redder, almost chestnut-
brown ; the wing-coverts showing two white shoulder-spots ;
under parts sordid whitish ; legs flesh-brownish.

I find this bird very restless, and somewhat masterful ;
but it is a pretty bird, and its beak has not the powerful
character of that of the English species ; so that, as I keep it
with Weavers and Buntings, I do not think it likely to do much
mischief : it has uttered no sound since it came into my
possession.

Dr. Russ speaks of this species as “ a genuine Sparrow,
with all its failings : — impudence, boldness, and importunity.
When caught, he gives utterance in the hand to prolonged,
plaintive, melodious sounds, which, at other times, one never
hears. Eoose in a bird-room, it builds a nest in a bush,
charming, Magpie-like, with an over-arched roof of twigs, the
cup moulded of Agave -fibres, threads, bents and feathers.
Sitting, 4-6 eggs, like those of the House-sparrow. Young
plumage : earthy brownish grey ; head paler ; under - surface
whitish grey; wing- bauds delicate; beak brown, the base
broadly yellow ; eyes black ; feet flesh-grey. Days also readily
in nests of strangers, and chases away the owners. Spiteful
towards small associates. Only arrives in the market by chance,
either singly or in a few pairs. Kept alone in a large cage is
sure to give satisfaction ; but, nevertheless, is not deserving of
any special regard.”

Although they do not, by any means, equal the so-called
Song-sparrows in beauty, either of form or colouring, the true

* The word “Rare” in this title is to be understood in the sense of
“ rarely imported,” and it is not to be inferred that the birds included in
the series are necessarily rare in their native country.

6

Sparrows are very handsome birds, and the Grey-headed species
decidedly not the least of these : its ruddy wings, tail and
back, show up strikingly against the nearly white under parts.
In the winter its beak becomes yellower, almost like that of our
Bramble-finch. In size, the Grey-headed Sparrow is about equal
to our Chaffinch .

SOME DIFFICULTIES OF THE AVICUITURIST.

By Charles D- Rothera, B.A.

Hon. Curator of the Nottingham Arboretum Aviary.

My experience, such as it is, has been gained from the
management of a garden aviary, and is therefore limited to such
birds as can endure the variations of a proverbially uncertain
climate. My objefit in promoting the aviary,- and undertaking
its management, was to add to the attractions of one of our public
gardens in Nottingham, — our Arboretum, — and I desired to
introduce to our people some of the various specimens, beautiful
in form and colour, which are imported from other countries and
yet are capable of acclimatization in confinement.

Our aviary is divided into three compartments, each having
a large flight par tty glazed and partly open to the sky, and a
sheltered house-place, with boarded and tiled roof, for retirement.

In one of these compartments I keep a collection of small
birds, mostly foreigners ; there are Green and Grey Singing
Finches, various species of Waxbills, Silver-bills, Whydahs and
small Weavers, Mannikins, Ribbon Finches, Parson and Diamond
Finches &c., &c., with two or three species of British Tits.

In the large centre division we have Cockatiels, Rosellas,
Budgerigars, three species of Dove Birds, Cardinals, a Virginian
Cardinal, Japanese Robins, Blue Robins, a Cross-bill, Turtle
Doves, a Military Starling, Californian and Egyptian Quails,
Golden Pheasants, and a Blue-and-yellow Macaw on a stand.

In the third compartment we have the British birds, —
Buntings, Goldfinches, Bullfinches, Dinnets, Redpolls, Siskins,
Greater-Tits, Robins, Nuthatches, Hawfinches, &c., & c., with a
pair of Saffron-finches for a dash of colour, and a pair of Silver
Pheasants for show.

Adjoining this we have a small pool of water with an island
and shelving shore, covered in with wire, in which we keep
Curlews, Green and Grej^ Plovers, Ruff and Reeve, an Avocet,
a Godwit, a Knot, and a Dotterel, with Wagtails, Reed Buntings,
Kingfishers, a Shore Dark, a Snow Bunting, and a pair of Chinese
Mandarins.

7

A ver}' mixed collection and one that takes no little catering

for.

And herein lies the first difficulty. “ One man’s meat is
another man’s poison ” is a true proverb for birds as for men, and
we frequently lose the greedy birds, such as the Blue Robins
or Virginian Cardinals, from what I suppose is apoplexy, or
syncope due to fatty degeneration. They generally drop off the
bough when in the pink of condition and are found to be as
fat as butter. Of course I shall be told not to give so much soft
food, but the difficulty is how to avoid it.

Again, it will often happen that a particular bird will
monopolize all the food vessels and prevent the other birds from
approaching them. To meet this difficulty I adopted the plan
of having a number of trays and boxes about the place, but
this is unsightly and gives rise to yet another difficulty, viz. the
mice trouble.

I know no bird so prone to take on this dog-in-the-manger
spirit as the Pin-tailed Wliydah, and I have discontinued trying
to keep him in consequence. The last I had, though not so big
as a mouse, could keep the whole floor of the large centre com¬
partment of the Aviary clear even of birds as large as a Rosella
or Moustache Parrakeet, amongst which I placed him after he had
proved himself more than a match for birds of his own size and
weight.

A hen American Mocking bird proved equally implacable
and had to be dismissed.

But the greatest difficulty arising out of the character of
birds is their resentment at the intrusion of strangers ; and this
seems to be quite instinctive, and not to be dependent in any way
on the question of food supply or anything of that sort. I have
just tried to introduce a pair of Redfaced Lovebirds. I was
fortunate in being able to select, out of a large number, a pair that
had more wing than these birds usually have when first im¬
ported — why are these alone of the various lovebirds cropped
in this way? — but they were still unable to fly without difficulty,
and in two days one died, as my assistant told me, simply because
the other birds persistently drove it from the food, no matter how
freely he scattered it about the place.

So of a pair of Avocets, the male was killed in 24 hours by
the Curlews, and a second one, procured to fill the gap, shared
the same fate in less time, and this occurred only last week when
there could be no jealousy arising out of pairing.

Of a pair of Nightingales introduced last Autumn among

8

the British birds, the cock was speedily killed by a Nuthatch,
while a single Pied Wagtail killed off a whole family of the same
species, both parents and three young ones, within a few days, so
soon as the weather set in cold in the late Autumn.

The difficulty of breeding among so mixed a collection is
great, and we only succeed in rearing a few young birds.

My greatest disappointment this year was connected with
two broods of Red-crested Cardinals, both from the same parents.
The second clutch of eggs was laid in the old nest as soon as ever
the first young ones left it, and before they could feed them¬
selves — and they were very slow in trying to do this. Apparently
the effort of feeding them, (there were three), was too much for the
father, for he died while the second eggs were incubating and his
three charges all died also. Then the second brood was hatched,
and, the weather being very favourable, the hen brought them on
by herself till they left the nest, but before they could feed
themselves they died too.

The second ones proved as slow as the first in “ fending ” for
themselves, and the mother grew tired of her job.

Another difficulty, rather apart from the birds themselves,
is that of finding some green shrub or tree that will withstand the
incessant whittling of the birds. Amongst the Parrakeets I have
found nothing, not even the rank growing, intensely nauseous
guelder rose, that will survive, and we therefore have to be content
with occasional changes of strong boughs of lime or elm, from
which they manage in a short time to strip off every bit of bark.

For the British finches and small foreign birds the ever¬
green box seems about the only shrub that can thrive at all, and
ours have done so well that Dinnets and Hedge Accentors have
built beautiful nests in them.

Another difficulty is to satisfy the general public that all
foreign birds, especially if brightly coloured, do not come from
tropical countries, and that it is therefore not cruel to keep them
out of doors during the winter. This shows the need for education,
the prevailing idea clearly is that the expressions “foreign” and
“tropical” are equivalent.

And still another difficulty is to procure specimens of live
birds outside the ordinary run of cage birds. I have being trying
for several years to get live Dippers and Sandpipers, without
success, though one would expedt to get them as easily as King¬
fishers. So few people seem to understand any other method of
getting birds than with the gun, which may answer very well to
meet the demands of ladies’ detestable fashions, but is not much
use to the aviculturist.

9

THE PIED WAGTAIL

A WARNING.

By John Sergeant.

For nearly three years I have had in my largest aviary a
cock Pied Wagtail, and until recently he has lived on fairly
amicable terms with his foreign relations ; but about a month
ago I noticed that he was developing pugnacious tendencies,
and harrassing birds smaller than himself — but as there is plenty
of room and any amount of cover I thought no harm could
come of it.

After a while he seemed to gain more confidence in
his powers, and at last I saw him attacking a particularly
large and fine Shama which I have had for a long time.
On noticing this I was rather pleased than otherwise, because I
thought he would receive the thrashing that his conduct
deserved.

Going down to my aviary three days later, on the eve of
my departure from home, I was surprised to find the Wagtail
chasing the Shama, and the Shama seemed distressed and
thoroughly frightened. Had I not been going away I should
at once have caught the miscreant and caged him, but not
having time I was obliged to leave them, expecting to find a
tragedy when I returned.

And I was not disappointed, for my Shama was dead and
the Wagtail was master of the situation.

I immediately caught the murderer and gave him his
liberty, although he richly deserved the penalty of capital
punishment for his wickedness.

It seems little short of marvellous to me that a com¬
paratively insignificant and very fragile bird like a Wagtail
could actually run down and kill a bird three times his own
size, and more especially a bird like the Shama, that held
in subjection a Blackbird, a Thrush, a Baltimore Oriole, and a
Dyal, all larger birds than himself, and, in addition, a whole
aviary of more than forty other birds.

After this experience, I strongly advise any of our mem¬
bers who happen to possess a Pied Wagtail, especially if it be in
a mixed aviary, to carefully watch it.

I had always known that Wagtails were very intolerant
of the presence of their own and closely allied species, as this
particular bird, two years ago, has liarrassed into an early grave
three Yellow Wagtails; but I had no idea he would extend

IO

his operations and go for larger or more valuable game, or he
should have had his liberty long since.

At the same time, we should no doubt be doing the
Wagtail family a gross injustice if we put them all down as
vicious and dangerous ; but it is as well to have before us the
fact that high living, and a plentiful supply of mealworms and
blackbeetles, may make the best regulated Wagtail develop
murderous tendencies.

REVIEWS.

Foreign Finches in Captivity , by Arthur G. Butler , Ph.D., etc.y
(A. Reeve 6s Co., 6, Henrietta Street, Covent Garden'). Part V.

We have little but praise for the newly issued part of this
admirable work, which fully maintains the high level of its
predecessors. Dr. Butler continues his account of the Waxbills
with a description of the Cordon-bleu, of which a very beautiful
and life-like illustration is given. Our experience of this
species leads us to believe that it is far more easily kept in
confinement than is usually supposed. Dr. Russ says it is
“ almost the most delicate of all Ornamental Finches. The
“ hens die with the slightest fluctuations of temperature, and in
“ the nesting season, unhappily, frequently from egg-laying.”
Dr. Butler, too, lost by far the greater number of his specimens.
We have, however, kept several pairs of Cordons-bleus and found
them, without exception, long lived and healthy ; but they were
never exposed to a temperature below 450.

The author mentions the nearly allied species, Estrilda
angolensis ; but we think he is mistaken in saying that it has not
been imported as a cage. bird. To the best of our recollection,
there was a pair at the Dondon Zoological Gardens in 1893.

That very interesting bird, the Australian Fire-finch or
Crimson Finch, is fully described ; but it is a pity that the female
is not illustrated as well as the male : the sexes of this species
differ so much, and the females are so seldom imported, that
the absence of an illustration distinctly detracts from the
value of the work. On the other hand, both sexes of the
Australian Fire-tailed Finch are represented, though male and
female are alike. Several very rare species are included in this
part, notably the Painted Finch ( Emblem a pictd) and the Red¬
faced Finch (. Pytelia afro).

Dr. Butler’s work is commendably free from the careless
and unscientific writing which disfigures so many popular works

II

on aviculture. “ Foreign Finclies in Captivity ” does not
pretend to be a scientific book, but aviculturists may rest
assured that they will find in it nothing ^scientific.

Accidents to Birds.

An anonymous article in the Cornhill Magazine for October,,
under the above heading, contains some very curious fadts about
birds.

“ It seems almost incredible that a bird should break its wing in mid¬
air by the mere exertion of flight ; yet four such accidents have been
reported within the last two or three years. A gentleman, whilst out quail¬
shooting near the Pyramids, flushed an owl, and mechanically raised his
gun, without any intention of firing, when, to his utter surprise, the bird
twisted in its flight and fell to the ground as if shot. On examination, the
astonished sportsman discovered that the poor owl had broken its wing.”

That immense numbers of migratory birds are killed by
dashing themselves against the glass of light-houses, is, of course,
well known ; and also that many birds are killed or injured by
flying against telegraph wires. But some of the other accidents
recorded are very unusual.

“Although swallows are such wonderfully quick-sighted birds, and
can change the diredtion of their flight with amazing rapidity and ease, it
occasionally happens that they either do not perceive the danger lying in
their path or are not quick enough to avert it, for I have once or twice,
whilst fly-fishing for trout, accidently knocked down and stunned a swallow.
Several instances have been recorded of the poor bird being struck and
killed by golf-balls, and in one case at least even by a cricket ball. Petrels
and other sea-birds have been known to collide whilst in mid-air aud drop
into passing boats.”

“ If the little white-throats happen to cross the Channel on their
spring migration whilst there is any ‘sea on,’ (to use a nautical phrase) they,
fly so low that many of them are knocked down by the scudding spray and
perish.”

“ Many strange accidents have occurred to birds whilst feeding. An
Irish naturalist once observed a Dunlin behaving very curiously on the sea¬
shore. The bird rose in the air and flew for a short distance, then alighted
and shook its head violently in a vain endeavour to detach aroundlump observ¬
able upon its bill. The encumbrance proved to be a cockle which the
Dunlin had found open, and, in innocently attempting to negociate, had
been trapped by it.”

“ Birds that employ hair in the building of their nests sometimes come
to grief by hanging, but I should say very seldom indeed in the following
singular manner : A gentleman who had a number of colts upon his farm
one day noticed a small bird entangled in the long hair of the tail of one
of them. The little creature had evidently been in search of material
wherewith to line its nest, and by some unaccountable accident had
become ensnared in the unkempt hair of the colt’s tail.”

“ Finally, it may not be unfitting to glance for a moment at the way
in which birds regard accidents to each other. I have seen them so devoted

12

as to try to carry off their dead ; and many instances are on record of birds
endeavouring to help each other in time of trouble. An observer not long
ago reported the fa6t that he saw a sparrow trying to release another which
had become entangled in a piece of horsehair attached to the bough of a
tree.”

“ A party of sportsmen out grouse-shooting in Ireland a year or two
back, came upon a pair of grouse, and discovered that the male was totally
blind of both eyes, and that his mate, a fine bird, evidently ministered to
all his wants — leading him about, bringing him food, and keeping close
beside him. Such devotion in a bird is, I should say, almost without a
parallel.” _

CORRESPONDENCE.

IS GRIT DANGEROUS TO NEWEY IMPORTED PARROTS?

Sir, — I think the following extract, from the letter of a person who
has much to do with freshly imported Parrots, will be of interest to some of
your readers.

“ I never give Parrots grit of any kind. Several Parrots that have
died I have opened, and in many cases have found that their gizzard has
been full of hard, undigested grit, all caked together, so to speak, and the
intestines torn, and in some cases quite pierced, as though the grit, passing
through the bird, had torn them ; and consequently this, I think, must
account for so many cases of inflammation of the bowels in Parrots ; and
even Cockatoos, the same. In their natural state, they are, I believe, more
used to long grasses than grit.

“ One thing I do know, the sailors never give them any. And I have
had the greatest success with Greys, Amazons, and Cockatoos, when no
grit has been used. Fine sand is all right, but no grit.”

I do not know that I should altogether draw the conclusions my
correspondent does. The Grey Parrot is chiefly in question. It won’t do
to generalize as to Parrots’ food, but I think it is possible sharp grit may be
dangerous, and that the Grey, at any rate, does not have much in its wild
state.

I shouldn’t take sailors’ feeding as a model : withholding grit on the
voyage may be the cause of the mischief when it is supplied. But I am
always glad to get the experience of those who have had much to do with
Parrots. F. G. Dutton.

FEEDING PARROTS ON MICE.

Sir, — Much has been written and said against giving Parrots and
Parrakeets meat, but it seems hard to believe that it can be so injurious to
them, seeing that they are so fond of it. About five years ago, I had an
English Jay in one of my outdoor aviaries in which were four Pennants, a
Bloodwing, King and Queen Parrakeets, several Rosellas and Mealy
Rosellas, etc., and I always found that as soon as a saucer of chopped lean
beef was put in for the J ay, every bird immediately went down and
secured his share, taking a piece on to the roost, and holding it in one claw,
whilst eating it with evident relish. In fact, Mr. Jay had to be very quick
over his meal or he would have got short allowance. Now, about a
fortnight ago, I had caught one of those pests of aviculturists, a mouse,
in a steel trap. The mouse being caught only by one leg, I was about to

13

kill it, when I noticed a hen Grand Eclectus become very excited in her
cage, and, as they are generally such quiet, sedate birds, I wondered what
the reason could be, and held the mouse to the cage, when she immediately
fastened into its head, crushing the bone and killing it quicker perhaps
than I should have done. As she would not leave go, I released it from the
trap, when she at once commenced eating it, holding it in her claw the
while; nor did she cease until she had eaten the whole of it, bones and all,
even chewing the skin, and then throwing down the fur, which is all that
can be found after her meal is over. I find the other Ecledluses equally fond
of mice, frequently eating two each per day when I have them to give
them. Have Mr. Camps, or any other experienced aviculturists found the
Eclectus Parrots to be fond of mice, and do they find that flesh injures
Parrots or Parrakeets ?

We read so much now, written by gentlemen of theory, but those who
have had years of practical experience seldom put pen to paper.

I must say I am glad to find our Society going on so well and
increasing its number of members so fast. I look forward anxiously each
month for the Magazine. Charges P. Arthur.

SILKWORMS FOR INSECTIVOROUS BIRDS.

Sir, — From time to time I have seen it mentioned in the “fancy”
press that silkworms are useful for feeding insectivorous birds, so last
summer I made the experiment, the result of which I shall now give for
the information of the readers of the Av [cultural Magazine.

Having a mulberry-tree in my garden, I was provided with the
proper food for the tiny mites that issued from the majority of the 2,000
eggs I bought. They grew apace, so that they were soon large enough to
use, and very soon too large ; that is one great objection to them ; another
objection is that they want continual attention, being tremendous feeders
and making a corresponding amount of mess. Besides, on the whole, I
found that the birds did not like them too much.

I gave them to the following birds, with these results: — ■

My Shama was very fond of them ; my Pekin Robin and Bulbul
also liked them.

My Scarlet and Superb Tanagers, Blackcap and English Robin, did
not fancy them very much : besides, they soon became too big for them.

My Dyal Bird would not look at them, although he is very fond of
mealworms.

Judging from the above, I do not consider the}’ are worth the trouble
of keeping, so I do not think I shall try them another year.

V. CasTEU/AN.

PER RUCHE INGAMBEE OF LEVAILLANT.

Sir, — Have any of your readers ever seen the above, or can they give
me'any information about it ? It conies from Australia, is remarkable for the
length of its legs, lives on the ground, and seeks its food among the herbage.
Uliger placed the species in a genus by itself.

James Storey.

14

BREEDING RESUETS.

Sir, — It would be interesting to the members of the Society to know
what breeding results have been obtained this season. I give mine, hoping
other accounts will follow.

Seven Saffron-finches: one died; hen nesting again ; five eggs. All from
one pair.

Four Ribbon-finches : still in the nest. Parents, a young pair purchased a
couple of months ago.

Twelve Budgerigars ; one died. Three pairs kept. Moult nearly over, and
visiting nests again.

Two Virginian Cardinals : both eaten by parents. Three eggs were laid
afterwards, but the hen did not sit on them ; tw-'o were given to the
Saffron-finclres, both good and one hatched ; but the Saffrons failed
to rear the young bird. The one given to the Ribbon-finches was sat
upon for the full time, but was clear.

Four Redrumps : one died at an early age. All bred by one pair.

Thirteen Rosellas : twm nests from same pair ; seven from eight eggs, and
six from six eggs. Nearly all died young ; but a fine young male is still
left and capable of looking after himself. Two nests in one year
from the same pair is, I think, rare.

Nine eggs, New Zealand Parrakeets, five and four; first nest spoiled
through faulty log, discovered too late ; second, abandoned before
due to hatch, I presume through birds beginning to moult. Same pair
laid all the nine eggs. I have successfully bred these Parrakeets till
this year, in nests of from two to five.

A. Savage.

THE ETHICS OF EXHIBITING.

Sir, — As your article under this heading in the October Magazine is
chiefly a criticism of mine in the previous issue, I feel sure that you will
not object to publishing a short repl}r from me.

(i) It is certainly not necessary to exhibit birds in very small cages,
but it is much more convenient to do so and is the almost invariable
practice. Personally, I dislike cages altogether, and perhaps what I
should call a small cage would be called by you a moderately large one.

(2) Whether the exhibits are sent on long or short railway journeys makes
but little difference, probably the birds become, to some extent, inured to
the discomforts of travelling after the first hour or two, and the total amount
of suffering on a short journey would be almost as much as on a long one.

(3) It is certainly practicable to maintain an even temperature in the show¬
room, but it is seldom or never done.

I admit the cruelty involved in the importation of birds, but much of
it is preventible. And the aviculturist can scarcely be held responsible
for what happens to his birds before they come into his hands. The
cruelty is caused chiefly by overcrowding — when birds are carefully
imported by amateurs, the cruelty is reduced to a minimum. But many of
the most delightful foreign birds can be bred in aviaries in this country,
and, if purchasers would be content to pay a rather higher price for aviary-
bred birds than for imported specimens, there is no reason why the latter
should not be driven out of the market. I hope the day will come when
nearly all the foreign birds in England shall be aviary-bred.

Septimus Perkins.

15

[My experience, and that of other amateur exhibitors, does not bear
out Mr. Perkins’ theoretical objections. I maintain that we are not less
careful of the health and comfort of our birds than is the non-exhibitor. I
have of course no apology to offer for the professional exhibitor, who sends
his birds from one show to another throughout the season, simply and solely
as a matter of profit.

The cruelty involved in the importation of birds must, I think, have
caused some uncomfortable thoughts to most of us. I cannot for one
moment admit the argument that we as aviculturists are not responsible for
this, for it is evident that if we did not create the demand for foreign birds,
the supply would very soon cease. My own position is logical, because I hold
that we have rights over the lower animals, as well as responsibilites towards
them. But, if I understand Mr. Perkins rightly, he thinks it justifiable to
import birds from foreign countries at the cost of much suffering and many
deaths, but unjustifiable to expose them to the short journey and very slight
risk incidental to a well conducted show.— C. S. Simpson.]

Sir, — Under the heading, “The Ethics of Exhibiting,” a very
interesting subject has been started in the Avicultural Magazine. Most of
the writers on this subjeCt in the September number deprecate the showing
of birds, and I am in some respects in accord with the sentiments expressed.
Englishmen, however, are essentially sportsmen ; and, whether the}7 own
yachts, animals of any kind from race-horses to fancy mice, or British or
Foreign birds, or, in fadt, are able in an}7 way to compete with their fellows,
they are possessed by a healthy spirit of combativeness which prompts
them to endeavour to excel, each in his own particular line.

Competition is good for everyone : even the defeated learn something.

It is exceedingly unfortunate that we exhibitors of foreign birds are
so heavily handicapped. In the first place, our pets cannot bear the
knocking about which such live-stock as fowls, rabbits, and cats can
endure with impunity : and this important fact is quite beyond the
comprehension of the average helper at bird shows. Hence the paramount
necessity of personally accompanying one’s exhibits. To a recent show, I
took six cages of foreign birds. On arrival at the station, from which the
show was distant about a mile, I found no arrangements whatever made by
the Show Committee to meet the trains with covered vans. The porters
were all too bus}7 to take m37 birds, and I had to wait on the platform in a
cutting wind, while a bo}7 fetched me a cab from somewhere in the town. I
wonder when and how my birds would have been delivered if they had
been unaccompanied ?

Granted the safe arrival of our exhibits, we are met with the
extraordiuar}7 fact that we have, in most cases, to submit them to the
discrimination of a bagman-judge, who undertakes such classes as poultry,
pigeons, rabbits, cats, cavies, fancy rats and mice, and foreign cage-birds.
The foreign cage-birds are put into his day’s work as a kind of make¬
weight.

At the show above referred to, the judge (whom I know as an
excellent judge of cats) had to adjudicate upon 322 pigeons in 28 classes ;
207 Rabbits in 22 classes; 11 Cavies; 27 Canaries in 3 classes; and 13
foreign birds in 2 classes. It is a mercy there were no cats, rats, or mice.
The 180 dogs at the same show had five judges and a special secretary all
to themselves !

i6

Foreign birds were “judged ” at 8 p.m. There were only five entries
in the large-bird class, so the judge could not go very far wrong. Even
then, he gave first to a Gloss}' Starling over the fine Chera procne which
won first at the Crystal Palace in a class of 37 entries ! As both birds are
mine, I shall not be accused of writing from the disappointed exhibitor’s
point of view.

The small-bird class contained eight entries, as follows : Cuba
Finches, pair; Black - faced Gouldian, cock; ditto, hen; Red -faced
Gouldian, cock; Crimson - banded Whydah, cock (I believe the only one
ever shown in England, and one of the only two imported for many years) ;
Rufous-tailed Grass-finches, pair; Rufous-backed Mannikin, cock; and a
Saffron Finch. As I was an exhibitor, perhaps it will be better to describe
the judging rather than to criticise the awards.

At 8 p.m., in a room crowded to suffocation and lighted by the dim
religious light of oil lamps, the judge undertook to place these eight tiny
birds according to their merits. The exhibits between which he had to
discriminate were piled on the top of two tiers of poultry pens, at a
height of some seven feet from the floor. The cages were not taken
down, but the birds were induced to show themselves by the effective, if
somewhat crude, method of drawing a walking stick across the bars of their
cages. The Red Gouldian was soon awarded first. The Cuba Finches were
so effectively secluded in a primitive wooden box, that even the application
of the stick failed to bring them into view. A disinterested spectator
kindly took them down and showed them to the judge, who, after
remarking that “people should show birds in cages so that they could be
seen,” awarded them second prize. The Crimson-collared Whydah received
third, and the Black-faced Gouldian hen, fourth. The Rufous - backed
Mannikin was honoured by the judge’s remark that it was a “very nice
Spice-bird,” and was accorded a V.H.C. The Rufous-tailed Grass-finches
he characterized as “a neat pair of Orange - cheeks,” and they also
achieved the distinction of V.H.C. I ought to mention that, in the matter
of condition, there was nothing to choose between the birds, each one
being shown in perfect plumage. It was, therefore, only a question of
rarity and beauty, and the class could have been judged from a written
list of the competitors. I should like to know how near to, or rather how
far from, the awards, as given, would be those which would have been
given by anyone who really understood foreign birds. The intentions of
these judges are doubtless good, but their performances are distinctly
weak.

So much for the judging. I have already mentioned that the foreign
birds were “ staged ” seven feet from the ground. Well, upon my arrival at
the show on the second day, I found the cage containing the pair of
Batliilda ruficauda braced round with string, and was informed, in answer to
my enquiries, that a fowl had got loose in the morning, and had flown up
among the foreign birds’ cages. The efforts of the attendants, to recapture
the escaped prisoner, resulted in the two unfortunates in question being
given a Calcraft drop of seven feet. Excepting for the smashed cage, a
matter of some fifteen shillings, no particular damage had been done; but
these things set one wondering what happens to the unfortunate exhibits
which are entrusted throughout to the tender mercies of railway porters
and show officials.

Henry J. Furejames.

THE

Bxncultural rtlbagasme,

BEING THE JOURNAL OF THE

A V! CU LTU RAL SOCIETY.

VOL. II.— NO. 14. DECEMBER, 1895.

THE LESSER EGRET AS A PET.

By the Rev. H. D. AsteEY, M.A.

In a garden, in the midst of which stands a large circular
fountain edged around with a broad border of turf and centred
by three dolphins twisted together by the tail into a conven¬
tional device in stucco, I keep, besides four Spoonbills (about
which more, perhaps, may be told some other day) a Resser
Egret. I wonder whether all these small white birds of the
Heron tribe are equally tameable. To whistle, if he be at all
hungry, means that he will run across the lawn to meet me
and follow at my heels ; sometimes, but not often or always,
uttering a harsh grating cry, which no doubt like all nature’s
sounds would be pleasing at a distance, and which even at close
quarters is not altogether unwelcome to the ear : there is a
quaint wildness about it. He is a bird endued with a certain
amount of common sense ; his yellow eye, set close to the base
of his needle bill, being evidently sharp enough in powers of
sight to dart at the small fish upon which he would feed, were
he able to find them : instead of which he contents himself with
pieces of liver chopped up, and holds his own against the broad
mandibles of the Spoonbills, as they ladle up the bits thrown
down to them.

The Resser Egret is a bird of complete and snowy white¬
ness in plumage, with toes of great length for the size of the
owner, and of a bright yellowish green colour. In the spring
he assumes a slender crest as well as the delicately formed
“ aigrette” feathers on the back.

Every evening my Egret marches solemnly in to his
roosting house (for I fear foxes, etc.) where he will perch himself
upon the summit of a sheaf of clean straw, feeling, without
doubt, superior to the Spoonbills below him.

Anyone having a good supply of fresh water, a picturesque
shallow pond where grow rushes and irises, cannot do better than

wire it in, and turn down sucli birds as Egrets, Spoonbills,
OySter-Catchers and various things that love to' stand on one
leg, knee deep, near the margin, uttering whistlings and pipings
and croalcings of different tones and degrees. Such sounds
recall to one days and moments passed in the haunts of birds
of marshland and sea and loch, than which, to bird-lovers, there
are no surroundings more full of fascination and interest.

Almost, if not quite, the most delightful spot in our
Zoological Gardens is the Eastern Aviaiy, where the pink and
white Flamingos, standing on coral stilts, “ gaggle ” and croak ;
where the scarlet Ibis dazzles one’s eye, where the Egrets and
the Spoonbills, the smaller gulls and various waders congregate
together in picturesque and varied groups ; flying, at times, with
free pinions, and thereby shewing themselves to advantage, as
many another of their species in captivity is unable to do.

AN ACCOUNT OF MY BIRD ROOM.

By Margaret Wirriams.

My bird-room is still in its infancy, having been but recently
devoted to its present purpose. Only last year it was a laundry,
andwdien I took it in hand it bore very visible signs of the purpose
to which it had been put. It is the front-room — the drawing¬
room — of an empty four-roomed cottage attached to a coach¬
house and stable combined. The latter is not used as a stable,
but elevated into a rabbitry, and the whole cottage will soon, I
hope, be an interesting Zoo in miniature. The birds’ parlour is a
room about 22 feet by 14 feet, with a double window looking
nearly due south, which gets every ray of sun. You enter by
the door, as is customary, and in the opposite wall are two more
doors, opening on shallow cupboards. The shelves in these con¬
tain the birds’ larder, but as they are damp, and accessible to
mice, being in the outside wall, they are, vulgarly speaking, no
great shakes. However, by keeping all the seed, etc., in airtight
tins — Eipton’s tea tins, multitudes of which were left in the
house by our predecessor — I manage to cheat the mice, who can¬
not get out into the room, the cupboard doors being well fitted.

The room is decorated with ordinai'y whitewash, mixed
with a good deal of yellow ochre and much size, and the walls
look bright and clean and do not rub off. The door and cup¬
boards and all woodwork are painted grey. Two aviaries, each
about four feet wide and deep are built against the back and door
side walls, and run from the ceiling down to within three feet of
the ground. They were built up upon flap ironing boards, which

19

had been fixed against the walls originally ; the ironing-board
forms the bottom of the aviary, and is supported on two slender
rods fastened to the floor, up which mice could not creep ; at any
rate, not without some trouble. The aviaries are made of white
deal tile battens, planed, and left their natural colour ; and half-
inch mesh wire netting. The perches are of bamboo, which I
like, as it is so smooth that the dirt from the birds’ feet (and the
yery cleanest birds, beautifully kept, will sometimes have dirty
feet) does not stick to the perch. Besides straight perches, each
aviary has in it a large evergreen branch, which will be changed
when dirty. I cannot get fir branches, so have to be content
with arbor vitos, and even those were arrived at with considerable
difficulty.

Standing with one end close to the window is the small
birds’ aviary, made of the same materials as the two against the
wall, and perched and bushed in the same manner. It is about
six feet long, four-and-a-half feet wide, and nearly eight feet high,
and is made of batten and wire all round. There are six cocoa-
nut husks in it, and a very delectable log nest from Paris, most
ornamentally covered with beautiful green lichen. The birds,
however, inartistic brutes that they are, scorn this high-art
residence and much prefer the humble husk. The husks cost
sixpence, and the log nest two francs, so after all economy is con¬
sulted, if not taste ! I find the birds seem to like the bamboo perches
much better than either branches and twigs, or ordinary wood
perches : probably the varying thickness of the bamboo and the
little knots in it help them to hold securely when at roost. On
the floors of these three aviaries — perhaps I should call them
large cages by rights — I use sand collected from a well rain-
washed road. This material is the only alternative to Spratfis
threepenny bags, and I found it so very expensive to have such
elegant sand for general use that I sent the gardener to get the
road sand for floors, while I put a little Spratt’s in a tin for eat¬
ing and gizzard purposes.

The fireplace of my bird-room is occupied by a coke stove,
which is very tiresome and which I do not recommend to any¬
one who can afford oil, or get gas. I found an oil-stove so
extravagant — it burnt three gallons of oil in a week, and some¬
times more — that, my bird hobby not being my only craze, and
having to divide the purse with one or two others, I was obliged
to have the cheaper coke stove. It makes dust, and requires
attention every two hours ; this would not be the case if it were
larger, but too large a stove would make the room unwholesomely
warm. The great disadvantage of coke stoves is the almost im-

20

possibility of regulating the heat, which can be so easily done
with oil or gas. However, I still use an oil lamp when only a
slight warmth is required. The stove, flue pipe, and opening of
the chimney are made quite safe by being, as it were, caged in a
square cover made of batten and netting, which is very light
and is moved aside when the stove is stoked.

The floor of the room is kept covered with fine red saw¬
dust, which looks exactly like sand, and is swept up and sifted
whenever it begins to look dirty ; the real sand is kept in a
shallow box from which the birds can take all they want. The
water, seed, and food for the insectivorous birds are at present
kept on the floor, well out in the middle and away from perches ;
should the mice find their way in at any time, I must rig up a
swinging tray from the ceiling. In the corners of the room I
have masses of branches, forming a dense cover for shy birds,
and bamboos here and there between the sides of the fixed
aviaries and the walls. I mean to have some box shrubs in pots
when I can get them, and put them about in the middle, unoc¬
cupied, part of the room.

Outside the door I have a second door of batten and wire,
opening in the reverse direction, so that in hot weather the
wooden door can stand wide open, and the air find a free passage
through the wire one.

At this season of the year the windows do not require to
be opened, and they are screened by the wire end of the small
birds’ avairy. Next summer I mean to build an outside annex
to the bird-room. Its windows look on a gravel path and bit of
lawn which I shall have enclosed and wired over ; and let the
birds go in and out of the window. Some rose-bushes growing
outside will doubtless suffer, but I rather fancy the birds will
enjoy it !

Having described the bird-room, I must give a few words
to the occupants. I would rather watch a few birds, comfortable,
at their ease, and not crowded together, than have the pleasure
of possessing a great many : so my bird-room is not very
full.

Kach aviary contains a pair of Cardinals, in one case red,
in the other, green. The latter are very tame, and I hope will
breed next season. In the small birds’ aviary are Cutthroats,
Zebras, Diamond Finches and Saffron Finches ; one pair of each ;
while a few larger birds — -Weavers, Troupials, &c., occupy the
rest of the room at their pleasure. The small birds do not seem
to mind the presence of their large relations in the least, and the

21

two couples wlio might be quarrelsome — the Cardinals — are not
in a position to make themselves disagreeable.

Outside my bird-room, at the back of the cottage, I have
a small garden aviary containing Budgerigars ; it is a compadt
little wooden arrangement, built against a wall, with wire on one
side only, and a snug enclosed bedroom. The Budgerigars
seem happy ; and we canhear them chattering a hundred yards
away.

My one sorrow is the want of accommodation for my
Pollies. Six poor exiles have to pass the dull days of winter in
the kitchen, for want of a nice warm room of their own. In the
summer they live in the drawing-room and make excursions into
the garden ; in the bird-room they would be impossible. I do
think, however, that parrots like the company of the world
below stairs ; or, perhaps, mine are all of low extraction ! At any
rate, they chatter far more when in the company of the servants
than when they are residing in polite society.

I light my bird-room lamp, which hangs on the wall over
the mantel- piece, every evening from seven to nine or ten o’clock,
and I find nearly all the birds seem glad to feed up to this late
hour.

I know that my bird-room arrangements compare very
unfavourabty with those of some other members who have been
good enough to describe their premises, and I cannot help feel¬
ing a wee bit envious of their “ regardless of cost” palaces, no
doubt just as lovely as the Zoo aviaries, with their fascinating
streams and plots of grass and bushes. Still, I hope very much,
even in a small room, to be successful with a few insectivorous
birds. I have done pretty well in former days with the com¬
moner small foreign finches, but the larger insectivorous birds
seem to me far more interesting and desirable both as pets and
breeding stock.

A VISIT TO THE BIRD SHOW AT THE
ROYAL AQUARIUM.

October, 1895.

By Dr. Geo. C. Wieeiamson.

I merely strolled in to look at the foreign birds, and a few
brief notes that I made may interest aviculturists.

The exhibition room by daylight is not at all suitable
place for studying birds. What it may be by night when well

22

lighted and heated, I tremble to think. By day, certainly one
half of the exhibits are more or less invisible. Each row of
cages keeps the light from the next row, and many of the birds
could not be seen at all.

I am not interested in Canaries, and did not pay any
special attention to them, save to admire the beautiful crests of
some of the birds and the rich colouring of the Lizards. I do
not admire birds in proportion to their rarity, but for their
beauty, and Mr. Dutton’s King Parrakeet (1049) pleased me more
than any other bird : it was in perfedt condition and wonderfully
fine plumage.

The Ecledtus Parrot (1950), close by, did not look well,
and was, besides, so shrouded by a curtain that it was very
difficult to see its lovely colour. It was a beautiful bird, but
put in a bad position and in a very poor light. The Laughing
Jackass (1037) was the largest that I have ever seen, and although
rather rough in its plumage, a grand bird. Mr. Castellan’s three
birds, Honey-sucker, Dyal bird, and Sliama, were of considerable
interest and great beauty. For glory of colouring, the Toucan
(1030), sent by Mr. Arthur, was the most noticeable exhibit. Its
bill was in admirable order and betokened the health of the bird,
and its colour was clear and brilliant. I11 English birds, I must
confess to being disappointed at the extremety small size of the
cages. There were Skylarks and Song Thrushes confined in
cages in which they could hardly turn, and their plumage was
suffering with every movement. It always seems to me very
hard that Skylarks should be kept at all in captivity ; but if it
must be so then aviaries are, I think, the only suitable places.
The bird ought to have room to open his wings.

A fine Woodpecker was exhibited by Mr. Lott (992). Its
owner had eredted in the cage a piece of virgin cork, at which
the bird was industriously working. A rough piece of tree-stem
would have been better. It was almost cruel to offer it barren,
dry cork upon which to pursue its wonderful and energetic
labour.

The Magpies were beauties : Victor (924), as grand a bird
as anyone could possibly want to see. There was an interesting
Corncrake in fine condition, but needing food, I believe. I think
amongst the British birds, Mr. Bradshaw’s Cornish Chough most
delighted me. It appeared to be perfectly healthy and really
cheerful, and its lovely red bill and feet were simply delightful
in colour.

One decision I came to, most emphatically, and it was,

23

never to exhibit under such circumstances. The room was
close, dull, and dark ; the air loaded with tobacco-smoke, and
unhealthy. Many of the cages, especially those of the Parrots,
were high up in the heated air and their occupants evidently
suffering for want of fresh air. Many of the finest birds were
dejected and depressed in appearance, and offered by no means
a cheerful sight. I am not an exhibitor, I have no wish to gain
prizes ; but I do love birds for their own sake, and most
sincerely I pitied many of the lovely birds in this Show that
were suffering from travel, exposure, confinement, and bad air.
I hope Messrs. Kneen and Forsyth will not lose their beautiful
Swallow (932) but I doubt whether either of them would have been
at all happy, if they love their bird, could they have seen it 011
the day that I was there, and watched it gasp for breath. There
were some fine Song Thrushes, but they were so in the dark that
one could hardly see them : and yet this fate was preferable to the
heat, smoke, and light in the Aquarium when lit up at night. I
find no fault with the managers, they did their best ; but I
recommend no real bird-lover to go to the Show save as a bird-
fancier, for to the naturalist the sight is a sad one, and sufficient
to start a very strong theory as to the ethics of bird exhibiting.

The Bullfinches, Goldfinches, Ifinnets, and Siskins were
fairly comfortable and resigned to their lot.

The stronger Parrots would probably not suffer, but the
more delicate and sensitive English song-birds do, I am con¬
vinced, suffer very much at such shows as the one that I visited.

Many exhibitors had thoughtfully affixed labels to their
cages, desiring that the birds should not be fed, or at least fed
only on certain food. It is quite useless, certain visitors feed every
bird indiscriminately ; and nuts, sponge cake, biscuit, apple-peel,
orange-peel, currants, buns, sultanas, bread, sugar, and sweets
are offered to birds by careless, foolish visitors, just as they
fancy, wholly careless of instructions or of knowledge of the
bird’s proper food. Food is sometimes stuffed into the bird’s
bill : as, for example, I saw a piece of walnut pressed into the
mouth of the Swallow, when all he wanted was air ; and the
wonder is, that any bird ever survives this indiscriminate feeding,
the noisome air, and the intolerable heat.

My notes are scattered and written in haste. The exhi¬
bition was interesting, many of the birds of great beauty ; but,
as I have already said, to one who loves the bird for the bird’s
sake, it was a very painful and grievous sight.

24

THE GROSBEAKS.

By H. R. Fiixmer.

I propose in this paper to discuss, more or less briefly,
some eighteen species of the sub-family Coccothraustince. I have
kept living specimens of ten of these species in my own
bird -room, and have had good opportunities for examining
living birds of three more species ; two other species I have
seen alive but have not been able to closely examine ; the
remaining three species f Spermophila ophlhalmica , S. azrulescens,
and Phonipara lepida) I have never seen, and can therefore
give only second-hand information about them.

I write as an aviculturist for aviculturists, and I therefore
propose to make very little reference to the habits of the birds
in a state of freedom, and to deal with them simply as aviary
birds.

It is very difficult, if not impossible, to draw a hard and
fast line between the Grosbeaks and the True Finches on the
one hand, and the Grosbeaks and the Buntings on the other;
yet, in spite of this, most of the genera have a very distinctive
appearance in consequence of the size and shape of the beak,
so that even a novice could at once decide whether an unknown
bird belonged to this sub-family. However, there is nothing
Grosbeaklike about the outward appearance of either Phonipara
or Volatinia, but Dr. Bowdler Sharpe doubts whether these
genera are correctly placed among the Coccothraustince .

From the avicultural point of view the Grosbeaks are a
very attractive group, for they include two prime favourites :
the Cuba Finch and the Virginian Cardinal, as well as several
other birds less generally known, which are especially well
adapted for the aviary, some of them being remarkably good
songsters.

The Greenfinch fChloris chlorisj.

Of the two British species of Grosbeak (the Greenfinch
and the Hawfinch) this is by far the most common, it is indeed
so common that most people do not consider it worth keeping in
captivity. It possesses no song, and is not remarkable for
beauty, although Mr. Hudson thinks its colours prettier than
those of the Chaffinch, and says that “against a background of
green leaves, with the sunlight on him, he is certainly beautiful.”
In captivity it is hardy and long lived. It is heavy and clumsy in a
cage and should, therefore, always have the range of an aviary.
It is readily tamed if caught when adult, but a hand-reared bird
is best and makes a delightful pet. It is easily reared from the

25

nest on hard boiled egg and soaked rape-seed, or some similar
food.

The Chinese Greenfinch (Chloris sinica).

When a pair of these birds were exhibited at the Crystal
Palace a few years ago (I think it was in 1892) many people,
especially the very deep ones, thought they were hybrids, one of
the parents of which was a European Greenfinch. They are
found in Eastern Siberia, Japan, and China, and bear a strong
resemblance to our Greenfinch, but the general colour is
chocolate browm instead of olive green. I well remember
how, at the Show before alluded to, Mr. Abrahams pointed out
those birds to me and a good many others who were present, and
remarked that they were the rarest birds there. This was very
probably correfit, but rare birds are not necessarily attractive, and
there was nothing very taking about the Chinese Greenfinches.
If they were easily procurable at a moderate price, which is the
reverse of the case, I do not think they would become popular
aviary birds.

In 1893 a bird was exhibited at the Crystal Palace which
was described in the catalogue as a hybrid between an “ English
Greenfinch and a Japanese Finch.” Probably the “Japanese
Finch ” was Chloris sinica.

The Black-taired Hawfinch ( Eophona mdanura) .

As the first volume of the Avicultural Magazine contains
two short articles from my pen concerning this bird, I propose
to dismiss it here after a very few words, referring my readers to
Vol. I, page 12, for a description of its appearance ; and to Vol. I,
page 104, for an account of its nesting.

Although not brightly coloured the Black-tailed Hawfinch
is a handsome bird. When in good plumage it almost rivals the
Java Sparrow in sleekness; and, like the Java Sparrow, it is
seldom to be seen in bad plumage, except when moulting. But
its chief attraction is its song, which is both loud and musical
and not at all such as would be expected to proceed from a seed¬
eating bird. The notes much resemble those of the Blackbird,
and can be exactly imitated by the human lips in whistling.
Both sexes sing, when together as well as when separate, and
my hen sings more loudly and frequently than the cock ; but the
cock has a sweeter note. My hen sang while building her nest,
only ceasing when she commenced to lay.

Although common in its native laud very few specimens
find their way to this country, and -for that- reason no young of
this species have yet been reared in England, although it is a

26

somewhat free breeder in captivity. According to Dr. Russ, it
has been bred in Germany by Mr. W. Hartwig.

I feed my Black-tailed Hawfinches on canary seed, paddy
rice, sunflower seed, German rape, linseed, and occasionally
some hemp seed. I also give them very frequently a small
quantity of Abrahams’ Preserved Egg — they will not eat fresh
egg, although they fed their young one on it. They also have
a good deal of fruit and green food, but they will not touch
insedt food in any form.

Considering its handsome appearance, fine song, hardiness,
and readiness to nest, the Black-tailed Hawfinch, if regularly
imported, would doubtless become a favourite aviary bird. Its
greatest fault is its spitefulness towards other birds, which
renders it quite impossible to keep it in a mixed aviary. I have
tried more than once to keep other birds with my Hawfinches,
but have alwaj^s been obliged to remove them on account of the
persecution to which the Hawfinches subjected them, though I
am bound to say that I never found that any injury had been
inflicted, beyond the loss of a few feathers.

The Black-tailed Hawfinch is sometimes known as the
Japanese Hawfinch, but the true Coccothraustes japonica is a
quite different species. Our bird is a' native of China, and is
of doubtful occurrence in Japan.

The; Hawfinch ( Coccothraustes coccothraustes) .

This handsome bird is not quite so rare in England as is
often supposed, its great shyness making it very careful to avoid
observation. It is not much of a favourite as an aviary bird, on
account of its spitefulness towards other birds : for this reason
it should never be trusted in a mixed aviary of small birds, but
it could doubtless be kept with Parrakeets.

I have never kept this species, but it would no doubt
thrive on the same diet as its Black-tailed relation.

The Yeleow-beeeied Grosbeak f Pheucticus chrysogaster) .

This bird is fully as ugly as its name, which is saying a
good deal. It is as large as a Virginian Cardinal, very stoutly
built, and with a short tail. The general colour of the male is
golden yellow very much mottled with blackish ; the wings,
however, are black or blackish brown, with white spots. The
bird looks much like a very large and stout Saffron Finch,
without the orange forehead. I have never seen the female,
but her general colour is described as ashy brown.

27

They have had this species at the London Zoological
Gardens, and Mr. Swaysland, of Brighton, was recently the
happy possessor of two — both of them, I think, young males,
although he believed them to be a pair.

The Yellow-bellied Grosbeak seems to be of a very
peaceable disposition and differs greatly in this respect from
the Hawfinches. He is reported to be a good songster, but the
only information which I can obtain on this point is very vague :
should this report be correct the species may come into favour,
but Pheucticus chrysogaster will certainly never be prized for his
beauty. He appears to be a tame bird, and readily makes
himself at home.

He is a native of South America.

The Dark-beue Grosbeak ( Guiraca cyaneaj .

This handsome bird reminds one of the allied genus
Spe?'inophila , but is considerably larger than any of the species
in that genus. The Zoological Society call it the Brazilian Blue
Grosbeak, and some of the dealers give it the absurd name of
Brazilian Bullfinch.

The general colour of the male is deep blue, similar to
the colour of the Combasou, the forehead and fore part of the
crown and the butt of the wing are of a much lighter and
brighter blue ; the feathers at the sides of the beak and under¬
neath, to the extent of nearly a quarter of an inch from the
beak, are black ; the flight feathers of the wing are black or
nearly so, and the tail feathers the same colour, the bill blackish.

I have never seen the female, but she is described as being
of an ochreous brown colour.

It is a somewhat slender bird,, although the head and beak
are large in proportion to the body. In actual bulk it would
perhaps not much exceed the Greenfinch, but it would measure
considerably more in length.

From the above description it will be seen that it is a bird
of striking appearance, which would add to the attractions of
any aviary — but I should be inclined to doubt its peaceableness,
and should advise considerable caution in placing it among
smaller birds. It has a good song,

The circumstance that Mr. Swaysland has at present two
males in his possession has enabled me to describe this decidedly
uncommon species.

It is a South American bird.

(To be continued).

28

REVIEWS.

The Royal Natural History. — Parts 19, 20, and 21. Edited by

Richard Lydekker, F.R.S. (Frederick Warne & Co.)

It is eminently desirable that aviculturists should acquire
at least an elementary knowledge of the structure of birds, their
habits when free, and the principles which underlie the system of
classification adopted by ornithologists. The study of these sub¬
jects has an important bearing on aviculture, and we therefore
make no apology for occasionally occupying the pages of the
Avicultural Magazine with reviews of books which treat of the
natural history of birds, and not of their management in
captivity.

Chapter VIII of the “ Rojml Natural History” describes
the Cuckoos and their near relations the Plantain-eaters or
Touracos. Some of the Cuckoos are parasitic, while others
build nests. Thus the great Spotted Cuckoo lays in the nests
of Crows and Magpies, while the Indian Pied Cuckoo lays in the
nests of Babbling Thrushes. Of the common Cuckoo, Dr.
Bowdler Sharpe writes :

“The variability in the colour of the eggs is well known, and it
appears that in each individual the colour of the eggs is hereditary. That
is to say, that Cuckoos brought up by Meadow Pipits always select that bird
to be the foster-parent of their own young in course of time, the same
being the case with regard to Hedge Sparrows, Wagtails, and other ordinary
victims of the Cuckoo. The small size of the egg and the extraordinary
similarity which it often shows to the egg of the foster-parent render it
difficult to distinguish the Cuckoo’s egg from those of the rightful owner
of the nest ; and sometimes a Cuckoo will lay a blue egg exactly like that
of the Redstart or Pied Flycatcher, the nest of which it is about to utilize.
I11 the case of eggs laid by the Cuckoo in Wagtails’ nests and those of other
birds, the resemblance is exadt, and when a Cuckoo’s egg is found in a nest
where the eggs of the foster-parent are different, it is probable that the
Cuckoo has not been able to find a nest at the moment in which the eggs
belonged to its own hereditary type. The nest of a Sedge- warbler has
indeed been found with a Cuckoo’s egg in it, which was the exact counter¬
part of those of the foster-parent ; and a few daj-s after, the finder having
noticed the female Cuckoo to be hovering about the neighbourhood all the
time, found a Cuckoo’s egg of the same Sedge-Warbler type in a Reed-
Bunting’s nest where, of course, it looked thoroughly out of place. From
these facts it would appear that a Cuckoo, laying a “Sedge-Warbler” egg,
had been unable to find a second Sedge-Warbler and had been constrained
to put it into a Reed-Bunting’s nest.”

Chapter IX deals with the Trogons, which, we believe,
have never been successfully kept in Europe ; the Colies or
Mouse-birds, which are sometimes to be obtained by avicultur¬
ists ; the Humming-birds, the Swifts, the Nightjars, Todies,
Motmots, and Bee - eaters. The Hoopoe has been kept in

29

confinement, and is said to be a very interesting pet. The
Hornbills are familiar to visitors to the Zoological Gardens.
A description of the Kingfishers, Rollers, and Frog-months
concludes this chapter.

Chapter X contains an interesting but too brief account
of the Parrots, and here the author ventures on a few quotations
from avicultural books, which cannot, however, be said to add
to the interest or value of the chapter. The coloured plates
representing Macaws and Kaka Parrots are the best that have
appeared so far, which is not saying much for them. Chapter
XI treats of the Owls, which, we think, deserve more attention
from aviculturists than they generally receive. Chapter XII
is devoted to the diurnal birds of prey, and Chapter XIII
describes Cormorants and Pelicans.

The “ Royal Natural History” is issued at a price which
places it within the reach of all aviculturists, and our readers
will do well to give it a place on their bookshelves.

CORRESPONDENCE.

THE ETHICS OF EXHIBITING.

Sir,— -You and I both agree that man has rights over the lower
animals, and that the keeping of birds in captivity is a lawful and
justifiable exercise of that right. I admit that the keeping of birds in
captivity, which have once known a state of freedom, involves an appre¬
ciable amount of suffering; but I hold that we are justified in inflicting
that small amount of suffering in order to increase our own knowledge and
pleasure. If we are to keep wild birds at all, this suffering is inevitable.
But you go a step further and say that, because the keeping of birds
involves the infliction of suffering, and yet is justifiable, therefore the
wholly unnecessarv^ and purposeless suffering caused by sending birds to
Shows is also justifiable. Here I part company with you. The whole thing
depends upon the end to be attained. Is man better or happier for this
suffering of the birds ? I say “ Yes ” in the case of bird-keeping, but “ No ”
iu the case of exhibiting. I believe that man is justified in confining birds
for his own pleasure, provided that he does all in his power to make their
captivity happy. The exhibitor who shuts his birds up in little boxes called
show-cages, and sends them about the country all the winter to Shows, is
certainly not doing his best to make their captivity endurable.

Septimus Perkins.

BREEDING RESUDTS.

Sir,— Mr. Savage asks, in the November number, for breeding results
during the past season. Mine have not been so satisfactory as usual : the
small foreign finches particularly having done badly, and I am fast coming
to the conclusion that it is unwise to have more than one pair of a kind in
the same place, if the best results are desired.

30

My first young ones were two mules from a male Green Singing
Finch and female Grey. They were hatched early in April, and developed
into fine sprightly birds, with but a faintly perceptible trace of their father
about them. The same pair reared two young ones last year. They are
verj7 poor nest builders : making a slight open nest that is verj7 apt to let
the 3'oung ones fall out before they can fly.

The only other jmungster from our small foreign section has been a
Zebra Finch, the only one from two pairs.

In previous years we have had Ribbon Finches (4), Parson Finches
(4), and St. Helena Waxbills (6).

Of Budgerigars we have had a considerable number from two pairs,
I cannot say how many ; but the larger proportion of them were from one
pair. The Cockatiels were a long time settling down, and ultimately
brought out two fine young ones. The White-headed Love Birds have
made a great show, but have produced no young ; last year they laid some
eggs which did not hatch.

Silver Pheasants (6), Golden ditto (3), hatched under Bantams.

The Saffron Finches have reared three fine young ones, making their
nest in a hollow log. A first nest was built in a gorse-bush, but nothing
resulted. In other years the same log has been used b}7 other individuals of
the same species. They generally breed late in the season.

Red-crested Cardinals, six hatched in two nests from same pair; four
left the nest, but did not live.

With the British birds the results this year have been very discourag¬
ing, three nests of Greenfinches being the sum total. These birds breed
like mice. In previous years we have done well with Goldfinches, Bull¬
finches, and Brown Linnets; rearing fine, strong young birds.

One A7ear we had young mules hatched from a male Pied Wagtail and
a female Grey, but they were not reared. The nest was built in the corner
of the husk-tray, beneath a seed hopper from which most of the other birds
obtained their food regularly and which the attendant had to replenish
frequently. The hen bird was very tame; she disappeared unaccountably
soon after being transferred to our new pool aviary, when that was
first stocked ; probably an early victim to the rats — the greatest of my
“difficulties.” Charles L. Rothera.

Sir, — It may interest some of the members of the Avicultnral
Society to hear the result of breeding from Yellow Budgerigars. My
Yellow Budgerigars went to nest last month and have reared two \rery
fine young ones, both of a very light j^ellow colour. One more died in the
nest— that also was yellow7.

I should like to know if any of the other members have bred from a
pair of Yellows, and if so, with what result as regards the colour of the
offspring.

I have also reared trvo fine Peach-faced Love Birds — these are from
my Brighton and Palace Avinners. It is Avorthy of note that the parents
Avere disqualified at Norwich Show, on the ground that they were two
cocks !

My Cherry Finches have brought up one young one— another died in
the nest. J. Cronkshaw.

31

Sir, — My breeding results for tlie year 1895, are as follows :

Ribbon Finches. Thirteen young ones reared by two pairs. Several more

died iu the nest, including one whole brood, but none were thrown

out alive.

Parson Finches. Four young ones from one pair (two broods of two each).

No others were hatched.

Black-tailed Hawfinches. One young one hatched, and lived a week.
Bengalese. One j-oung one hatched on two occasions, each time destroyed

when a day or two old, either by Ribbon Finches or by the parents.
Dwarf Finches (Spermestes nctna). One nest of three eggs — none hatched.
Virginian Cardinals. One nest of five eggs — none hatched.

Horatio R. Fieemer.

MEAT FOR PARROTS.

Sir,— I note that Mr. Arthur is asking if any avieulturists have found
flesh to be injurious to Parrots. My answer, from experience, is Yes.

I have kept dozens of Parrots and Parralceets and have never had but
two feather-pl ackers, and both of these had been fed on meat. I have
never seen a good tight-feathered bird fed on meat either raw or cooked

J. Cronkshaw.

PARROTS’ PERCHES.

Sir, — I think I can give a useful hint to those members of the Society
who are troubled, as I was some months ago, by their Parrots constantly
nibbling their perches to pieces.

Oak and other hard wood perches were all destroyed in a verj? short
time by my Grey Parrot ; till one day I happened to notice a nice straight
branch from a laurel that was being cut down. Thinking it just suitable
for a perch, I had it cut the right length, thoroughly pealed, and then
placed by the kitchen fire to dry and harden.

At the end of the week it was ready to be fitted into the cage, and
from that time I have had no further trouble about perches, as it remains
untouched.

I fancy it must be from the taste, as others quite as hard were
destroyed. M. D. Sharp.

IS GRIT DANGEROUS TO NEWfiY IMPORTED PARROTS ?

Sir, — Referring to Mr. Dutton’s letter at page 12, my experience-
such as it is — teaches me that grit is sometimes dangerous, at any rate to
newly imported Parrakeets, and to those newly received from dealers. The
withholding of grit, and often unsuitable food given at uncertain intervals,
cause indigestion, leave the birds in a weak and disordered condition, and
occasionally with an abnormal craving for grit. As soon as grit is placed
within their reach, regardless of size or suitability, such birds swallow what
first comes to hand, and too much of that, and an internal block occurs, but
more often in the crop than elsewhere.

With new birds, my usual practice is to supply only the finest grit,
and that very sparingly ; but I let them have plenty of crushed egg-shell
and cuttle-bone. When well established, I have not myself known a case of
Parrot or Parrakeet suffering through having partaken of grit.

Reginaed Phieeipps.

32

FOOD FOR INSECTIVOROUS BIRDS.

Sir, — Possibly some readers of the Avicultural Magazine have ex¬
perienced a considerable difficulty in getting a supply of suitable insedts for
their pets, especially in winter. I have, at the cost of no little time and
correspondence, collected the addresses of seven or eight people willing to
supply cockroaches at a reasonable price, (4dto 5d per ioo); and, as these are
a most valuable staple for large birds, I think the members of our Society
might be glad to know where they can obtain supplies. I will willingly
send a list of names and addresses of cockroach vendors to anyone enclos¬
ing a stamped envelope for the purpose. Of course I cannot vouch for the
character of all those on my list; but I have found those among them who
have supplied me quite satisfactory. M. Wieeiams.

io, Lansdown Crescent, Bath. (Mrs. Eeseie Wieeiams.)

BUDGERIGARS.

Sir, — It may not be uninteresting to the members of the Avicultural
Society to read the following facts regarding a nest of Budgerigars I have
had during the past season. I had some fourteen or fifteen in an outbuilding,
which I wanted to remove into a large outdoor aviary I had erected, but
one pair had a nest of three young ones which I did not wish to disturb. I
safely removed about half of them, leaving the parents behind to look after
the family^, but in removing the second lot on the following night I was not
so fortunate, for amongst those I caught were the parents of the young birds.
This I did not find out until that night, the following day, and the next
night had passed, then I discovered the poor little things were getting no
food. I cut down the cocoa-nut husk, took it into the new aviary, cut it
open upon the seed table, and awaited the issue. No sooner had I got a fair
distance away than the parents flew to the young ones, and there was a
most comical scene : such fluttering, and kissing, and chattering, as made
it most amusing ; but what I think remarkable was the fact that the young
had been two nights and a day without food, and yet appeared not to have
suffered ; the old birds fed on, and they were quickly able to take care of
themselves. Norman H. Jones.

THE RUFOUS-NECKED WEAVER.

Sir, — Will you tell me the name of a large Weaver (?) bird which I
will endeavour to describe accurately ?

It is nearly twice as large as an Orange Bishop, with strong black
beak, large dark flesh-coloured claws, black head shading off at the neck
to something like the dark colour in the front of a Paradise Whydali’s
neck. The body is yellow with a slight greenish tinge, becoming a little
lighter towards the tail, which is light olive-green. The wings are light
olive-green with darker markings, somewhat like the wings of a Mountain
Finch in the position of the markings. The eyes are red with black or
dark-brown pupils. The size is between a hen Cardinal and a Mountain
Finch. It is very fierce and quarrelsome. Eucy E. Phieeips.

The following reply has been sent to Mrs. Phillips : — •

Your bird is undoubtedly the Rufous - necked Weaver, sometimes
called the Texter Weaver (Hyphantornis cucullatusj. I have kept this
species in an aviary ; its chief interest consists in the marvellous nests
which it weaves. A. G. BuTEER.

THE

BEING THE JOURNAL OF THE

AVICULTURAL SOCIETY.

VOL. II. — NO. 15. JANUARY, 1896.

IDENTIFICATION OF RARE DOVES.

By O. B. Cri3SSWEI.Iv.

I have for several years been interested in the Columbine
tribe. When first I began my collection of Doves I found it
extremely difficult to identify those which I bought of various
importers, and even now I do not by any means find it easy to
do so, though there are only two or three of my stock about
whose corredt names I still have doubts. Why dealers should
be so specially vague about this genus, I cannot pronounce.
Probably it is because the genus is a very large one, and very
widely spread over the earth, and that real study is needed to
gain anything like accurate knowledge of it. There appears,
too, to be no great demand for foreign Doves, and consequently
vendors do not find it worth their while to take much trouble
about them. For those who may be inclined to try this
singularly varied and, as I think, interesting tribe, I may as
well relate three ways in which I have traced birds.

ist. By seeing living named specimens in public collec¬
tions, such as the Regent’s Park Gardens, the Antwerp and
Cologne collections, and the Jardiu d’Acclimatation in Paris.

and. From illustrated and descriptive books, such as
Selby’s volume on “Pigeons,” in the series of Jardine’s
“ Naturalists’ Bibrary,” and the works of Gould, Bevaillaut,
and Temmiuck.

3rd. By examining stuffed specimens in museums, and
especially by looking over some of the large collection of skins
at South Kensington, which, by the courtesy of the Curator of
the Ornithological Department of the British Museum, I have
been allowed to do.

All these three methods of study have, however, some
drawbacks, ist. From the vast number of species in this genus,
and the very slight difference between some of them, one finds
much diversity of nomenclature in different Zoological Societies ;

34

hence some perplexity, which is not diminished by the aforesaid
ignorance of those who import such birds. With some remark¬
able and laudable exceptions, they give, unwittingly, most
misleading information about their origin. Over and over again
I have been offered two birds of different species as cock and
hen of the same. In some cases, few I hope, imaginary names
are assigned to importations, supposed to be attractive to
purchasers. I have quite lately known of an instance in which
a large and unattractive importation were for a time advertised
as “ Bronze-winged Doves from Africa,” and subsequently as
“ Bronze-winged Doves from India.” Of course this diversity
of nomenclature, both on the part of scientific societies and
unscientific vendors, causes much confusion and uncertainty.
It may be said that a practical aviculturist takes pleasure in his
birds apart from their scientific names ; this may be so, but, as
I take it, the great objeCt of our Society is to bring together
those bird-lovers who are scientific and those who are not.
Accurate knowledge of the native climate of any bird helps
towards its proper treatment in captivity ; not to mention
that most of us like to be duly informed of the species we
possess.

2nd. The older ornithologists were addicted to giving very
fantastic names to their discoveries, some of which have stuck
to them. E.g. : Bevaillant, one of the most interesting travellers
and ornithologists of the last century, named a small Dove
which he found in Caffre-laud and elsewhere in South Africa,
the “Emerald Dove,” because, when in full plumage, a tiny
speck with a green gloss is to be found on its wing. The name
survives, but in different colledtious I have found it attributed to
different breeds ; this is not very surprising, because Eevaillant’s
own description of it is at variance with his beautiful illustration
in the 6th vol. of “ Oiseaux d’Afrique.”

3rd. Though much information is to be gathered from the
study of stuffed specimens and preserved skins, there are often
two things lacking, of much importance in the identification of
species :

(a) The corredl colour of eyes.

f bj That of beak and feet.

I11 a preserved skin, the former is, of course, entirely lost ; and
the latter much changed. In the case of many stuffed specimens,
the stuffer has little to guide him beyond the skin itself ; hence
wrong eyes are used,] and incorreCt colour given to beaks and
legs.

35

From this summary of my general difficulties in correct
identification of Doves, I pass to one or two particular enquiries,
in case any member of our Society can help me. I should like,
first, to get any information about the Emerald Dove (Chalcopelia
afraj to which I have already alluded. More than three years
ago I got a pair of Doves as “ Spotted Doves from Brazil,” from
a great importer. The hen survives now in lovely plumage. They
came with various African Doves, and certainly correspond with
Eevaillant’s illustration of the “ Emerald,” and with a stuffed
specimen in the Natural History Museum, but the spots on their
wings have a purple, not a green, gloss ; and their tails, which
Eevaillant describes as “ ires courte et orrondee ” are certainly
neither short nor appreciably rounded. Eevaillant, too,
describes his Emerald Dove as being one-third less than the
Common Turtle : a fairly accurate description of this bird ;
while much smaller Doves which I have, on the Continent,
seen labelled “ Emerald,” are not half the size of the European
Turtle.

Then I have for years possessed a great favourite : a tiny,
short-tailed and short-legged Dove, which came in the same lot
as the bird I have described, with Tambourines and others. The
vendor sent it as a Schlegel’s Dove, of which it is not half the
size ; and when I repudiated this name for it, said it must then
be an Emerald Dove, and came from S. W. Africa. I put no
great confidence in his knowledge : for when he advertised
Emerald Doves, since, and I wrote for some, he only sent me
small Brazilian Zenaidas, which I know well, and sent back.
This little bird is of a generally bronzy and vinaceous colour, has
a bluish head, red beak and feet, and tiny brilliant green spots
on the wings. Its figure resembles Eevaillaut’s illustration of
what he fantastically calls the Columbe Caille. I have never
seen but this one, and two others which came with it in
miserable condition and soon died.

There is another Dove about which I would say a word.
In our own Zoological collection, at Regent’s Park, it is called
the Vinaceous Turtle — not a very appropriate name for a bird
whose hues are chiefly pink and blue. It is the size of a
Barbary Turtle, hardy and attractive. All over the Continent
it is called the Senegal Turtle : not inaptly, as it seems common
in Western Africa. Eevaillant has a charming illustration of
it as Tozirterelle Maillee, from the fancied resemblance of its
breast - markings to mail. Why it should have been named
Vinaceous by our Zoological Society, I should like to know.

36

Lastly, there is a Dove largely imported from Africa, and
sold under many names. In plumage it is almost identical with
the Barbary Turtle, though the neck-ring is rather thicker at the
back and does not come quite so far forwards. In size it is
slightly less ; but the real distinction is in the eye, which is
large and entirely dark, instead of having the brilliant red iris of
the Barbary Turtle. This Dove I have always believed to be the
Half-Collared Turtle ( Turtur semitorquatics ) ; the other names
under which I have known them sold are absurd and entirely
made up for sale. However, not long ago a distinguished
aviculturist, who presumably should know, assured me that
some far larger Doves which he had (Cambayau I fancy) were
“ half-collared.” Am I right or wrong in the name which, in
all good faith, I have assigned to this Turtle?

RARE FOREIGN BIRDS.

(SECOND SERIES)

II.— THE GREEN MALABAR HONEYSUCKER.

Phyllornis aurifrons.

By C. S. Simpson.

Of the somewhat large number of foreign birds which
have at various times lived in my collection, not one was more
beloved nor is more regretted than a beautiful specimen of the
Green Malabar Honeysucker which I obtained in the summer of
1893, and which came to an untimely end in one of my aviaries
a short time ago.

There is indeed no cage bird which combines more charm¬
ing and attractive traits than this species, which is usually
(though wrongly) known in this country as the Green Bulbul.

The Malabar Honeysucker is a native of India ; the
specimens which reach England are few and far between, and
are readily purchased at high prices by amateurs on their
arrival : it is therefore very seldom that one is to be seen for
sale.

This bird is singularly beautiful in colour, and, unlike
many birds of gorgeous plumage, has a very pleasing song ; it
readily becomes tame and familiar, and with reasonable care will
preserve its health and beauty for years in captivity ; it is by no
means difficult to cater for, and is not very susceptible to changes
of temperature. And, since there is no undesirable quality as a
set-off to these amiable traits the subjeCt of my article deservedly

37

occupies a very high rank among the aristocracy of the bird-
room.

The Green Malabar Honeysuclcer measures about seven
inches in length, and the prevailing colour of the adult male is a
bright grass green ; the forehead is bright orange ; the chin and
throat purple, surrounded by a rather broad band of black, and
a small patch of the most brilliant metallic blue appears at the
bend of the wing. The body is stout, and the tail short and
square, but the head and neck are slender ; the beak is long,
slender, and gently curved, and the long narrow tongue is
admirably adapted for insertion into flowers, and is indeed con¬
stantly in use exploring any objedt which may be presented to
the bird. The legs and feet are short, stout, and of a pale grey
colour : they are evidently intended for an arboreal life, for the
bird hardly ever comes to the ground, and I never saw my
specimen either run or hop. It has no crest, thereby differing
from the true Bulbuls, all of which are crested.

Though I prefer aviaries to cages as a general rule, there
are some birds which appear to adapt themselves more readily to
the latter, and among these I should be inclined to class the
subjedt of the present article. My Malabar Honeysucker
occupied a large cage for the greater part of the time that I
had him, and I shall never cease to regret turning him into an
aviary with other birds. A large cage, however, is absolutely
necessary, for the bird is very adtive, and as its plumage is
peculiarly soft and the feathers easily broken, it requires a good
deal of room. Its powers of flight are rather feeble, and as it is
somewhat timid and defenceless when attacked by other birds,
while it becomes most tame and affedtionate towards its owner, it
is far happier in a cage in its master’s study than in the com¬
paratively free life of the aviary.

The Malabar Honeysucker is very fond of bathing, but
never remains in the water splashing about as many birds d6 :
on the contrary it makes a series of rapid dashes through its
bath, in at one side and out at the other, the very soft plumage
quickty becoming saturated, so that the bird is unable to fly, and
is obliged to seek its lowest perch to preen and dry itself, for
nothing will induce it to remain on the floor of its cage.

In its diet it is both insectivorous and frugivorous : it will
consume quite a surprising quantity of pears, bananas, and other
soft fruits, which it prefers in a somewhat over-ripe condition :
it is extremely fond of mealworms, which it catches cleverly
when thrown towards it : bread and milk is also relished, and

38

ants’ cocoons (fresh when possible) and preserved yolk of egg
will complete the dietary.

As I said before a large cage is necessary, and, as with all
fruit-eating birds, a metal tray should be used and covered with
a good layer of sawdust, which may be renewed daily.

The Malabar Honeysucker has a pleasing song of its own,
but it is also an excellent mimic, and in the bird-room it soon
learns to mingle the notes of its companions with its natural
song. Its disposition is nervous and excitable : it soon becomes
tame and confiding towards its master, and may readily be taught
to perch on the finger and feed from the hand, but it fears
strangers and is easily terrified.

My poor bird came to a sad end : I turned him into a
small indoor aviary with some other birds, among which was a
black and yellow Troupial. All went well for a few days, but
one morning I found the Honeysucker dead and mangled on the
floor, and the Troupial eagerly tearing the body of his victim to
pieces. The murderer was removed and placed in the Parrakeet’s
aviary where he lived for some months, but he finally fell a victim
to his vicious propensities, for he attacked a Purple-capped Tory
with fatal result to himself. Had the Malabar Honeysucker
remained in his cage, he would probably be alive and happy
now.

MILLET.

By E. G. Salt, T.R.C.P., Etc.

MILLET — genus '■ Panicece,” order “ Graminece."

French “ Millet ” — Italian “ Miglietto,” diminutive of “ Miglio."

Latin “ Mille," a thousand, in allusion to its fertility.

(i) The true millet generally admitted to be “ Panicum ”
( Setarici ) miliaceum — German “ Hirse” mentioned by Hippoc¬
rates and Theophrastus as already cultivated in South Europe
in their time. It is an annual, grows in sandy soil, and reaches
three or four feet high ; characterized by its bristly, much-
branched, nodding panicles ; a native of India and Africa, but
is now extensively cultivated in Southern Europe, Southern
States, and N. America. The seed is very small, about the size of a
large pin’s head, white and very glossy ; but though small it is
an important article of human food, particularly in Africa,
where, with “ Sorghum ” (Indian millet or guinea-corn), it is the
principal support of the Negro population.

39

In India it is chiefly used in a kind of soup or bouillie , and
is made into cakes. The natives grind it in a primitive manner
between two stones, and make it into a diet which cannot
properly be called bread, but rather a kind of soft thin cake half
baked.

In Java it is called “ Jawa-nut” and in India called
“ Warree ” and “ Rade-kaneR

There are several varieties of this, distinguished by grey,
white, red, and black seeds.

This is the smallest seeded variety, but the number of
seeds in each ear make up for its small size.

(2) Italian Millet ( Setaria Italica ) or Great Indian
Millet was brought originally from India, where it is called
“ Kungoo” or “ ICora-bang.” It is now cutivated in Egypt,
Nubia, and the warmer parts of Southern Europe, and used as
an article of food for the poor population, as well as being used
for the fermentation of beer. It is also employed for making
pastry and puddings, and used for feeding horses and domestic
fowls. This plant is an annual and the largest variety ; grows
in a poor soil but requires a warm climate, not ripening in this
country ; it reaches from four to six feet high and is most
prolific in its produce : one spike yielding as much as two
ounces of seed, one stem produces many stalks. Its produce
is estimated at from five to ten times more than that of wheat,
The seeds are small, round, and white, enveloped in a thin,
pellucid skin which is very easily removed. In some parts of
the South of France, Italy, and Spain it is largely consumed by
the poor : who boil the seeds along with vegetables, add a piece
of butter or lard, season with salt and pepper, and thus make an
acceptable meal ; it is alimentary in this form, but makes a
heavy, coarse, and disagreeable bread.

(3) German Millet (Setaria Gervianica) or Mohar —
German “ Kolbenhirse" — probably a less valuable and dwarf
variety of the Italian Millet ; this is a small-seeded variety, but
is extremely productive. Formerly grown in Germany and used,
as a bread-corn, but its use in this way has been long dis¬
continued. It is largely grown in Hungary as green food for
cattle and particularly for horses, who prefer it to all other green
food.

The Common, Italian, and German Millet are largely
imported to this country, and mostly used as bird seeds.

40

MR. 0. E. CRESSWELL’S ARTICLE ON HIS
PARRAKEETS, IN THE “ FEATHERED WORLD.”

A CRITICISM.

By V. CasteuAn.

No doubt the readers of the Avicultural Magazine , who
are at the same time readers of the Feathered World, have read
with much interest Mr. O. E. Cresswell’s recent article on
his Parrakeets. I, for one, have done so with great pleasure, and
I think it is a great pity that more of our aviculturists do not
come forward and give us their experience of birds they have
kept. I am, therefore, all the more sorry to have to find fault
with so instructive an article ; but Mr. Cresswell has made one
rather grave error in classification which I should like to point
out. In the third and last portion of his article is the paragraph
wherein the error occurs, and which I will quote, with his kind
permission. When speaking of his Lovebirds, he says :

“ Last, and least in size, but not in interest to me, at least,
of all my Parrot flock are the Lovebirds. The genus Agapornis
is a very large one, and is distributed over South Eastern Asia
and the adjacent Islands, East and West Africa, and Madagascar,
and one species, at least, is a native of South America. These
varieties are fairly common in English aviaries : the Red-faced
or West African, the Grey-headed or Madagascar, and the Blue¬
winged or Passerine Parrot of Brazil. I fancy these three are
barely a tithe of the species which have been found. I know
not of any collective list of the genus, which would be of great
interest.”

Mr. Cresswell’s mistake is this : he says that the Blue¬
winged or Passerine Parrot belongs to the genus Agapornis ; this
is wrong, for scientifically speaking this species is not one of
the Lovebirds at all, although it bears a close resemblance to
them. Whereas the genus Agapornis, or Lovebirds proper,
belong to the sub-family Palceoi'nithince of the family Psittacidcz,
on the other hand the Passerine Parrots belong to the sub-family
Conurince and to the genus Psittacula. Again, he is wrong in
his description of their distribution ; for the genus Agapornis
is entirely restricted to Africa South of the Sahara, and
Madagascar, although they have been introduced into the
Mascarene Islands: and therefore its members are not in¬
habitants of South America or South-Eastern Asia and the
adjacent Islands. The genus Psittacula is confined to South
America, and the Blue-winged Parrotlets range from Mexico to
Bolivia and Brazil.

4i

What Parrots he is thinking of, when referring to Love¬
birds, whom he mentions as living in South-Eastern Asia and
the adjacent Islands, I do not know; unless it is the sub-family
Nasiternince, or Pigmy Parrots, which live in New Guinea, and
which have never been brought alive to England ; or the genus
Loriculus, or Hanging Parrots, which range from India and the
Philippine Islands through the Malayan region. Neither of
the above two groups have any connection with the genus
Agapornis.

The members of the latter genus may be distinguished
from those of the genus Psittcicula b}^ their rounded instead of
pointed tail feathers. The two genera also differ from one
another in their nesting. The Parrotlets nest in holes and lay
their eggs on the bare wood ; but the Lovebirds take possession
of the nests of other birds, such as Weavers, for their own
use. Those who have been fortunate enough to breed them
in captivity tell us that they line their nests with twigs, bits
of straw and bark, etc., which the hens carry up to their nest-
boxes by putting them between the feathers of their rump.

The confusion between the two genera has arisen on
account of their small size (the Parrotlets being the smaller) ;
and also on account of their both having short tails : in which
respect they differ from all the other species in their respective
sub-families. Internally they also resemble one another, in that,
in the skeletons of both, the furcula is absent.

The genus Agapornis only contains seven species, so that
it cannot be called a very large one.

There is an interesting fact concerning the Parrotlets,
which has come to my knowledge just recently. A gentleman
of my acquaintance tells me that he has kept a Blue-winged
Parrotlet eighteen months in a cage by himself ; whereas, we
have been told that these birds will only live in pairs.

I am glad I have had an opportunity of pointing out, and,
I hope, correcting these very common mistakes ; at the same
time, I must again apologize to Mr. Cresswell for having
criticised his article, but it is only pro bono publico , and for
that reason I crave his pardon.

A REPLY.

By O. E. Cresswepp.

I should like to write a few lines in answer to Mr.
Castellan’s friendly criticism of a paragraph in my article on
my Parrakeets, in the Feathered World.

42

The said article was written under great pressure for time ;
though eventually cut up by the Editor into a series of articles,
it was written by request as one, for a special number, and that
almost at a sitting. It was solely intended to be popular
for a popular paper ; and, barring the Parrot volume of the
“ Naturalist’s Library,” I had no books at hand. I quite own
that under these circumstances it would have been better not to
allude to classification ; and I stand corrected by Mr. Castellan’s
superior scientific knowledge as to the commonly called “ Love¬
birds ” belonging to three, not one, scientific genus. He asks
what Parrots I was thinking of as coming from South-Eastern
Asia and the adjacent Islands. I was thinking of tiny Parrots
which I have personally known at different times, some brought
from Ceylon and some from, I believe, the Malay Peninsula,
and which, in form and voice, greatly resemble the true African
Lovebirds (. Agapornis ).

Mr. Castellan doubtless refers to the newest classification
of the Zoological Society of England, which I presume for
convenience sake we must all follow. The best collection of
small stuffed Parrots that I have ever seen is at Basle, where,
according to my notes, a very different classification is accepted.
I quite see that in habits there is a real distinction between the
Asiatic tiny Parrots and the true African Lovebirds ; but though
it may be presumptuous for a practical aviculturist to criticise
scientific definitions, and I find much inconvenience from such
ornithologists as Levaillant and Temminck having despised
classification in a scientific sense, still I must say that it seems
to me very strange to find the little South American Passerine
Parrot placed in a totally different genus from the African
Lovebirds. I watch my birds very carefully, and have observed
the closest similarity between the Red-headed Lovebird and the
Passerine Parrot. Every note, every motion and attitude is alike,
and I am told they readily pair together. On the other hand,
the Madagascar Lovebird, placed in the genus Agapornis with
the other Africans, is in voice and manners very different.

I can only repeat what in other words I said in the
Feathered World, that anything like a complete list of the
miniature Parrots would be most interesting, ; and, with his
evident great knowledge of the Parrot tribe, perhaps Mr.
Castellan would, in some number of our Magazine, favour us
with at least an outline of a list of them, so far as discovery
has gone.

43

REVIEWS.

Foreign Finches in Captivity , by Arthur G. Butler , Ph.D., etc.,
(L. Reeve & Co., 6, Henrietta Street, Covent Garden) . Part VI.

The present part contains descriptions and coloured plates
of some of the most charming and popular of the Grass Finches,
commencing with the Parrot Finch, the Pintailed Nonpareil,
and the Gouldian Finches. The coloured plates of all these
species are excellent, and the letter-press is as interesting and
as reliable as that of the preceding numbers. An account of the
nesting of the Red-headed Gouldian Finch, from the pen of
Mr. Reginald Phillipps, will be read with very special interest.
The fadts bearing on the true relationship of the Red-headed and
Black-headed Gouldians are clearly and intelligently discussed
by Dr. Butler, in a style which might well be copied by some of
our dogmatic avicultural writers.

The descriptions and illustrations of the Parson Finch and
Diamond Sparrow are good : the male of the latter is represented
performing his ridiculous love dance. An account of the Ribbon
Finch follows (we prefer the old-fashioned and more descriptive
name of Cut-throat Finch), and a very pretty plate of the Zebra
Finch concludes the number. We think the artist has hardly
done justice to the perky, alert appearance of the latter bird.

Birds, Beasts , a?id Fishes of the Norfolk Broadland,
by P. H. Emerson. (David Nutt, 270-71, Strand).

This is mainly a book on birds, for the beasts and fishes
together occupy less than one-fifth of its four hundred pages.

There is a good deal of truth in Mr. Emerson's condem¬
nation of the illustrations which disfigure most works on
ornithology ; but his strictures are rather too sweeping- — he
weakens his case by overstating it.

Our author is very complimentary to Sir Ralph Payne-
Galway and the late Mr. Booth ; and very severe on Gilbert
White, Richard Jeffries, and “ A Son of the Marshes.” White’s
reputation is too firmly established to be affedted by anything
that Mr. Emerson can say, and Jeffries also has, by this time,
attained a position almost above criticism — but it seems to us a
mistake, in the Preface to a work of this kind, for the author to
endeavour to discredit his great predecessors, and rather bad
taste to speak disparagingly of a contemporary writer of the
same style of literature.

Perhaps we shall best enable our readers to form an idea
of this book if we give in full the chapter on the Goldfinch.

44

We do not for a moment agree with Mr. Emerson’s opinion that
the Goldfinch is “ ill-shapen ” and “bad-tempered,” nor do we
pledge ourselves to any of his other notions.

“The Goldfinch or ‘draw-water’ is not a bird of graceful build nor
sweet song, yet is he dear to the Philistine who loves variegated colours,
because he satisfies a rude barbaric taste for colour : for he is a “ gay bird,”
and he is great at parlour tricks, like his lover : for cannot he draw his water
and seed to his cage by a simple mechanical contrivance ? And so he
delights the populace, as do the performing elephant and the contortionist.

“And of our cage-birds he seems most ill at ease, and is perpetually
rushing from one side of the cage to the other, and if he be given half a
chance he will escape, for he is a quick and swift flyer, and returns to the
marsh, where in sooth he is seen at his best; for at a distance, flitting
restlessly with quick jumps from thistle to gorse - bush in the bright
sunshine, he delights the eye, for ’tis an ever-shifting ball of colour flitting
over the sere marsh-crops ; but when you come to regard him in a cage,
you find him ill-shapen, restless, bad-tempered, an indifferent musician, a
mountebank and imitator, and a lover of rude noises, for he sings never
so sweetly as when a millman’s engine is rattling, pumping forth the marsh
water into the rivers.

“However, he has taste when building his nursery, for he generally
chooses a fruit - tree, preferably an apple, covered with madder - tinged
blossom ; for though he pairs very early in the spring, he does not begin to
build till the middle of May. In some mossy crook he builds his neat
small cradle of moss, and he is a good husband, taking his turn at sitting
and feeding the young with flies and maggots.

“ Though shy birds, if robbed of their young they are very bold ; and
I have known them go regularly into a cottage to feed the captive young in
a cage ; the cage was moved by degrees from the nesting-tree to the cottage
table — an interval of a da)' elapsing between each stage. On the other
hand, if captured when old, they will often sulk to death, or “ die of
sulking,” as the fenmen say.

“There is a superstition amongst cottagers, that if the young
birds die, the old birds have poisoned them ; but the mystery is generally
to be explained by looking into the seed-dish, when pure hemp will be
found — a seed fatal to young birds.

“In autumn they collect in small flocks, and may be seen beating the
thistly marshes, or flashing over the snow in mid-winter, when they look at
their best, and indeed are then very tame and can almost be taken by the
hand.

“But they are becoming rare in the Broad district, and though they
may be seen on the marshlands and in the elms and cars by the river-side,
it is not an everyday picture.

“The sentimentalist, whose heart is often better than his head, often
raises an outcry against caging birds ; but if the young bird is taken from
its nest before it recognises its parents, there is no cruelty in the matter,
for they never know the doubtful sweets and dangers of bird liberty, and
will at times, if they escape, return of their own free will to their “ prison.”
Should you wish to take young birds for the cage, you must watch your
brood every day ; and so long as these formless creatures upon your
appearance stretch forth their ugly necks and open their mouths for food

45

on your approach, so long they are ignorant of their parents, for ’tis a mere
reflex action. For when they begin “to take notice,” the ugly maw is no
longer opened at your approach. You must not, however, wait for that
period of development, but take them just before, when they are fledged.
Seize them boldly, forgetful of the sentimentalist, and cage them, placing
the cage on a stout branch near the nest, and the old birds will feed them.

“ A few hours later you may move them up the whitethorn decorated
lane for a couple of hundred yards, and so on tip to half a mile, but no
farther, in one day — that is a young Goldfinch’s infant day’s journey. So
by degrees you decoy the parents into your garden. When the parents get
tired of feeding your captives, make pills of eggs and flour, and give them
together with plantain-seeds and thistle tops ; and so you shall educate
them to sing when you blow your slender lire with the bellows; and, if you
be a woman, destitute of human lovers, you may teach the little brown-
billed bird to kiss you — but a man’s kiss is preferable.

“Unless you wish him to sing another’s song, for he is of the mean
tribe of plagiarists, keep him, when young, out of the hearing of other
birds, as he, like many a human parrot, prefers the songs of others to his
own. But for any purpose whatsoever, I do not think his company is
worth his keep.”

Mr. Emerson’s style is attractive in spite of sundry
irritating affectations, and he is evident^ a diligent student
of nature and no mere retailer of second-hand facts. The
illustrations are all from photographs, and many of them are
exceedingly good.

The author’s habit of heading his chapters with the local
East Anglian names of the birds, is most confusing. The
average reader cannot be expected to know that “ Firetail ” is
Norfolk for Redstart, “Herring-spink ” for Golden-crested Wren,
“ Reed-pheasant ” for Bearded-tit, “ Spinx ” for Chaffinch, and
“ Gool-finch ” for Yellowhammer.

The autumn fights between the old and young cock
Robins are well known, but it is new to us to read that in these
contests it is almost invariably the father Robin who comes off
second-best. The battles frequently end in the death of one of
the combatants, and Mr. Emerson has been assured by many
an old Broadsman that the bodies left on the field are alwaj^s
those of old birds.

It seems that birds on their migration, captured on board
fishing smacks, are found to suffer at first from sea-sickness, and
throw up their food. But, like human voyagers, they speedily
recover from the complaint, and feed heartily.

The following account of the nesting of that rare bird,
the Bearded Tit, is in Mr. Emerson’s best style.

“ You may find as many as nine eggs in a nest, but five is the more
usual number; and they will, if robbed, build five or six nests in a season,
moreover, and not far from the spot where the first cradle was lodged. Nine
days suffice for those little architects to complete a new home, which is

46

nearly always built of reed-leaf and featlier ; but I have seen nests built of

litter and lined with fine grass . The fenmen who gather the

nestlings mow a circle round the nest before the eggs are hatched off, and
net the place with an old piece of herring lint ; for the birds seldom build
over water, though the}' dearly love a hover that rises aud falls with the
tide, and perhaps that may account for their long nests. And when the
hatchings are a week old, the bird-catchers drop into the reed-jungle and
make a dash for the nest. The young birds tumble out like mice aud make
for the ground, and the fenmen catch them in the mowed space before they
have time to reach the protecting reed-brakes, and afterwards they are
reared by hand and kept as cage-birds, and they are wonderfully fast growing
birds. Indeed, the eggs are hatched in eight days and the young can fly in

a fortnight . In winter the Reed-pheasants gather together

in flocks, each numbering fifteen or twenty, and you may see them rise
from the reed on a bright winter’s day, chinging, flying up some yards into
the blue, and suddenly throwing themselves down headlong into the yellow
reed-bed to feast upon the insects therein. They are cheery companions to
the solitary reed-cutter as he works boot-deep in the icy water. He often
sees them run along the fallen amber stalks, moving like a Wagtail, with
tail held straight out behind, picking insects from the water. Aud the
fentnan knows they build close by, for they never wander far from the
place where they were bred and born.”

The extracts we have given show that Mr. Emerson has
no prejndice against keeping birds in captivity, and that he is
quite free from the cant aud sentiment on the subject with
which a good many writers on our native wild birds are afflidted.
“ Birds, Beasts, and Fishes ” is a book which we can heartily
recommend to our readers.

CORRESPONDENCE.

BREEDING GREY PARROTS.

Sir, — Plas any one of our Society ever bred Grey Parrots? If so,
would they kindly tell me how they set to work ? F. G. Dutton.

GOULDIAN FINCHES.

Sir, — Those of your readers who are interested in the charming
Gouldiau Finches, of both forms, may care to hear my experiences of the
past breeding season.

I turned out two pairs of Black-heads and one pair of Red-heads into
an uuheated garden aviary, on the 24th June, when they had almost
completed the moult, a few head and neck feathers only being in the blood.

One of the pairs of Black-heads had reared young last year in the
same aviary, which is well furnished with shrubs, and nest-boxes in the
covered portion. A cocoa-nut husk and a small wooden box were jaresently
occupied, and almost filled with dry grass bents, by the two pair of Black¬
heads. The lieu Redhead appeared delicate from the first, and later on,
died ; while her mate, apparently without exciting any opposition, visited
both nests, and indeed, if I missed him, I could generally find him by
taking dowii one or other of the nest-boxes off its nail. As last year,
I noticed that the chief burden of incubation, and even of feeding the

47

young, fell to the male birds’ share : the hen starting a second clutch as
soon as the young left the nest. Early in August I went from home,
leaving a brood of young in each of the two nests. Unluckily, at this time
an invasion of mice occurred, and before the offenders were caught, the hen
belonging to one nest was killed, and the young were forsaken and died.
The nests were out of reach of the little pests; but the cock bird of the
second nest was somehow caught (at roost I suppose) and his thigh broken.
In spite of this severe injury, the heroic little bird brought up his brood
single-handed ; his mate going to nest again, though the eggs, as might be
expected, proved unfertile. As a result, at the beginning of October, I
caged, besides the adults, five healthy juveniles in the pretty olive grey of
the first plumage.

And now I come to the point which really suggested this letter.
Judging from what occurred last year, the young will not come into full
colour until next May or June ; but during the first winter slight changes
occur, commencing with the appearance of the feathers of the cap. To
my surprise, while his companions are shewing a few black feathers on
their heads, one little fellow has already assumed such a brilliant patch of
scarlet, that there can be no doubt that he will in due course become a
Red-liead, and also that, like, I believe, three of the other young birds, he is
of the male persuasion. How this is to be accounted for, I cannot say;
but it seems to point to one of two things : Either the young bird with
the red cap is the outcome of something more than a Platonic affeCtion
between the black-headed hen, the owner of the nest, and the unattached
red-headed cock — in which case thepurity of the scarlet seems rather strange —
or, if he is really the genuine offspring of parents both black-headed, it goes to
prove that both forms may occur in the same brood : which, though I believe
is suspected, has, so far as I know, not been definitely proved. That a stray
egg was not laid in the nest by the red-headed hen, I feel sure : for she
never appeared either to notice her mate, or to show any interest in the
nesting operations going on around her, and, as I have above said, she soon
drooped and died. W. H. ST. OuinTin.

IS GRIT DANGEROUS TO NEWLY IMPORTED PARROTS ?

Mr. Dutton’s correspondent was doubtless right as to his facts, but
quite wrong, I venture to think, in the conclusions which he drew from the
faCts.

I have more than once come across the condition described : the
gizzard, on opening the abdomen, presenting the appearance of a solid
tumour of stony hardness, filling up the greater part of the abdominal
cavit}'. When laid open, the gizzard was found to be completely filled with
a mass of grit and sand welded together into a solid lump, causing, of
course, a complete obstruction.

The correCt explanation of this condition I believe to be as follows :
It is well known that the function of the grit swallowed by birds is to aid
digestion, and that want of grit is a common cause of indigestion. Birds
deprived of this material during a more or less lengthy voyage, suffer from
indigestion, and, when the grit is at length supplied, are apt to swallow it
greedily and too freely. It is easy to imagine that an obstruction may thus
be caused, and that the discomfort to which th s condition gives rise leads
the bird instinctively to swallow more and more grit with the object of
relieving its suffering, giving rise at last to the condition described above,
and the speedy death of the patient.

48

That grit, in itself, is not injurious to parrots is proved by the fact
that they habitually swallow it with only beneficial effects ; but it is highly
probable that it is injudicious to supply it too freely to birds which
have been previously deprived of it for some time. Many experienced
aviculturists are fully alive to this fact and supply only very fine grit,
and that sparingly, to newly imported birds. This I think is the right
conclusion to draw from the facts given by Mr. Dutton’s correspondent ;
not that grit is injurious in itself. C. S. Simpson.

THE SONG OF THE GREENFINCH.

Sir, — In his article on Grosbeaks, in the Magazine for December
(p. 24), Mr. Fillmer says of the Greenfinch— “ It possesses no song.” I
have written to him on the subject, and he wishes me to contradict him.

I have, from time to time, caught and kept a good many Greenfinches,
and their performances have varied considerably ; but, if kept alone, I have
always found that a cock bird sang in the spring-time. This is also the case
when a pair is kept in an aviary; for then the male bird sings to his mate,
and there is no difficulty in breeding if an ordinary Canary nest-box is hung
up and material provided for the hen to build with. One cock bird which I
caught sang out industriously for many months in the year, its song being
equal to that of the ordinary Norwich Canary, but more powerful, and
interrupted, after the manner of its kind, by the frequent interjection of its
harsh and unpleasant call-note : a guttural sort of churrr.

I have, on several occasions, heard wild Greenfinches, in the open
country, sing equally well to that example of mine ; and once, in Norfolk,
I heard one singing even better.

The worst of keeping Greenfinches in the neighbourhood of Canaries
is — that the young Canaries invariably copy the Greenfinch song with all
its blemishes. Apart from the call-note, I consider the performance far
superior to the chuckling song of the Linnet, or the wheats, wheak, song (no
pun is intended) of the Goldfinch.

Seebohm fairly describes it thus : “There is nothing very striking in
its music — it is a song which bears some resemblance to that of an inferior
Canary ; and it is only when several birds are singing in chorus that
their notes are at all attractive.” I don’t quite agree with his last sentence ;
I think the song, when heard in the country, is verj’ enlivening. Howard
Saunders says that “the song is poor,” but he admits that, in confinement,
it “ shows a moderate capacit}-' for learning the songs of other birds.”

Two male Greenfinches in the same aviary are ususalty too much
occupied in fighting to think about singing. A. G. Buttlr.

THE BIRD SHOW AT THE ROYAL AQUARIUM.

Sir, — I am very sorry to see Dr. Williamson’s account of the
Aquarium Show.

I think one good 3'early Show for Parrots much to be desired. The
Cr3'stal Palace would supply the want, if it were not held in Februar3r.
I was hoping the Aquarium might do it, and that our Society might help to
provide classes. But after Dr. AVilliamson’s report it is quite clear that
idea must be given up. No smoking ought to be allowed at any Bird Show.

F. G. Dutton.

THE

Hvtcultural ®a$a3tne,

BEING THE JOURNAL OF THE

AVICULTURAL SOCIETY.

VOL. I!.— No. IS.

FEBRUARY, 1896.

THE LOVE-BIRD.

By Reginald Philupps.

I am glad to see that Mr. Castellan has transferred
the case of the Rove -bird front the Feathered World to the
Aviciiltural Magazine . There are not a few who seem to call
any small member (including the Budgerigar) of the Parrot
family, irrespective of genus, colouring, or habits, a Rove-bird,
so that the title has become meaningless ; and I have long felt
that it would be better in every way if it were reserved for the
Agapornes, the genus most entitled to it. The Agapornes may
claim the title by right of birth, for they inherit it from their
forefathers; and although over - truthful people have rudely
shaken the popular belief that if one of a pair die the other will
follow’ suit, yet do they not exhibit their tender love and
devotion in another way ? and should we not ungrudgingly
award the title to them as the reward of merit, and as a
mark of distinction above their fellows ? With possibly only
the remarkable exception of the Grey - breasted Parrakeet
( Myopsittacus monachusj, of all the members of the Parrot
family the Agapornes alone make nests for their young, the
others laying their eggs on the bare wood, soil, or stone, and
not carrying to their nests even one single twig, straw, or feather,
to help to make their babies comfortable.

Of the seven species of the Agapornes, living specimens of
Agapornis taranta, A. fischeri, A. persofiata, and A. swindeixniana
are practically unknown to present-day aviculturists. Another,
A. pullaria, the familiar Red-faced Rove-bird, has not, I believe,
ever been known to have nested in captivity. In consideration
of the importance of the statement made by Mr. Cresswell that
he has been told that this bird and the Blue- winged Parrakeet
readily pair together, I think we are justified in inviting that
gentleman to obtain and furnish particulars of at least one well-

50

authenticated instance of such an intermarriage having taken
place. Of these five, we may expect that they will nest much like
the two species which yet remain to be mentioned ; and we can
only hope that, when their manner of nidification comes to be
revealed, it will be found that they have not belied the title
which I hope will now be accorded to the Agapornes, and to the
Agapornes alone.

Of the Red-faced Rove- bird, the Madagascar, A. cana, and
the Peach- or Rosy-faced, A. roseicollis, I may say that, however
spitefully they may behave towards other birds and extra
members of their own species, in a suitable aviary they are,
as a rule, very loving and affectionate towards their mates ;
but the last two have also betrayed to us the ingrained
devoted and exceptional character of the Love-bird, not only by
making right down comfortable nests for their young, but also
by carrying the material to the nesting-places in a way which is
unique among the feathered creation, and by bestowing an
amount of pains-taking and labour upon the work which, being
carried on single-handed, eclipses the proverbial industry of the
ant and the bee.

I must here pause for a moment to bring to the front
a statement of Mr. Castellan which appears in the second
paragraph at page 41 : — “ The Love-birds take possession of the
nests of other birds, such as Weavers, for their own use.” If
the reference to the Weavers’ nests had been included in the
next sentence, and quoted along with the other unnatural modes
of the nesting of the Love-bird in captivity, I could have
understood it ; as it stands, it is to me incomprehensible ; and
I should be exceedingly obliged if he will give his authority tor
the statement. The rest of the sentence I have quoted may have
been taken from the Royal Natural History ; but I feel strongly
that the writer mentioned in that work made the statement
under a misapprehension, of which more anon.

It was with a light heart that I took up my pen to write
this article, but it has just occurred to me that it might be wise
to refer to my bird-journal. Here I find notes on the nesting
of A. roseicollis, a daily record extending over a period of some
two years, so voluminous that I must confess myself nonplused,
being quite unequal to the task of putting them into a shape
suitable for the Avicultural Magazine in the short time that I
find at my disposal ; I propose, therefore, to hold over the
account of the nesting of this bird for a future occasion, and
will now confine myself to a few general remarks.

5i

The nesting habits of the Madagascar Love-bird have
more than once been described ; it is sufficient to say that, on the
whole, they appear to be identical with those of the Rosy-face.
Some years ago I had three pairs, one mostly in the house, the
others mostly in the garden. These birds were wilder and more
timid than the Rosy-face, and not nearly so ready to go to nest.
When they did do so, they became so savage and aggressive that I was
obliged to get rid of them. Those in the garden always roosted
in a balsam poplar, the four sitting side by side, when it was
most difficult to detect them amidst the green leaves. Unlike the
Rosy-face, for nesting purposes these confined their attentions
to a lime tree. The cock-of-the-walk sat a good deal alone,
singing connectedly and continuously ; neither of the other
males sang. I should judge that in their native country they
would keep in flocks, separating during the breeding season.
When going to feed, they fly down one after another, at intervals
of a few seconds. Sometimes, both in manner of flight and
accompanying call, they reminded me forcibly of the Common
Sandpiper. In Mauritius, they are simply known as Ra
Perruche.

The flight of the Rosy-faced Rove-bird is like that of an
English Partridge, the bird going off strong and straight, and
with a whir-r-r when put up, but usually ending with a sail on
out-stretclied pinions. When first imported, the male has
usually more colour on the face than the female ; but, when
an old well-kept pair are in a small cage, to distinguish the sex
with certainty by a cursory examination is often impossible.
With A. cana and A.fiullaria, the sexes are readily distinguish¬
able ; I refer to this, as an article in the Feathered World some
months back made a direct statement to the contrary as regards
the latter.

Mr. Cresswell refers to a likeness he sees between the
Red-faced Love-bird and the Blue-winged Parrakeet. Besides
the points of difference mentioned by Mr. Castellan — the pointed
tail feathers and the non-loving nesting arrangements of the
Parrakeet — I may point out that the bands on the tail feathers
of the Red-face are well marked, while they do not appear at all in
the Blue-wing. In their habits I have not myself noticed a
likeness, excepting, perhaps, when they are kept in small cages ;
but in large places I notice many points of difference. The voices
of my specimens are alike only in the sense that they both consist
of little more than gentle and pleasing twitterings. The war
notes of my Blue-wings differ from any sound I have ever heard

52

littered by the Red-faces; and their ordinary notes when on the
wing are much more like those of some of the Wagtails than
of those of the Love-bird. The twitterings of a good Red-faced
male, when alone with his wife in a suitable home , or when head
of a flock, are often so connected and so continuous as to be
worthy of being called a song ; they sing too by artificial light,
and even in the dark. They will also climb down and feed
when in almost total darkness, while the Blue-wings rarely move
from their perches after dusk, even by artificial light. And then
we are told as a point of distinction between the Red-face and
the Blue-wing that, in the former but not in the latter, the “ deep
beak has no ridge along the interior surface of the symphysis of
its lower mandible.” The force of language can no further go :
surely this will settle the matter to the complete satisfaction of
everybody. -f

RARE FOREIGN BIRDS.

(SECOND SERIES).

Ill— THE MOORISH HOUSE BUNTING.

Fringillaria saharce.

By E. G. B. Meade-Waedo.

This little Bunting is, I fancy, practically unknown as a
cage bird ; and probably would not be popular if known, as it is
an unobtrusive little bird without any brilliancy of colouring.
Its charm consisting principally in its extreme familiarity, both
in its wild state and in an aviary ; also in that it is a free breeder,
rears its young well, and, although a denizen of the burning
Sahara, will, in common with most desert species, stand cold
well. It is not at all quarrelsome, but, in my experience, will
not nest successfully in an aviary, however large, in which any
other passerine birds are trying to breed, with perhaps the
exception of those which nest on the ground. The range of the
House Bunting extends from Saffi on the West Coast of Morocco,
throughout the Algerian Sahara, into Tunis and Tripoli and
Western Egypt. It frequents the towns and villages and is very
partial to the mosques and saints’ houses, and is consequently
very popular with the inhabitants of the country, who have a

* I find I have omitted to point out that the seven species of
Rove - birds may be readily distinguished from every other Parrot by a
sub-terminal band of black across the tail. In some species the band is
not so fully marked as in others, and in most there are also bands of
other colours. — R. P.

53

strong dislike to seeing it molested in any wa}^. *It comes freely
in and out of all houses, and will almost feed from the hand.

The Moorish House Bunting is about the size of a Hedge
Accentor. The cock is of an almost uniform chestnut colour
above and below, the tail dark brown with the outer feathers
edged with chestnut, the head ash grey with a dark line through
the eye, the basal half of the lower mandible bright yellow, the
legs and feet flesh coloured. The female has the head brown
striated with black, the upper parts the same, the chest and
abdomen light uniform chestnut. In a wild state the nest is
usually placed on the top of a wall under the eaves, or in
any crack or cranny. If the space is too large for the nest
the Bunting will fill it up with lumps of earth, bones, or any
rubbish, and hollow out its nest in one corner and line it with
roots, grass, hair, feathers, in fact anything that is handy. In
an aviary it will build in an open box, and is also very fond of
patching its nest on to a beam. The eggs, three to five in
number, are like small strongly marked eggs of the Snow Bunting,
and three or four clutches are laid in the year. The j^oung
are reared on insects, which are swallowed and then disgorged
for the young. I have fed mine principally on small green
caterpillars, moths, and small mealworms that had just shed
their skins ; and the old birds also seem to find a lot of food
among the heaps of weeds provided daily.

The old birds eat any small seed, but show a preference
for the seed of grasses and various weeds. The}^ do not roost on
a perch if they can help it, but prefer a retired ledge or cranny ;
in a cage the}^ frequently roost on the bottom. Mine have stood
the cold of the last two winters perfectly well in an open aviary,
with the roofed-in portion entirely open on the south side. The
cock has a sweet wild song, very frequently uttered. The call
note is peculiarly loud for the size of the bird.

IV. — THE BLACK-VENTED BISHOP.

By A. G. ButlBr, Ph.D.

In the autumn of the past year, I had a chance of
purchasing a number of Weavers out of colour at a nominal
price; and as I hoped to get a fair sprinkling of males of
Pyi'omelana franciscana and P. afra, I did not let the opportunity
of securing the birds slip. As, however, I turned most of
them into an unheated aviary, they are extremely slow in
developing.

54

Late in November two Bishops died, which proved on
dissedtion to be both hens ; but, on comparing one with the
other, I at once perceived that one was P. francisccina ; the other,
I knew not what. I put these birds into the hands of a skilful
taxidermist, who made them into two admirable skins. A
comparison with the series in the Natural History Museum
clearly demonstrated the fadt that my second hen was that of
P. nigriventris, a species but rarely imported ; but, nevertheless,
bred by Mr. Fritz Schrodter, of Vienna, in 1882.

As Dr. Sharpe has not pointed out the distinctive
charadters of the female of this bird in his Museum Catalogue,
it may perhaps be useful to do so here : The female of P. nigri¬
ventris, , on the upper surface, is marked almost exactly as in that
sex of P. oryx, the black stripes being very much narrower than
in P. franciscana, but especially on the crown, where they are
more regular, running in slightly divergent lines from the base
of the upper mandible. O11 the under surface the colouring
differs widely from that of P. oryx, and more nearly resembles
that of P. franciscana ; bnt, apart from its slightly inferior size
and shorter beak, the chin and throat of P. nigriventris are pure
white, instead of huffish white ; the fore chest is crossed by
a diffused sandy buff belt, with scarcely perceptibly darker
longitudinal streaks ; the sides of the chest are, however, more
distindfly streaked with smoky brownish : in P. franciscana the
entire breast is sandy brownish, far more sordid in tint, and
is distinctly streaked even in the middle, and much more so
at the sides, where some of the streaks are blackish* ; the pure
white area of the under surface in P. nigriventris, is therefore of
nearly double the extent of that in P. franciscana ; the flanks
are of a clearer sandy buff, and not streaked, and the under
tail-coverts are of a purer white.

The male in breeding plumage bears a general resemblance
to that sex of P. flammiceps ; but is, if anything, rather smaller
than P. fra?iciscana : whether any of my males will prove to be
this species, I cannot say at present ; but I certainly have two
species.

* The whole breast and sides of P. oryx female are heavily streaked.

55

THE GROSBEAKS.*

By H. R. Fieemer.

( Continued from page 27) .

The Genus Spermophila .

All the birds which I have hitherto treated of belong to
different genera, although the Common Hawfinch and the Black¬
tailed Hawfinch are placed in the same genus by many writers.
But now we come to a large group of little birds, all belonging
to the same genus ; indeed the genus Sper?nophila includes
about 36 species, but only eight of these are likely to be met
with by the aviculturist, and therefore to these eight I shall
confine myself. One species, the White-throated Finch, is fairly
common, while all the others are rare in this country. They
are all natives of South America, and are imported very
intermittently and in small numbers. Notwithstanding their
comparative rarity the dealers are generally willing to part
with these little Grosbeaks at a moderate price, for their plumage
is modest and unassuming and their merits do not lie upon the
surface, therefore they seldom command a ready sale. All the
species have a strong family likeness, and very little experience
is sufficient to enable the aviculturist to identify an unknown
bird as a member of the genus Spermophila ; but the identifi¬
cation of the species is often less easy, even in the case of the
adult male, while in the case of the female or immature male it
is frequently a matter of the greatest difficulty. Birds of this
genus are distinguished from all other very small birds by their
powerful conical beaks. The mandibles are very deep posteriorly
and the edge of the lower mandible is curved inwards. In short,
these little Grosbeaks are very grosbeaklike. Almost all the
species possess a spot upon the wing (at the base of the inner or
middle primaries) which goes by the name of “ alar speculum.”
All the species here described have an alar speculum, except the
Bluish Finch ; and it is white in each of these birds, except in
the Guttural Finch, where it is yellowish white. In most of the
species the immature males much resemble the females, and a
bird bought as a lieu will often change greatly in plumage at its
first moult and prove to be a cock.

Most of these little birds are decidedly hardy. They are
peaceable in the aviary towards other birds, but two males of

* I11 writing this series of articles, I have been largely indebted to
Dr. Butler’s “ Foreign Finches in Captivity,” and all quotations from
Dr. Russ are made at second-hand through that work. I have, however,
described a number of birds which are not included in Dr. Butler’s book.

5^

the same species will sometimes fight, and occasionally males of
different species may do the same. Still, it is generally quite
safe to keep any number of Spermophilce together, and always
safe to place them among Waxbills and other defenceless birds.
They thrive on the same food as Waxbills : that is, canary seed,
white millet seed, and Indian millet or spray millet. They are
sometimes fond of hempseed, and I believe that a small quantity
is decidedly beneficial to them. Some specimens like fruit,
particularly pears. They are often very fond of green food,
and should have plenty if they will eat it. I have never known
them to touch insedt food.

The White-throated Finch ( Spermophila a/bigularis).

This little bird is about the size of the English Goldfinch.
The colouring of the male may be roughly described as follows :
General colour above slate-gray, general colour below white ;
the head, tail and wings black, a band of black across the throat,
the beak yellow, the feet gray. The female is a very unattractive
brown bird, with a black beak.

There is no recorded instance of the successful breeding
of this species in England, but Dr. Butler has had nests built
in his aviary.

The male is a bright, cheerful, pretty bird, and has a
merry little song which is superior to that of most foreign birds,
but is certainly rather “ scroopy.” Attempts to represent the
songs of birds by words are not often successful, but in the case
of the White - throated Finch Dr. Butler has been unusually
happy in his rendering, which is as follows: Chce wow, chee wow,
cheewow, chee wow ; techec, techee, techee ; tswow-tswee, tswow-tswee ;
iechee, techee.

It is sometimes called the Grey Singing Finch by English
dealers, who also give it the name of Pettykever ; indeed, they
apply this last name, not only to all the SpermophilcE, but also to
other small birds of the true names of which they are ignorant.

The White-tliroated Finch is a native of Brazil.

The Hare- white Finch (Spermophila hypoleucaj.

This species is seldom seen in England. It is larger than
the White-throated Finch. The general colour of the male is
slate-gray above and white below, as in the White - throated
Finch, but there is no black on the head or throat. The beak
is darker in colour than that of the White-throated Finch, being
a sort of orange-buff. The female is brown in colour.

57

This bird is described by travellers in Brazil as a “ delight¬
ful songster” — all I can say on this point is that the specimen in
my possession has scarcely sung at all during the two }rears he
has been in my bird-room, although he seems in perfect health.
Occasionally he utters a few long-drawn notes, hardly to be
called a song, and sometimes he constantty repeats one loud
mournful note, much like the note of the Virginian Cardinal.
My bird is perfectly peaceable, but he gets strangely excited if
any of the birds in the bird-room call loudly to one another.
He seems specially excited when he can hear the birds calling,
but cannot see them. I suppose the excitement is due to
curiosity. It is probably only an individual peculiarity.

It is a native of Brazil.

The Plumbeous Finch ( Spermophila plumb ea) .

The Plumbeous Finch is one of the least attractive birds
of the genus Spermophila ; it is ashy-gray or lead colour all over,
with the exception of a small white mark on the cheek close to
the beak. The beak is blackish. In size it resembles the White-
throated Finch. The above description applies to the male
only. I have seen a bird which was said to be a female of this
species, and it may have been what it wTas represented to be ; but if
so then the hen Plumbeous Finch is practically indistinguishable
from the hen White-throated Finch.

This species appears to be less sprightly in its habits than
the White-throated Finch, and is not nearly so pretty.

I once possessed a specimen for a short time, but I did not
care for the bird and soon got rid of it. Mine did not sing while
in my possession, but I am told by other aviculturists who have
kept this bird that it has a very sweet song.

It is found in Brazil and Bolivia.

The Reddish Finch (, Spermophila nigro-auranlia) .

This is one of the smallest and also one of the most
beautiful of the Spermophila ? — unfortunately it seems also to be
more delicate than its cousins, at any rate when first imported.

The general colour of the male is cinnamon, with a black
crown and dark wings and tail. The female is olive-brown
above and yellowish-brown underneath.

It is a native of Southern Brazil.

The Spectacled Finch ( Spermophila ophthalmica).

This bird seems to be rarer than any of the others of this
genus which are here described. My reason for including it in

53

this article is that Mr. Wiener mentions it in his book on
Foreign Cage-Birds. It has been kept at the Zoo.

The colours of the male are black and white, and the bird
derives its name from the shape of the white patches on its neck
and cheeks — there is also a tiny spot of white below the eye.
The female is light brown. It is about the size of the White-
throated Finch.

The Spectacled Finch is indigenous to Ecuador.

The Beuish Finch (. Spermophila ccerulesens )

Apparently called the Bluish Finch because there is no
blue in its plumage. It bears a very strong resemblance to the
White-throated Finch, from which, however, it may readily be
distinguished by a patch of black immediately below the beak,
and by the absence of an alar speculum. The female is brown.

There is some difference of opinion about the song : one
writer says “ It is possessed of a nice song ; ” Dr. Russ describes
it as “ monotonous, chirping, but not unpleasant ; ” Mr. W. H.
Hudson calls this bird the Screaming Finch, and adds, “ The
male has a loud startled chirp, also a song composed of eight or
ten notes, delivered with such vehemence and rapidity that they
run into each other and sound more like a scream than a song.”

Dr. Butler has possessed this bird, but it is very rare in
England, though fairly common (according to Dr. Russ) in
Germany.

It is found in Southern Brazil, Paraguay, the Argentine
Republic, and Bolivia.

The Gutturae Finch ( Spermophila gutturalis) .

This bird is rather more frequently met with than the last
four species. Its colours are sombre, and it cannot be called
pretty. The general colour of the upper parts of the male is
dull olive green, with a small white spot on the wing ; the
head, neck, and throat are black, or almost black; the breast
and under parts pale yellow. The female is dull olive brown
above, and yellowish white below. It is slightly smaller than
the White-throated Finch.

I found this bird an adtive, chattering little creature.
My bird had no real song, but it died before it had fully
attained adult plumage, so its vocal powers may have been
undeveloped. Dr. Butler tells me that he finds it to be “ a very
fair singer: the song being not unlike that of the White-throated
Finch, but less scroopy.”

59

It inhabits Peru and Brazil, and the other South American
States which lie to the North of those Republics.

The Lined Finch ( Spermophila lineola) .

The upper parts of the male are glossy black, the under
parts yellowish white ; there is a longitudinal band of white run¬
ning back from the base of the bill along the crown. The throat is
black. The cheeks and ear coverts are white, forming a broad
band of white on each side. The band of white along the
crown and the bands on each side of the face have a curious
appearance. Mr. Wiener remarks that these bands resemble a
white cross. In size it is equal to the White-throated Finch.
The female is olive brown above and buffy white below.

This species has recently been imported in considerable
numbers. Unfortunately it is very seldom to be seen in really
good plumage ; when in perfect condition it is a handsome little
bird.

I have kept this bird for years, and find it rather dull and
inclined to mope. It has a really fine song, decidedly superior
to that of the White-throated Finch ; nevertheless, as an aviary
bird I much prefer the White-throated Finch, which is far
prettier and more lively.

The Lined Finch is a native of Brazil, Guiana, and
Venezuela.

(To be continued).

SOMETHING ABOUT A FRUIT PIGEON FROM

SAMOA.

By the Rev. Hubert D. Asteey.

Not having had an opportunity of visiting the Ornitho¬
logical Department of the Natural History Museum in South
Kensington, I can only write about a pair of Fruit Pigeons
which I have had in my possession since last August, from my
own experience of the birds, and from what Mr. Albert K.
Jamracli has informed me of them, from whom I purchased
them. He believes them to be the only living pair in Europe,
but of this fact I fancy he is not absolutely certain. He further
informs me that their true title is Ptilonopus apicalis, and that
their habitat is Samoa— a place full of interesting sentiment in
connection with the name and life of the great writer, R. L
Stevenson.

Lovely birds they are ! stoutty built, and in size about
one-third of the wild English Turtle Dove, or perhaps less. The

6o

whole body is a bright yet soft green, the male bird having a
lilac crescent, edged with yellow, across the stomach from thigh
to thigh. The tail feathers, too, are tipped with yellow. But
the chief feature in either sex is a lovely forehead of a colour
which is neither pink nor lilac, but an admixture of both of
these.

They have moulted since I have had them, and have kept
in good health, fed upon boiled potato chopped into small pieces,
as well as an occasional apple, and at times a few grapes, treated
in the same manner.

In the summer time, the male bird became decidedly
fussy when a small open basket, filled with hay, was introduced
into the cage, and showed every inclination to nest.

Both birds are perfectly tame, and with studied petting
would become extremely so. But I am leaving home for four
months, and must in consequence reduce the numbers of my
cage-birds, since I cannot carry them with me, hence the
insertion of my advertisement in the column used for that
purpose, to which I may perhaps be allowed to refer the readers
of my notes. _

CORRESPONDENCE.

BREEDING RESULTS FOR 1895.

Sir, — As it is possible that some of the readers of the Avicultural
Magazine may care to hear of my breeding operations in the past year, I
have (at the Editors’ suggestion) recorded them, as follows: — -

My first nest was from a pair of Java Sparrows bred in 1S94: I had
put these birds up in a large flight-cage, in January, and four young left the
nest 011 February 15th- 16th ; a second nest at the end of the same month
was a failure, it contained two young which died when about three days old.
By the middle of May this pair of birds had produced fourteen young, of
which two have died during the present winter. About the same time my
Saffron-finches had produced six young ones which had grown up, but four
or five others had died in consequence of being taken away from their
parents too early ; two of these died when only two or three mouths
old, but were replaced in the meanwhile. During the Autumn the parents
again went to nest, laid and even hatched, but reared nothing.

Meanwhile, I had many mixed pairs put up, with a view to hybridiza¬
tion ; some of these have produced eggs, but none have hatched ; thus
from Canary and Indigo-finch I had eggs which were constantly upset (and
so broken) by the Bunting; from Java-Sparrow and male Ribbon-finch I
had, and still have, eggs ; from Cordou-bleu and Zebra Waxbill I had two
esjsrs, but the hen would not incubate ; from Parson-fincli and Zebra-finch
only soft-shelled eggs, which almost killed the lieu several times.

My Canaries produced twenty-eight young, two of which died in

6i

moult, owiug to the heat, which caused them to bathe excessively and
produced an unhealthy condition of their cage.

A Red-tailed Finch and Zebra-finch built a very cosy nest, but the
former unfortunately died in the nest with a ruptured vent (I never
discovered the cause) ; she was not egg-bound.

My Rosa’s Parrakeets paired, and examined the interior of a log-nestr
but the hen did not lay ; she was the bird bred in 1894: possibly, if I had
left her mother in the aviary and caged her, there would have been some
result; but the young one is, by far, the better bird of the two in
appear an ce.

My Green Cardinals built and hatched their second clutch (four eggs}
on the 8th June ; but insects were scarce, and the hen bird destroyed all
her young when they were only a few days old; a third nest of three was
almost brought to perfection when one died, a second left the nest and was
reared, but died before it had learnt to feed itself, the parents refusing to
give it anything but insects, so that it was literally starved by them, the
third young one was barely noticed after the second youngster had flown,
so that it died in the nest.

A pair of Goldfinches in one of my aviaries went to nest and hatched
four young out of five eggs, three of these left the nest on June 4th, and the
hen immediately took possession of a second nest prepared for her by the
male bird ; she began to lay again on June 8th, and produced six eggs, of
which five were hatched ; the j'oung of the first nest gradually killed these,
carrying them out of the nest and dropping them on the sand until only one
was left : this I gave to a Canary which reared it, but plucked it so severely
when it left the nest that it soon after died.

Rate in the year my Java Sparrows in the bird-room went to nest and
reared three young, which I removed as soon as they could feed themselves ;
a second nest of four flew on December 22nd and 24th ; a fifth, rather back¬
ward, bird was plucked and thrown out of the nest.

On October 18th, five Zebra-finches flew from a nest in my outer
aviary^ these all passed through their moult satisfactorily and proved to be
two cocks and three hens. On January 9th, 1S96, one of the hens died from
over-filling its crop : it was, in other respects, in perfect health.

Attempts to breed Bengalese produced eggs only ; specimens of Sharp¬
tailed Finches paired with Bengalee, Indian Silver- bill and Spice-finch
produced nothing. Chestnut-breast paired with Diamond Sparrow also
failed.

The result of the 3'ear’s breeding may be summed up as follows : —

Java Sparrows, 21 ; Saffron-finches, 8 ; Zebra-finches, 5 ; Green
Cardinal, 1; Canaries, 28; Goldfinches, 3. Total, 66. Of these, two Java
Sparrows, two Canaries, two Saffron -finches, one Green Cardinal, and one
Zebra-finch have since died, leaving a balance of fifty-eight birds still living.

A. G. Butter.

THE AQUARIUM SHOW.

Sir, — I expected to see, in the J auuary issue of the Avicultitral Magazine,
some reply to the criticism by Dr. Williamson of the recent Bird Show at
the Westminster Aquarium ; but, as the only ansvTer is that of the Hon. and
Rev. F. G. Dutton, who accepts Dr. Williamson’s -wholesale denunciation, I

62

am impelled to take upon myself the task of replying. I had some fifty
“birds at the show in question, and, as I was personally in attendance on
my exhibits each day from ten iu the morning until late at night, I
trust I may presume to write with at least as much authority as Dr.
Williamson, who “merely strolled in to look at the foreign birds,” and
who made “ a few brief notes, .... scattered, and written in haste.”
Early as I was, each morning, at the show, I never failed to find the
indefatigable Mr. S. Cook at work, intelligently attending to the birds
entrusted to the Society; and I am glad to take this opportunity of
tendering to him well deserved thanks, although my own birds did not
need his care.

It would occupy too much of your space to take each paragraph of
Dr. Williamson’s letter separately ; but there is scarcely one sentence that
would not admit of criticism. Almost the only sentiment which may be
agreed with is the deploring of the bad light in which the birds had to be
judged and viewed: and this was to the disadvantage of the judges and
visitors, not of the birds. The Aquarium is, in this respect, about the very
worst place which could be chosen for a Bird Show. In the day-time there
is scarcely any light at all, and at night the gas bill is so economically
looked after that each jet suffices only to show where its nearest neighbour
is located. So far as the comfort of the birds may be considered, I do
not know of any show to which owners might more confidently send
their specimens. The “intolerable heat;” “noisome air, loaded with
tobacco smoke ; ” and such like expressions are, to put it kindly, exagger¬
ations due to Dr. Williamson’s evident aversion to Bird Shows as Bird
Shows.

To every one who visited the Show other inaccuracies will, in nearly
every paragraph, be apparent, and the “ written in haste ” is self-evident
throughout the whole article. I can scarcely better illustrate this than to
take, for instance, the paragraph referring to the “ Eclectus Parrot (1950),”
the number evidently a misprint for 1050. This bird was not “ looking
unwell;” was not “shrouded by a curtain;” and was not “in a bad
position.” •

With regard to the labels requesting “ that the birds should not be
fed, or at least fed only on certain food,” Dr. Williamson seems to be under
the impression that these, instead of being instructions to the Stewards,
were appeals to the public to regard the inmates of the cages as being
somewhat different from the bears and monkeys at the “Zoo,” and, therefore,
to refrain from making them spontaneous offerings of “ nuts, sponge-cake,
biscuit, apple-peel,” etc., etc., etc. Just as though birds would take such
things, even if visitors were to offer them ! Such remarks scarcely deserve
reply, especially when the writer, as a climax, soberly says that he “saw a
piece of walnut pressed into the mouth of a Swallow,” (the italics are my
own).* Henry J. Furrjames.

IS GRIT DANGEROUS TO NEWLY IMPORTED PARROTS ?

Since my letter on the above subject appeared after that of Mr.
Phillipps, and to a certain extent took up the same line of argument, I may
perhaps be permitted to explain that it was written before I had seen Mr.

* We have been obliged to make some alterations in the wording of this letter, as Mr.
Fulljames had expressed himself with more energy than the occasion appears to require.
-Ed.

63

Phillipps’ letter, and should have appeared in the same issue, hut was
crowded out for want of space.

While I am sure our readers will readily acquit me of the literary
theft of Mr. Phillipps’ ideas, it is perhaps desirable in justice to myself
that this explanation should appear. C. S. Simpson.

APROPOS OF BOUGHT FOOD FOR INSECTIVOROUS BIRDS.

Sir,— I wish Mr. Fillmer could see my two Blue Rock Thrushes as
well as a Sharna and a Pied Rock Thrush which are fed upon food that Mr.
J. Abrahams manufactures and sells for the benefit (mark the word !) of
insectivorous birds. In deference to that sold by Mr. Cross (styled
Capelle’s food) I ought to add that the above birds, that is to say, all but
the Shama, were reared by myself from the nest upon his mixture, and at
times are still given it.

The Pied Rock Thrush (both he and the Blue Thrushes are in
magnificent health and plumage) is now five years old ; the eldest of the
Blue Thrushes being four years old, and the youngest three years; and
these birds are, more often than not, considered delicate to keep. My eldest
Passera Solitaria, for so the Italians call them, has never ceased singing all the
winter, and will do so until the lamps are extinguished, up to n.o p.m. and
11.3a

Oh ! b3*e-the-bye, a Blue-throated Warbler has also thriven through
November, December, and January upon the foods already mentioned.

Bejxmd this, these birds receive, as a treat, a few mealworms and some
raw beef cut fine.

I have, for many years, kept insectivorous birds most successfully
upon these foods, and I therefore consider that it is only fair to speak up
for their meritorial value.

I wonder why Mr. Fillmer is prejudiced against “ advertised foods,”
as is evident from his request and stipulation that whosoever will accept
the Yellow Wagtail and the other birds that he offers, will not feed them
upon such a diet.

One would like to know his reasons ; but I am sure he will not object
to my taking up the friendly gloves on behalf of such advertised food as
has always done my birds a good turn.

Hubert d. Astley.

Sir,— The above letter from the Rev. H. D. Astley calls for some
reply from me.

I should be very sorry for it to be supposed that my advertisement
was purposely so worded as to appear to disparage any advertised food or
foods. My birds had been accustomed to a diet of soaked ants’ eggs and
mealworms, and I was anxious that they should not have to endure a
change of diet on finding a new home. But as Mr. Astley has now raised
the whole question of tinned food versus freshly-prepared food, I feel bound
to express my opinion upon the subject. I shouldlike, however, first to point
out that such birds as Thrushes and Shamas will survive on a diet which
would not suit our delicate native Warblers.

With a few exceptions, all the advertised foods for insectivorous birds
now in the market appear to be very much alike in character, the chiei
differences being that some contain grocer’s currants and some do not, and

64

that the proportions of the various ingredients vary. I do not profess to be
able to properly analyse any of these foods, but the use of my eyes, nose and
mouth leads me to believe that they consist of a mixture of — r, Abrahams’
Preserved Yolk of Egg. 2. Ants’ eggs. 3. German paste (or at least some
mixture which I am unable to differentiate from that venerable concoction).

The Preserved Egg is a very valuable preparation, though I do not
think that it is so nourishing as fresh egg. The ants’ eggs are better still,
but the proportion of these is usually very small indeed, and being in the
dry state they are not so digestible as when properly soaked. The German
paste is utterly unsuitable food for any bird. Fortunately most birds pick
ont the egg and ants’ eggs (the only digestible and nourishing parts of the
food) and leave the rest — therefore they are not injured by the German paste
for the simple reason that they don’t eat it.

If there are any readers of the Avicultural Magazine who are not
acquainted with German Paste, they may like to know that it is a delicious
mixture of pea-meal, crushed hempseed, oatmeal, moist sugar, olive oil,
mawseed, and other things — but the chief ingredients are usually pea-meal
and hempseed, although the various recipes vary greatl}7.

It is fair to add that there are at least two foods in the market which
do not contain German Paste or anything resembling German Paste. I
shall be pleased to give the names of the makers of these privately, but I
do not think it would be fair to the other makers to publish them here.
Neither of them is mentioned by Mr. Astle}7. Even these foods, however,
are very inferior, in my opinion, to freshly prepared food.

The fact that Mr. Astley and other people have kept birds in health
for years on the food he mentions by no means proves that it is the best
possible diet. Many a man could live and retain his health on a diet
chiefly composed of pease pudding and shrimps (the latter eaten skins and
all) but nothing would persuade me that such a diet would be desirable
and wholesome for mankind, and nothing will persuade me that a diet
of pea -meal and crushed hempseed is desirable and wholesome for
insectivorous birds.

I hope that the whole question of food for insectivorous birds will
now be thoroughly thrashed out in our columns.

Horatio R. Fieemer.

COEOUR OF TPIE BIFF OF THE AUSTRAFIAN
GREEN-WINGED DOVE.

Sir, — Can any member explain how it is that in the Australian
Green-winged Dove ( Chalcophaps chrysochlora) some specimens have red bills
and some yellow? I at first believed the difference to be sexual; but
this, apparently, is not so : for two birds of mine, which I am nearly
certain are both cocks, differ in the colour of the bill, that of the one
being like red sealing-wax, while that of the other is yellow.

I know the yellow-billed one to be a cock ; and the one with the red
bill was sold to me by a lady-member of our Society as such, and as it is
fond of fighting with and driving about the other, I think that lady was
right. I have never heard the red-billed one coo, but the other coos
frequently.

I have two more of these Doves which I obtained very recently, and
these differ in the same way. D. Seth-SmiTh.

THE

Bvicultural fllbaga^tn^

BEING THE JOURNAL OF THE

AVICULTURAL SOCIETY.

VOL. II. — NO. 17.

All rights reserved.

MARCH, 1896.

BRITISH BIRDS AT THE CRYSTAL PALACE.

By J. Tkwis Bonhote.

Once more tlie Crystal Palace Show is over, the great
event in the cage bird year is passed ; hopes of such and such
a bird raised by his exhibitor have either been realised or dashed
to the ground, and it now remains for us to consider whether
those hopes had been rightly or wrongly founded.

The classes were well filled, the quality good, and the
judging on the whole fair ; although, as we shall see, there were
several cases in which the judge did not know his own mind.
There was one thing I noticed more this year than in former
years, which was that in walking along the rows of cages I could
have picked out and gathered together the cages of several
exhibitors. One exhibitor put blotting paper at the bottom of
his cages ; another had his cages painted a peculiar shade
while several had writing relating to the feeding of the birds-
pasted on the front ; another, I suppose that the judge might
not recognise his writing, had the notices printed, thereby
rendering his cage all the more conspicuous ; while lastly,
in one or two cases the labels were left attached. Far be it from
me to imply that anything was meant by these marks, but, if
once allowed, it opens a high road to collusion between judge and
exhibitor, which should not be.

The Bullfinches were a good class and difficult to judge,,
and many of high merit were left unnoticed. No. 1241, which
took first, was very good in size and colour, but rather wild, and
I preferred the second prize bird, No. 1243, although it had lost
some primaries in the left wing. I was delighted to see the third
prize awarded to No. 1219, a hen, which was a large good-coloured
and steady bird, but would have looked better in a show cage.
I hope this marks the beginning of an epoch, when hens, if of
good merit, may stand an equal chance with their more brightly
coloured mates.

66

The Goldfinches were not of such good all round quality
as the Bullfinches ; 1267, a splendid bird, was not noticed. 1250,
the first prize bird, was nice, but far too brown on the flanks, in
fadt, too dark altogether ; surely the ideal Goldfinch ought to be
the one that most nearly resembles the wild ones, and not what
they may become by colour-feeding, but on this subjedt I shall
have more to say when we come to the Siskins.

The Chaffinches were a poor class, most of them being far
too dark and very wild. I preferred 1307 (second prize) a large
bird with good shoulders and steady ; 1329, though a good large
bird, was very wild, and 1328 should have been higher. The
Linnets were, as usual, a large class. The first and second birds
were good and deserved their places, and were respectively of the
dark and light type. Which is the ideal ? 1345, third, had the

markings on the flanks all blurred, and should not have been
where it was. 1363 was remarkable for its size.

The Redpolls were a small class and consisted chiefly of
Mealies, cage-moulted birds being conspicuous by their scarcity.
1394 was good all round and deserved his place. 1393, second,
was fair, but 1397 wras much better. I saw no reason for not
noticing 1390, it was a splendid bird in every way ; it was
a Lesser Redpoll, but that was not its fault. I should much
like to know how some of the exhibitors know the age of
their Redpolls. I have never succeeded in moulting one red,
nor heard of anyone who has, consequently I take it that
most of these Mealies have been caught during the winter,
and yet we read in the catalogue such remarks as “ cock,
2 years,” &c. I am sure the bird did not tell them, and I wonder
on what grounds they based the statement.

I may begin my notice of the Siskin class by stating that
there was only one bird which was typically marked as a wild
specimen should be. That bird, 1401, the only one with a really
black chin, and good in every other way, was not noticed. About
the rest I have nothing much to say, except that they were all
colour-fed to an unnatural extent, and with the exception of the
one above mentioned, not one approached in colour to a fresh
caught wild bird.

The skylarks were conspicuous by their absence, there
being only four entries as against eighteen last year. The first
prize bird, No. 1416, was a very fine specimen.

The Robins, on the whole, were not up to much, I pre¬
ferred 1423 (second), as being a larger bird, while otherwise
equally good.

67

The Blackbird Class, 94, and Thrush Class, 95, were of
splendid quality throughout, and were rightly judged, except
that 1465 ought to have been noticed.

The Starlings were rather dull in colour, and on this score
1478 had to give way to 1474, which was the better bird.

In the Magpie Class 1488 was the best, and was a remark¬
ably large bird. 1490, a Jay, was large and nicely shown, though
not very bright. 1494, a Magpie, was rather small, but other¬
wise a neat, cleanly cut bird.

The Hybrids formed a nice, though by no means remark¬
able class. No. 1502 (first), a Greenfinch-Bullfinch was a good
bird with a nice red rump and breast and a brown head. 1503
(2nd), a Tinnet-Bullfinch, ran it close, but was not such a good
colour. 1500 (3rd), a Goldfinch-Bullfinch, with a white head,
ought not I think to have been noticed. 1499 was much better,
being brighter in colour, and having a ring of red stretching
partly round the neck.

The Pied or Albino Class brought out some splendid birds,
although in a few cases it was hard to see what right the bird had in
the class. The pure Albino Blackbird took first prize, and was in
splendid trim ; I suppose the pink eyes gave it its place, for 1525,
a White Hawfinch, is a far rarer bird, and was in equally good
feather. 1520, a Silver-grey Starling, well deserved its place
(second). It was of a delicate silver grey all over, but retained all
its markings. 1518, a White Blackbird, dirtjr and badly shown,,
took fourth, which place should, I think, have been given to
1516, a very nice specimen of a pied Goldfinch, showing a good
deal of white.

Class 100. A.O.V. British Bird not larger than a Wood¬
lark, was made into a sad mess. To start with, three Grey
Wagtails were marked “wrong class.” Why ? The Grey
Wagtail is to be found in some parts of the British Isles all the
year round. To make matters worse, the same judge gave a
Gre}^ Wagtail first, and another one V.H.C., in precisely the same
class at last year’s show. Then, again, we find six Brambliugs,
which are truly migratory birds, being only winter visitants to
this country, not marked “wrong class,” and actually taking-
prizes. No. 1540 also, a Tree Pipit, is a migratory bird, and
should also have been marked “ wrong class.” Of the Grey
Wagtails, 1532 was the best, being a splendidly long and slim
bird. 1555 was also' in excellent condition. I sympathise
deeply with those gentlemen who were wrongly disqualified.
The first prize was taken by a Golden Crested Wren, which

6S

was a Very bright and clean bird and in the pink of condition..
A Bearded Tit took second : it was a nice bird, but rather dirty ^
and I was glad to see it noticed. The fourth was a Reed Bunting,
rather a small bird, but in nice summer plumage.

In the A.O.V. larger than a Woodlark, a Cornish Chough,
with bright red legs and bill and in nice feather takes first ; a
very good Ring Ousel, second ; and a talking Raven, third. The
fourth prize was given to a Greater Spotted Woodpecker, in good
health and condition, which ought, I think, to have been second.

I hope the authorities will see their way another year to
giving separate classes for Hawfinches, Bramblings, and Missel
Thrushes, as there were several splendid birds of these species
shown.

This year the Nightingale and Blackcap class was remark¬
ably well filled, and the birds were all fine specimens in excellent
condition. 1589 (first), a Nightingale, was a nice bird in good
feather, but rather small. 1591 (the second prize bird), was
larger, but a little bit out of condition. Third prize went to a
very good large Blackcap, while 1599, a fair Nightingale, but
badly shown and with, if I mistake not, part of his tail missing,,
took an extra third. 1585 (fourth prize), a Nightingale, was a
good bird and in better condition than many.

In the A.O.V. migratory bird class a Grey Wagtail, in its
wrong class, gets noticed. The same judge (not the one who
disqualified them in class 100) gave a Grey Wagtail second in the
A.O.V. class (not migratory) at the Aquarium last j^ear. A bird
cannot be in its right place in two classes, and if it was right at
the Aquarium it was wrong here and vice-versa. A Crossbill, a
bird resident in Scotland, was also noticed in this class. A ver}r
good Swallow, in the pink of condition, but wanting his left outer
tail feather, took first. The cage was painted rather too dark
inside. Second was a Willow Wren, a perfedl beauty in every
way, and very bright ; third, a Resser Whitethroat, also in very
fine feather; while fourth was a nice bright Redstart, nicely shown.
There were also two very good Redwings, a nice Spotted Fly-
catcher, slightly rough, a good cock Whinchat, a very fair
Shorelark, and a Corncrake, which, I speak feelingly, had severely
hurt itself on the journey.

The show contained many birds of remarkably fine qualit5r,
and, with the exceptions above stated, the judging was good.

6g

FOREIGN BIRDS AT THE CRYSTAL PALACE

SHOW OF 1896.

By C. S. Simpson.

The number of entries in each department, Canaries,
British birds and Foreign birds was less than in 1S95, the drop
being most marked in the British classes.

In the classes provided for Foreign birds the number of
entries in the classes provided respectively for the small finches
and the insectivorous birds was almost precisely the same as last
year : there was an increase in the number of Doves exhibited,
and a diminution in the number of Cardinals and Virginian
Cardinals : it is worthy of note, however, that the large entry of
the latter birds in 1895 was quite exceptional, and therefore
could not fairly justify the retention of a class usually so poorly
filled. The number of Parrots and Parrakeets was pradtically
the same as last year. The alterations in the classification of the
seCtion judged by myself have been the cause of a good deal of
criticism, both adverse and favourable, and I may therefore
perhaps be pardoned if I allude briefly to the subjeCt.

The modern aviculturist is becoming alive to the faCt that
aviculture has been too long divorced from scientific ornithology,
and that an elementaiy knowledge, at least, of the latter science,
adds an infinity of interest to the former pursuit. We no longer
tolerate the careless and inaccurate writing which characterized
even the most popular of avicultural works a very few years ago.
It therefore seems desirable that we should at our principal
shows adopt a classification which, at any rate in its broader out¬
lines, should indicate the real relationship of the birds, instead of
merely sorting them out according to size. My twelve classes
therefore are divided as follows : four are allotted to the great
family Ploceidae (weaving finches) : four to the Fringillidse
(finches, grosbeaks and buntings) : one to be Columbidse (doves) :
of the remaining three classes, one is allotted to the Crows,
Starlings, and Mynahs : one contains the Tanagers and Bulbuls :
and the last is a refuge for any other species. Of course an
arrangement which brings together Tanagers and Bulbuls is
frankly unscientific, but it seems impossible to place the former
with their true relatives, the finches.

It was distinctly encouraging to find that the arrangement
appeared to be understood by most exhibitors, and that very few
birds were entered in wrong classes.

70

The great majority of the birds were in excellent condition
and health, and the exhibits were on the whole of greater interest
than last year.

Perhaps the most difficult birds to judge fairly are the
Gouldiau finches : they appear to be more upset by a journey
than any other birds and rarely show to advantage on the judg¬
ing day : it would have been difficult, however, to beat the first
and second prize winners in class 105 : Mr. Fulljames’ Parrot
finch was unfortunately moulting. An interesting exhibit was
Mr. Housden’s bird in class 107, which, I think, was a hen
Yellowish Weaver ( Sitagrci luteold). Mr. Swaysland’s exhibit
(1042), which was in the winter plumage, was probably Penthetria
fiaviscapularis. A very nice Pin-tailed Whydah (1043) in full
colour, was hopelessfy crippled.

The Rufous-tailed Grassfinch, a species which made its
debtct last year, was remarkably well represented, no less than
four good pairs being exhibited : Mr. Dewar’s pair were far and
away the best, and were indeed the finest specimens I have seen.

Miss Sturt’s Cordons-bleus, five years in their owner’s
possession, were in exquisite trim and spoke w^ell for her
care and skill : the Cordon-bleu is not a very easy bird to keep
in first-rate condition. A beautiful pair of Da vender finches
were well shown. A pair of the rare Rufous-backed Mannikins
were not in the best of plumage, or would have taken a higher
position. The Goldfinches and Bullfinches were, on the whole,
hardly up to the average, many being loose in feather, possibly
due to the very mild weather.

There were no Saffron-finches, Serin-finches, or Alarios.
Mr. Castellan’s Black-headed Siskin was a beauty. A splendid
pair of White-breasted Mannikins {Mztnia pectoralis ) were, most
unfortunately, exhibited in the wrong class. Surely so ex¬
perienced an aviculturist as Mr. Dewar might have avoided this
mistake. There was an unusually large number of Doves : the
Columbidae are not a popular family with aviculturists and are
poorly represented at shows as a rule. Perhaps the most
interesting exhibit was an Australian Green-winged Dove, sent
by Mr. Seth-Smith. Visitors who, guided by the catalogue,
expedted to see Mr. Arthur’s Blue-winged Green Bulbul, must
have been disappointed to meet with a Superb Tanager : a good
bird which, evidently suffering from the effedts of its journey on
Friday, looked much better on Saturday.

Mr. Housden exhibited a magnificent pair of Red-vented
Bulbuls, and a Scarlet Tanager, the latter not so rich in colour as

7i

other specimens in the class. There was one specimen (and a
very good one it was) of the Green Bulbul, the most delightful
of all cage birds in my experience.

Mr. Housden’s Wandering Tree Pie, like all that gentle¬
man’s exhibits, was shown in a large and well-lighted cage, an
example which other exhibitors would do well to follow as far as
possible.

A pair of Red-sided Japanese Tit-mice, exhibited by Mr.
Fulljames, attracted much notice on account of their rarity ;
probably very few of the visitors had ever seen the species before.
Some Blue-cheeked Barbets, not in first-rate condition, were
exhibited, and Miss Bamford’s delightful little White-eyes were
worth a journey to the Palace alone. Mr. Cronkshaw’s Cape
Coly had suffered much from its journey, and looked so ill on
Friday that I quite expedited to see its place empty when the
show opened. Fortunately it appeared better on Saturday :
whether it survived until the close of the show I have not heard.

A Blue-throated Warbler, a pair of Raughing Kingfishers,
and a Dial bird (a very poor one, by the way) were among the
more noticeable exhibits.

The classes provided for Parrots and Parrakeets were,
to those in search of novelties, distinctly disappointing. I
left the show under the impression that there was no species
new to me exhibited. I find, however, on referring to my
catalogue, that I must have most unaccountably overlooked
two birds catalogued as a Greeu-naped Rorikeet, and a Ruby
Rorikeet respectively.

The Rovebirds were not a particularly interesting class.
Mr. Cronkshaw’s Peach-faced birds seem to be invincible.
Budgerigars again, though charming birds in an aviary, are dull
in cages, from which, however, they show some ingenuity in
escaping. First prize fell to a fine pair of Yellow, belonging to
Mr. Dewar. I must say that I think the Green much more
attractive. When shall we see a Blue Budgerigar in England ?

Tlie class for Rosellas only attracted four entries, but there
was a splendid display of King and Crimson-winged Parrakeets.
I was sorry to see a pair of Crimson-wings the hen of which was
actually la}dng, and surely deserved better of her owner than to
be sent to a show at a time when she was needing extra warmth
and quiet. The poor thing laid an egg on Friday, but on
Saturday was looking very ill and miserable. The first prize was
awarded to a grand King and Queen, and there were no less than
thirteen entries in this class.

72

Among the Ring-necked Parrakeets, a fine Malabar,
belonging to Mr. Fulljames, was noticeable : also three speci¬
mens of the Malaccan Parrakeet ( Palceornis longicauda ) , a species
often confounded with the Lucian f P. modesta).

Twelve Lories and Lorikeets put in an appearance, includ¬
ing no less than four Ornamented Lorikeets, and a ragged looking
lot the latter were. I could not refrain from mentally comparing
them with a pair of brilliantly coloured, dapper little acrobats,
which occupy one of my small aviaries, and whose performances
are a constant delight to my household. Mr. Housden’s
Ceram Lory is a grand bird, and well deserved his first prize,
won three years in succession. A very shabby Red Lory and a
Purple-cap, still in moult, were exhibited. I have already
apologized for my omission to notice the two Lorikeets, exhibited
by the London Fanciers’ Supply Association. A Tabuan Parra¬
keet, catalogued as a Shining Parrakeet, was in poor condition,
and should, I think, have given wray to a lovely specimen of the
Pileated Parrakeet, a bird we should like to see ofteuer at shows.
The Pennants were poor in colour, and Messrs. Bottomley’s
Many-coloured looked more washed-out than ever. The survivor
apparently, of a pair of Parrakeets exhibited in former years as
Trichoglossus pyrrhopterus (they are certainly not Trichoglossi,
however), looked but sadly.

A fairly good Red-rump, a nice Turquoisine and a couple
of the quaint Patagonian Conures were also present.

There were six Grey Parrots, a remarkably good class,
considering the small prizes offered, but none seemed to be very
talkative, at any rate when I was present.

The class for Amazons contained nothing new. Mr.
Dutton’s Double-fronted, an old acquaintance, was first. Mr.
Martin’s Green-cheeked was deposed from the first place, which
he has occupied for four years, and a bird catalogued as Yellow-
fronted, was third. This was, however, a Yellow - cheeked
( Chrysotis autumnalisj.

A Cuba Parrot, which was awarded first in class 128 (any
other species) was a nice bird, but would have been more
corredtly entered among the Amazons. The Cockatoos. were not
particularly interesting classes, and most of the birds were
remarkably dirty. Would it not be possible to raise the entry
fees and double the prize money in these classes, in order to
secure more entries ? Cockatoos require strong and heavy cages,
and the cost of their carriage is considerable.

73

FOREIGN FINCHES AT THE CRYSTAL PALACE.

By H. R. Fillmer.

Excluding Foreign Bullfinches and Goldfinches, which are
of interest only to a very few, the Foreign Finches at the Crystal
Palace Bird Show of 1896 were divided into six classes, contain¬
ing between them 70 entries. East year there was the same
number of classes, but they contained 85 entries. It is disap¬
pointing that the greatly improved classification should thus have
apparently led to a decrease in the entries, and this, taken in
connection with the fadt that a somewhat large number of
entries were made in the wrong class, speaks badly for the
ornithological knowledge of the average exhibitor. While, how¬
ever, in 1895, 110 less than 15 entries in the Foreign Finch
classes were “absent” (doubtless on account of the severe
weather), this year only three were absent, so that the number
actually competing was only 3 less than last year. Moreover the
decrease in the Cardinals, of which an unusually large number
were exhibited last year, would alone account for the drop in
the number of entries.

Class 105 (Gouldian Finches, Parrot Finches, Pintailed
Nonpareils, and Cuba Finches). The first three species go well
together in a class, because they are all Grassfinches, and all very
brightly coloured, and they are, moreover, birds which compete
somewhat unfairly with more soberly attired birds. Cuba Finches
are probably put in this class because of the controversy about
their true classification, but it must be confessed that they seem
somewhat out of place there. There was only one pair of Cuba
Finches (belonging to Mr. Fulljames), but they were decidedly
good and well deserved the fourth prize which they received.
There was, likewise, only one Parrot Finch (also the property of
Mr. Fulljames), and this was awarded third — it would, doubtless,
have been higher if it had not been in the midst of a moult. A
common (Bunting) Nonpareil, had found its way into this class
by mistake. There were 8 entries of Gouldian Finches — 4 red
and 4 black.

Class 106 (Java Sparrows). Here were 6 entries, 4 pairs of
grey, 1 pair of white, and 1 pair pied. The first prize was
awarded to Dr. Butler’s handsome Greys, his own breeding, and
themselves the parents of 14 }x>ung in his aviary in 1895. Mr.
H. B. Smith received the second prize for his pair of White Javas.

Class 107 (Weaver or WhjMah Birds). I11 spite of the fadt
that most of these are hopelessly out of colour in February this

74

class secured 8 entries, of which, however, 2 were absent. Mr.
Housden took first with a bird which he calls a “Yellowish
Weaver,” though Mr. Abrahams told me that he believed it to be
the female of Passer luteus. I was disposed to think, at the
time, that it was one of the true Sparrows and not a Weaver at
all, but have since come round to the opinion that it was really
Sitagra hdeola (a female). Mr. Swaysland received the second
prize for a bird which was so far gone out of colour that its iden¬
tification was a matter of considerable difficulty. My own
belief is that it was Penthetria albonotata, and if I am right, then
it was a verj^ rare bird, possibly the rarest in the show. There
were besides a good Pintailed Whydah in nearly full colour, a
shabby Rufous-necked or Textor Weaver, a rather poor Napoleon,,
and a pair of Common or Russ’s Weavers, quite out of colour.

Class 10S (any species of Grassfinch, Mannikin, or
Waxbill, not previously mentioned). This was a large class of
27 entries, only one of which was absent. It would have been
better to divide the birds in this class into at least two classes.
It is remarkable that no less than 4 pairs of Bathilda ruficauda
were exhibited ; all of these were good, but Mr. Dewar’s, which
received first prize, pre-eminently so. There were three entries of
Chestnut-breasted Mannikins and two of St. Helena Waxbills —
no other species was represented by more than one pair. The
second prize fell to an excellent pair of Cordon Bleus. The third
was awarded to some nice Lavender Finches. Mr. Cronkshaw
received the fourth prize for his pair of Bathilda ruficauda.
The only other noteworthy birds were, Mr. H. B. Smith’s
Rufous-backed Mannikins ( Spermestes nigriceps ), and the female
Australian Crimson-finch ( Neochmia phaetcni), and pair of
Magpie Mannikins ( Amauresthes fringilloides ) all belonging to
Mr. Fullj ames.

Class hi (any species of Cardinal — including the
Virginian Cardinal). Last )^ear these mustered over 20, this
3^ear there were only 9. Three entries consisted of Green
Cardinals, three of Red -crested Cardinals, and two of Virginian
Cardinals. The remaining entry was a very rare bird, unfortu¬
nately shown in a ver}r dark cage, where it no doubt passed,
with ninety-nine out of a hundred of the visitors to the show, as
a hen Cardinal. I myself took it for a hen Virginian until the
peculiar shape of the beak was pointed out to me. I believe
the bird to be Pyrrhuloxia sinuata, the head of which species
is figured by Dr. Bowdler Sharpe. It is a pity that the fine
Virginian which gained the second prize should have been
exhibited in such a very small cage.

75

Class 1 12 (any species of True Fine'll, Bunting, or Gros¬
beak, not previously mentioned). This was a most disappoint¬
ing class. There were only 9 entries, and no less than 4 of these
were in “ wrong class.”' Where were all the Singing Finches,
Alario Finches, and Saffron Finches (not to mention rarer birds),
wdiich I expedted to see in this class ? The first prize was
awarded to Mr. Castellan’s beautiful Black-headed Siskin, which
he informed me was the same bird as that exhibited last year at
the Palace by a dealer, and upon the then shabby condition of
which I remarked in my notes on the show. Miss J. E. Sturt
received the second prize for her pair of Nonpareils — these were
in beautiful condition, but the cock had no trace of red or orange
in his plumage — I think they must have been hand-reared
birds. The third prize was awarded to Mr. Housdeu’s South
American Grosbeak, which I took to be a specimen of Gitiraca
cyanea. It was in splendid condition. The fourth prize was
withheld, so the rarity exhibited by Mr. Swaysland received
only H.C. — what that little bird is no one at the show appeared
to know, and I cannot even guess. Of the birds entered in this
class by mistake, some were worthy of note, viz. : a pair of Red¬
headed Finches, exhibited by Mr. H. B. Smith (not in good
plumage), and a pair of Munia pectoralis exhibited by Mr. Dewar.
Gould named the latter bird Donacola pectoralis, but I should like
to know Mr. Dewar’s authorit}’ for calling it Estrelda pectoralis.

On the whole, the show of Foreign Finches was some¬
what disappointing. Mr. Swaysland’s Weaver and Mr. Davis’s
Cardinal were rare birds, but not very attractive, and this year’s
show does not compare well with last year’s, when the eyes of
many of us were gladdened with the first sight of Bathilda
ruficauda , Spermestes nigriceps, and Munia pectoralis.

From the social point of view, however, the usefulness of
the Palace Show was well maintained, and once again it was the
meeting-place of many aviculturists who have no chance of
of meeting eleswhere.

CORRESPONDENCE.

THE SLENDER - BILE COCKATOO AT THE
CRYSTAL PALACE.

Sir, — I was not at the Crystal Palace Show, hut I have been amusing
myself by looking through a catalogue. I am surprised to see that a
Slender-bill Cockatoo, entered in the class for “Any other variety of Parrot,”
was marked wrong class, while a Macaw in the same class was V.H.C.
I presume that the Judge thought the Slender-bill ought to have been

76

entered in one of the Cockatoo classes; bnt, oddly enough, those classes
are expressly reserved for certain specified species of which the Sleuder-bill
is not one, and the bird could not have been properly entered in either of
them. Are we then to understand that, according to the Crystal Palace
authorities, the Macaws are Parrots but the Cockatoos are not ? Or what
are we to understand ? Really the Judge should explain.

- Septimus Perkins.

THE AQUARIUM SHOW.

vSir, — I am very much interested in Mr. Fulljames’ letter in your
issue of February, but regret that he has shown animus in his comments
and has written in such vigorous style. I am fully aware that the labels
as to food were instructions to the Stewards. I am equally certain that
they were read by the public, and my desire was that they had been more
carefulty read. I saw the birds offered each of the items of unwholesome
food that I mentioned. I saw the food accepted by the birds. I saw the
piece of walnut given to the Swallow, and I have good eyesight and am not
easily mistaken. The larger birds, in almost every case, did take the food
offered to them ; and I expostulated warmly, to at least three persons,
on the cruel way in which they were offering dangerous food to the birds.

I have not my catalogue handy to refer to and may therefore have
passed a misprint as to the number of the Eclectus Parrot, but an Eclectus
Parrot was shrouded by a curtain, was in a very bad position, and was
painfully suffering from the tobacco smoke. I am a smoker and do not
mind smoke ; I had three companions with me when I visited the Show,
and all of us complained of the very bad smoke-laden air of the stuffy
Aquarium, and pitied the birds that were exposed to it.

I write with no authority, I am not interested in the Aquarium, nor
would I do it the least damage by my words ; but I merely stated what I
saw, and to my opinion I adhere. The atmosphere was that of a Uonclou
Music Hall, or of a booth at a country fair.

George C. Wieeiamson.

INSECT FOOD.

Sir, — I am glad to see that the question of soft and insect-food is to
be discussed in our pages. Of the latter there is one which I have found
very helpful in rearing small birds: it is the larvae of the clothes moth.
With the help of these insects I reared nest after nest of Diamond Sparrows,
one season.

In order to keep up a supply, my plan is to stock several boxes —
such as the Hudson’s soap box — with materials that are attractive to these
moths ; then put the boxes away in an out-liouse, with the covers slightly
open, and leave them undisturbed for a month or two.

The things I have found most attractive are the cleaniiigs-out of the
bird cages, with layers of flannel, or any old woollen stuff, between. In
another box I have bran between the flannel. The moths that frequent the
latter are bigger, and the larvae seem longer in coming. In taking out the
little white worms for use, be careful not to disturb the contents of the box
more than can be helped. When the supply in one box is exhausted
set it aside, and by the time the last of the four or five boxes have been
used, the first opened will be found ready with a fresh suppty.

77

I am sorry to find, from the paper enclosed in the Avicultural M&gazine
for this month, that our Society is to be associated with a Cage-Bird Shbw.

- - M. D. Sharp.

breeding kestrels.

Sir,— It seems hard to account for what, I believe, is a fad, that the
diurnal branch of the Raptores, or Birds of Prey, while not nnfrequently
making nests, and even laying eggs in our aviaries, seem to be somehow
affected by confinement to such an extent that they ver}' rarely hatch their
young. Amongst the owls, I believe, besides the noble Eagle Owl, so long-*,
lived in captivity, and a free breeder, and the beautiful Snowy Owl, which,
though requiring much more care, has hatched young in at least three
collections in this country to my knowledge, the Barn, Tawny, Scops,
Little Owl, and perhaps others have been successfully bred. But of the
diurnal Raptores which have hatched young, I cannot myself recall an
instance of any other species than the subject of this letter, and the Great
S. American Condor, of which there is an unfledged nestling labelled;
“Hatched in the Zoological Gardens,” amongst the stuffed birds at the
Natural History Museum in the Cromwell Road.

A female Kestrel, which shared an aviary of mine with a pair of Red
Kites, on the eggs of the latter being taken away after having as usual
proved unfertile, took possession of the vacant nest ; and, on my return
home after a short absence, I found her sitting on a clutch of her own eggs
in a neat little cup which she had excavated amongst the wool and hair of
the great untidy' structure. Before the next spring I had provided her with
a mate in the adult plumage, and, both that season and the next, they
reared several young ones. When the young were clamouring for food, it was
very pretty to see even the male, who wras at other times rather shy, snatch
meat from the hand and hurry with it up to the nest, which was on a
shelf in the covered part of the aviary. As I did not require the young,
they were by degrees allowed their freedom, and though they hung about
for some considerable time, they gradually disappeared.

- W. H. S'i'. Ouintin.

FOOD FOR INSECTIVOROUS BIRDS.

Sir, — The subject of food for insectivorous birds has always been one of
particular interest for me, and the wording of many of the advertisements
has been a source of much amusement, because an universal food for
insectivorous birds is necessarily an anomaly. There are, if I may use
the term, many “grades” of insectivorous birds; and food on which a
Thrush or Blackbird would thrive would go a very little way towards
keeping a Blackcap, a Nightingale, or a Wren alive even, leaving condition
out of the question. Manufacturers of bird-foods seem to be content with
placing a food on the market that will keep life in our birds without
bringing the feathers off them : that is “ bird keeping,” but it is not
“ aviculture.” The food has yet to be invented that will maintain the
delicate velvety suppleness of feather that one finds on fresh-caught
specimens. To more fully explain what I mean, I recommend any
aviculturist to handle a fresh-cauglit bird and note the quality of the
feathers and the elasticity of the quills ; then, a month or six weeks later,
go through the process again and it will be found that -the quills have
lost, in some degree, their elasticity and the web will be more brittle, while
the body feathers generally will not have the bloom on them they
previously had.

73

This can be obviated to some extent by a plentiful supply of live
food, but, in the case of caged birds, much discretion is required in the
administration of such live food as the average aviculturist gets hold of ;
mealworms being the alpha and omega as a rule, but as they are stimulating
rather than nourishing they cannot be given with impunity.

Then there are individual peculiarities in birds to cope with : some will
eat and thrive on food that others of the same species would obstinately
refuse. A Robin I had, never did so well on my theoretically rational food
as he did on the bread crumbs and crushed hempseed of his former owner t
and I could quote many such instances.

I have no desire to disparage any brand of ready-made food ; many
are liiuch better than the novice would make for himself, but none are
perfect : as a fadt, in nine cases out of ten, the sponsor of a bought food
says, “On this, and mealworms and meat occasionally, my birds thrive.”
Exactly ! and to what extent, I would seek to know, are they indebted to
these very tit-bits, which are so extremely nourishing that but little is
required ? Aviculturists would do well to adopt the motto, “ Little and
good,” iu dieting their charges. They would then get a deal more song —
if song they wanted — than they do where a bird has to eat a large quantity
of food in order to obtain sufficient nourishment to maintain life, or has to
spend its time picking over a heap of food in search of the only ingredients
it cares for or, as a rule, requires.

I wish it to be understood that I allude entirely to the feeding of
British Birds, and more especially to that of the smaller Warblers. A
tablespoouful of paste made of ants’ cocoons and yolk of egg is much more
acceptable to them neat, than the same ingredients diluted with a handful
of bread crumbs which the}- seldom partake of, and which, I cannot hello
feeling, robs the paste by absorption of some portion of its nutritive
•qualities. T. Marshau,.

THE ETHICS OF EXHIBITING.

Sir,— Although perhaps late in the day, I may be allowed to trespass
on the ground already gone over. Opinions are sure to differ, but if we
draw the line within reason, surely sending our birds occasionally to Shows
will not be considered cruelty, neither will it be detrimental to their health.
But to go farther than this, as some exhibitors do, whose ambition it is
to show' their birds almost unceasingly throughout the season, and who no
sooner receive them home from one Show than they dispatch them to
Another, must, I admit, render the poor creatures’ lives not w'orth living.
Exhibitors such as these surely can have but little love towards their
feathered friends, but certainly must be studying what financial gain may
be obtained.

I have won hundreds of prizes with Foreign Birds, but it has
invariably been my practice to be at the Shows with my birds during
the greater part of the time, that I may see that the Stewards do not feed
them with poultry-foods, which I have seen done at some exhibitions. It
is most necessary that exhibitors should personally attend, to see to the
well-being of their pets, and not leave them hr. the hands of those who
have no knowledge of their requirements. Perhaps, with some who
exhibit, the .'journeying to the Show would' be' impossible : then I would
recommend them-. to send only within reasonable distances.

I have some specimens which I really think enjoy an outing:.

79

particularly a Great Salmou-crested Cockatoo, whose delight it is to set
up a cry louder than any other exhibit, and one might as well try to still
the tempest as attempt to quiet him when beyond concert pitch. This is
his way of showing his pleasure— unfortunately it is not always appreciated
by the audience gathered round him.

In my opinion, two or three well-managed Shows annually, (Summer
preferably to any other season, when our foreigners would not suffer from
the cold) should find favour with all true fanciers. They are the grandest
of all sights in my estimation, and must necessarily help us as aviculturists,
and have for many years been a great attraction to thousands.

- H. T. T. Camps.

TITS AND NUTHATCHES.

Sir, — While spending my Christmastide at a country rectory I was
much delighted with the tameness of the birds. Outside one of the
windows of the drawing-room, under the verandah, a piece of suet was
suspended in a little network bag. To the feast thus provided came
continually, all day long, a Great Tit, a Blue Tit, a Marsh Tit, and a
pair of Nuthatches. The Nuthatches were also furnished with a little
store of nuts in a hollow log, to which they did full justice, as may be
supposed. The birds were within four or five feet of the window, and did
not mind being looked at by the people in the room. They could be far
better observed than if they were in an aviary.

It seems to me we have here a “branch of aviculture ” which most of
ns are too apt to neglect.

It is generally admitted that the Tits are not suited for captivity, and
will not live long in confinement, even under the most favourable
conditions ; but they can be easily induced to approach close to the
house, and can then be well observed from the windows — surely it is
better to content ourselves with thus observing them, and give up, once
for all, all attempts to keep them in either cage or aviary.

Horatio R. Fittmer.

BREEDING RESULTS.

Sir, — We have had, in several numbers of the Magazine, tlie'particu-
lars of the breeding results of various members during 1895. I, for one,
have read them with pleasure and interest. Thinking it may be interesting
to know what starts have been made this year, I send you the following-
notes of the eggs and young obtained in my aviary up to February 17th,
and hope other amateurs will favour us with theirs.

Three Ribbon Finches, from five eggs, hatched about a fortnight ago
fledging and doing well. Two unfertile eggs.

Two Budgerigars, three hatched from four eggs, one died j^oung ; about
three weeks old and will soon leave the nest — two fine nestlines.
Hen about to lay again.

Another pair sitting on five eggs, several are darkened and appear good.
Another pair continually in nest and hen expefited to lay daily.

Five New Zealand Parrakeets’ eggs laid at various times, but all broken
almost immediately, and never two in the nest together. Hen appears
out of condition, which is doubtless the cause.

Several nests built, and some half dozen eggs laid. by u pair, of Zebra Finches,
no young reared — .one hatched, but disappeared almost immediately.
I rarely succeed with these birds. . A. Savage.

So

FANCY FEATHER AND BIRD SKIN SAFES.

Sir,— Perhaps the enclosed cutting about a sale which took place afew
da3'S:ago, and which takes place abont every fortnight during the }rear, will
interest some of our lady readers.

; If the fair sex could 011I3' be persuaded of the thousands upon
thousands of extremely rare birds that are slaughtered ever3' 3rear for the
decoration of their bonnets, etc. ; of the enormous waste of feathered life ;
and eventually the total extinction of birds which were at one time
plentiful, I am sure they would club together and make a promise never to
wear a feather of any sort.

There is a Society working with this end in view now, but what can
a few do against the thousands who think more of their personal adorn¬
ment than of the breath fleeting from the poor little bodies of the birds
which are either trapped, poisoned, or shot to effect this adornment.

. What these birds’ skins must cost abroad, when we see them offered
at one-thirt3’-second part of a penny per skin in the London markets,
cannot be imagined. A. Berthing.

The following is a copy of the cutting enclosed in J\lr. Bertling's letter
(From Messrs. Lewis and Peat’s Report, Feb. nth).

Feathers. — There was a good attendance of buyers at these — the
opening sales of the year. Competition, throughout, was ver3' keen, and a
considerable rise in values took place for nearly everything offered. Ospre3^
feathers of all sorts obtaining very high prices. White Paddy no change.
Gray Padd3^ were about 15 to 20 per cent, on last sales’ very high prices.
The total supply of all descriptions of Ospre3r, & c., feathers was 13,163 ozs.
against 20,137 ozs. in the December sales. Bird skins, in good supply, sold
steadity on the average ; but Birds of Paradise were in large suppty, -well
competed for, and sold at much dearer rates. Impeyan Pheasants, in small
supply, sold well. Parrots and Kingfishers, considering the qualit3r, sold at
an advance.

Bird Skins. — There was a large supply at these sales to-daj', and
they passed off well. Birds of Paradise, in large suppl3r, were well com¬
peted for, and sold at much dearer rates. Impeyan Pheasants, in small
supply, sold well. Parrots and Kingfishers, considering the quality, sold
well at an advance. Other skins, in good supply, sold steadily.

East Indian : Impe3-an Pheasants, 5s. 3d. to 7s. 3d., black argus, 3s. ;
Birds of Paradise, female round, 14s. 6d. to 24s. 6d., rifles, 4s. 5d. to 5s. many
wires, 5s. 9d. to 8s., black, 15s. 6d. to 17s. 6d., long tails, 7s. to 7s. 9d., black
and white, ns. 6d., new description, 40s. to 61s. ; pigeons, crested, 2s. to 5s.,.
bronze, 3s. 3d. to 3s. 6d. ; bee eaters, fd. to id. ; owls, small, fd. to 3|d. 7
jays, ifd. to 2§d., parrots, medium, id. to 2fd., ringnecks, ifd. to 3§d.,
blackheads, fd. to 3|d., roseheads, ifd. to 5fd., large ifd. : kingfishers, flat,
2|d. to 3fd. ; quails, fd., starlings, fd. ; jungle cocks, flat, 2s. id. various
birds i-32d. to fd. per skin.

West Indian : Humming fd. to 2d., various fd. to ifd,, ruby 2fd. to
5d., emerald, 2fd., ditto large 2d. to 2fd., ditto small, ifd. to 2d., Bonaparte,
6fd., amethyst, ifd. to 2§d., blue throated, 2fd.; tanagers, red, qd. to 5fd.,
yellow ana black, 7fd. ;; chatterers, blue, 4s. 8d. to 5s. 3d., trogons, 2S. 9d.,
various birds, i-iSd. to fd. ; osprey skins, with cross feathers, is. Sd. to
6s. 6d. per skin.

THE

Hvtcultural flfoagasine,

BEING THE JOURNAL OF THE

AVICULTURAL SOCIETY.

VOL. II.— NO. 18.

All rights reserved.

APRIL, 1896.

MY AVIARIES AND THEIR INMATES.

By R. A. Todd.

Perhaps the experiences of my first season as an aviculturist
may be of some interest to other members of our Society who
are also beginners in this fascinating hobby.

I started operations in May, in an octagonal open-air
aviary of about nine feet in diameter and ten feet to the apex of
the roof. Years ago, this had accommodated an Eagle, but was
now tenantless and quite out of repair. I covered it with
half-inch wire netting, boarding in the sides and top towards
the north and east, placing various nesting appliances on the
boarded sides among branches of box, fir, and }^ew — these,
however, lost their leaves and became bare and thin very early
in the season. I have seen furze recommended for this purpose
and shall try it next season, it will no doubt form a denser cover.
A cement basin in the centre held the water for bathing and
drinking; a pipe from a twenty-gallon cistern, outside, filled
every morning, permitting of a fresh supply being turned on at
intervals during the day, a second pipe carrying off the surplus ;
I found a good scrubbing out necessary two or three times during
the hot weather, to keep the cement clean. Round this basin I
planted a ring of grass about a foot wide : birds seem very fond
of grass, besides probabty finding many small insedts among it,
and I consider it a very important feature of the aviary.

Here, on the nth of May, I turned out sixteen pairs of
Ornamental Finches. The cold weather that followed was fatal
to Cordon Bleus and Bengalese, but Waxbills (including the
Sidney Waxbill) Nuns, Zebra, Ribbon, Parson and Saffron
Finches were unharmed. I subsequently added a cock Nonpareil
and Indigo Finch. Among the original occupants were also a pair
of Budgerigars : the hen was soon killed, as I imagined by the
cock, and as the latter seemed spiteful to the smaller birds, I had
to remove him.

82

Probabty owing to insufficiently dense cover, my breeding
results have been meagre, consisting of five Zebra Finches and
two Ribbon Finches. Two of the Zebras were hens, and, after
attaining full plumage, died from egg-binding in the Autumn.
The same fate overtook the old hen with her third nest ; a hen
that I bought to replace her soon followed her to the grave.
The young cocks and the Ribbon Finches, which were both
cocks, are still strong and healthy.

With Parson Finches, I have been as unfortunate as
Dr. Butler : my pair, after making various desultory pretences
to commence housekeeping, onty settled down to serious work
late in October, when the hen promptly succumbed to egg¬
binding. Mr. Abrahams kindly presented me with another hen,
which, in a short time, met with a similar fate.

During the season I had several other losses, mainly from
diarrhoea, probably from leaving green food in the aviary after it
had lost its freshness.

On the North side of this aviary I have built a house
about five feet square and six feet high. The walls are formed
of half-inch boards inside and out, with roofing felt between ;
the roof has the felt outside ; a skylight and windows on each
side give the necessary light. In this house I have hung up
several small travelling cages, substituting for the wire fronts
pieces of cardboard with a small hole in the centre, and fixing a
perch in front ; filled with hay, these cages afford a warm refuge
for my birds on cold nights.

For the winter, I have only left in this aviary Zebra,
Ribbon, Parson, Saffron, Nonpareil, and Indigo Finches ; with
the help of a few mealworms about three days a week, these
have, so far, stood the inclement weather perfectly.

For a bird-room, I have made use of a greenhouse about
tw’enty feet long b3r fifteen feet wide. On benches round the
sides are arranged six cages, three feet long, two feet wide, and
nearly three feet high, three of these are box cages ; there are
also six smaller cages. On a centre bench are three small
aviaries, about five feet square, and five feet and a half high. The
chief fault with this house is that it gets rather too warm in bright
sunny weather, in spite of free ventilation and an outside blind ;
I hope to obviate this difficulty in future by having a much
thicker blind on the south side, raised some inches from the
roof to allow the air to play between it and the glass. To
economise fuel, I have covered the glass on the east end with
felt and fixed mats round the sides for the winter. I have

33

omitted to mention that the house is fitted with a good supply
of hot water pipes.

I have had no breeding results here yet, the arrangements
being onty completed late in the autumn.

At present one aviary is occupied by a collection of
Waxbills and the smallest Finches. Another by Zosterops,
Superb and Scarlet Tanagers, Persian and Red-vented Bulbuls,
and Pekin Robins. The third contains several Weavers,
Cardinals, and a cock Black - tailed Hawfinch. A Chinese
Laughing Thrush (whose song, especially early in the morning,
is almost deafening) and a Blue-winged Green Bulbul, each
have a cage to themselves. The Bulbul was originally in the
soft-billed birds’ aviary, but had to be removed on account of
his quarrelsome disposition. A Shama also has a cage to him¬
self: the merits of this bird are so well known that I need not
describe them.

Conspicuous among the occupants of the other cages is a
pair of Parrot Finches. Contrary to Mr. Fillmer’s experience,
my birds will not touch paddy rice. Although they do not
behave as affectionately to each other as many of the small
Finches, I have often noticed them sitting close together on the
same perch. They have lately shown a disposition to nest, but I
have not thought it advisable to encourage them at this
unfavourable season of the year.

A small cage, in a warm corner, holds a pair of Orange¬
breasted Waxbills which should have bred, but they have shown
no disposition to do so. I have given them a basket nest in a
small bush, and tried to stimulate them with ants’ eggs and yolk
of egg, but all in vain : they never touch anything but the
usual seeds.

A pair of Red-headed Gouldian Finches in one of the
large cages, which I have had since April, have also never
attempted to nest, though supplied with everything needful.
They are in perfedt health. I consider the song of the cock
bird very pleasant, though low it is very sweet ; his love-dance,
which I have only observed on one occasion, consists of a series
•of perpendicular hops up and down on the perch.

Among the Cardinals, is a Texan or Small-billed Cardinal.
Though perhaps not so striking in colour as his congeners, his
dark grey plumage touched with red, and red-suffused breast,
make him a rather handsome bird ; his crest is grey, also tinged
with red, and is more constantly carried eredt than is the case
■with the other crested Cardinals. He is extremely fond of

84

cockroaches, and though rather shy, will at once come down
from his perch when I put a panful of the coveted delicacy in
the aviary.

I find all the larger Finches are fond of oats, though
I do not remember to have seen this grain recommended by
aviculturists. In the summer I collected a good supply of grass
in seed as it ripened, also plantain ; the small Finches take very
kindly to the former, but will not touch the plantain. Hips
and haws are also useful food ; soft-billed birds eat the flesh,
Tanagers being especially greedy after it : the Finches pick out
the seeds, and then eat the fleshy parts as well.

I think it best to have as many of my birds as possible in
the open air in the summer, but it is no doubt useless to expeCt
to do much good in the way of breeding, with a large number in
one aviary. I am, therefore, planning a new outside aviary,
fourteen feet long and ten feet deep, with a house at the back,
four feet deep, for shelter in bad weather. I shall divide this
into two compartments, in each of which I think three pairs of
small Finches should find sufficient accommodation to rear their
families without interfering with each other. I propose having
the greater part of the ground of grass, and only gravel under
the perches ; I suppose it would not do to have the whole grass.
By means of this aviary I hope to considerably increase my
young broods next summer.

RARE FOREIGN BIRDS.

(SECOND SERIES).

V.— THE CRIMSON-BANDED WHYDAH.

By H. J. Fuixjames.

It is as difficult to keep the name of our friend Mr. Joseph
Abrahams out of any article on Foreign birds, as it was to keep
King Charles’s head out of the memorial of the immortal Mr.
Dick. I therefore make no apology for commencing by stating
that in all Mr. Abrahams’ experience he has seen but two
Crimson-banded Whydahs, one of which is mine.

In all the works upon Foreign birds that are in my
possession, I have only found one reference to the species. This
occurs in Part I of “ Birds of Western Africa,” by W. Swainson,
forming Vol. XI of “The Naturalists’ Eibrary.” The Eatin
name of the bird is therein given as Vidiia rubritorques : but
when, by the courtesy of Dr. Butler, I was shewn over the
unique collection of foreign bird skins at the Natural History
Museum at South Keusiugton, I found the skin of the species

85

labelled Penthetria ardens. The former seems the better name, as
it indicates both the group to which the bird belongs and its
‘ 4 crimson ” throat band. In my own specimen, however, the
band is decidedly not crimson, but of an orange-yellow color. I
append the description given in the work above mentioned, as it
accurately describes the bird, with the exception that the tail of
my bird is fully ten inches in length, instead of six as mentioned :

“ The entire plumage, both above and below, is deep and
glossy black ; paler and inclining to brown on the wings, where
the tertials have a pale fulvous external margin. The bright
orange - scarlet band is situated across the upper part of the
breast, or rather at the lower part of the throat.

“Total length, from the bill to the tip of the wings, four
and one-tenth inches ; tail beyond, six ; bill, from the gape,
half; wings, three; tarsus, eight - tenths ; middle toe and claw,
one ; hinder ditto, eight-tenths.”

It may be of some interest to explain how I became
possessed of this rara avis. In the late summer of 1894, there
was established at the Westminster Aquarium a bird stall at
which I was a frequent visitor. One evening I saw two birds in
a cage together, one of which I readily identified as a cock
pintail Whydah just coming into color. The other was the
subjedt of the present chapter. The manager of the stall offered
them to me (at the price of one guinea) as a pair of “ Cut-throat
Whydahs.” He certainly got very near to the name of one, as
the bird is marked very similarly to the “ Cut-throat” or Ribbon
P'inches. After a little bargaining, I bought the “pair” for
twelve shillings and sixpence, thus making the cheapest
acquisition that has ever fallen to my lot. I have since been
offered ten pounds for the one bird.

The principal beauty of the Crimson-banded Whydah is
in his tail. While the ornamental part of the tail of the Pintail
and Paradise Whydahs consists of four feathers only, in this bird
the whole tail becomes elongated, and when it is at its best each
of the ten feathers of which it is composed becomes wavy, and
appears of a spiral form, the result being that his tail is an
exadt counterpart in miniature of the magnificent appendage
possessed by the Giant Whydah.

I bought my bird in full plumage in August, 1894, and he
kept in condition until May, 1895. I11 that mouth he cast his

tail, without changing plumage, and a new tail grew immediately.
At the end of Odtober he moulted throughout, the strange part
of the proceeding being that, while his new body and wing
plumage came “ out of color,” yet his new tail grew black from

86

the com men cement, excepting that, for the first week or two,
each feather was tipped with the narrowest possible band of
the “fulvous” color which margins his wings when in full
plumage.

As is the case with most of the Whydahs and Weavers,
my bird is exceedingly pugnacious, and at first I was afraid he
would injure some of his companions in the aviary : so I caged
him separately in a specially made cage. This did not by any
means answer, as during the first week of his solitary confine¬
ment he had two fits, out of which he was only brought by
immersion in hot water. After getting him out of his second fit,
I concluded to turn him into the larger birds’ aviary, and let the
other occupants take care of themselves. I soon found that his
“bark was worse than his bite,” for beyond driving about for a
few minutes, occasionally, any bird that will make way for him,
he does not do any mischief. It is most amusing to see his look
of astonishment when he finds anything to face his attack. He
stands for a minute with every feather on end, and hisses with
all his might at his opponent. If the other bird still refuses
to move, the Whydali will glance round for fresh quarry, and
immediately give chase. The aviary, however, being gft. by 9ft.
by 4^-ft. deep there is plenty of room for exercise of this descrip¬
tion, and, as he is somewhat handicapped by the weight of his
tail, any fugitive fleeing from his assault has considerably the
best of it : therefore no serious harm results from his apparently
vicious disposition. At the same time, I would certainly not
trust him with small Waxbills and Finches. He is exceedingly
fond of his bath, and as the bath in my aviary consists of a
zinc tray some twenty-one inches long by six inches wide he can
drench himself to his heart’s content. It is bad luck for any
bird to approach him when he is so engaged. After he has
thoroughly wetted himself there is peace for a time, for when
he has with some difficulty clambered to a perch, his sub¬
sequent toilet is a matter of great importance, and occupies his
entire attention for a considerable while.

Although he has access to fruit, soft food, and various
sorts of seeds, I have never seen him take anything but canary
and millet, with the exception of a daily mealworm of which
he is very fond.

Mr. Cronkshaw has the only other specimen of which I
have heard, and I should be obliged if he would let our
members and myself know, through the Magazine, whether his
experience coincides with mine. It would be also interesting if
some of the experienced aviculturists who are members of our

§7

Society would kindly say if I am correct in claiming such
extreme rarity for the Crimson-banded WhydahA

VI.— THE DESERT TRUMPETER BUEEFINCH.

Erythrospiza githaginea.

By E. G. B. Meade-WaIvDO.

This charming little bird is certainly amongst my greatest
favourites, both in its wild state and as an aviary bird, possess¬
ing, as it does, many good qualities, viz., extreme hardihood,
amiability, readiness to breed, beauty of appearance, and a most
remarkable voice. I am not aware that it has been described
as an aviary bird by anyone except Dr. Bolle, but am open to
correction on this point. This Desert finch has a very wide
though interrupted range, extending from the Island of Fuerta-
ventura on the west, to Southern Afghanistan on the east, when
it is replaced by E. obsoleta ; further again to the east, in the
Gobi desert another form, E. mongo lica, occurs. It is a bird of
the true desert but always frequents parts of a stony character,
and where pink limestone is more or less frequent : its own rose
colour harmonizing in a remarkable degree with its surroundings.
It is of great power of flight, and must travel immense distances
for water.

In its wild state and in breeding plumage, it is a most
beautiful bird. In the male, the thick and powerful beak is
bright coral red, the feathers of the crown of the head stone
colour edged with rose-pink, the back the same, rump and upper
tail coverts bright rose-pink, tail dark isabelline edged with rose,
wings the same but with scapulars edged with brilliant rose-pink,
the whole of the under parts suffused with rose colour, the legs
orange. The female is a very dingy edition of her mate. In the
autumn and winter both sexes are of a sand colour but slightly
suffused with rose, and the beak is but pale red. In a state of
confinement the full colour is never reached, but the male of a
pair that I have had since 1888, is nearly as good as a wild bird.
The young in their pure isabelline dress are very interesting.
This Bullfinch is about the size of the common Einnet.

* Since the above was written, another of these beautiful birds has
been imported, and I have been fortunate enough to get possession of him.
I am, however, compelled to keep him in a separate cage, as there would be
war to the death if I turned him into the aviary with the other, and I am
afraid to trust him with my collection of small birds.

88

The call note is a peculiarly metallic twang-twang, but the
breeding song of the male is most remarkable. It commences
with a great deal of show of singing — throat puffed out, head
turned from side to side, etc. — but very little sound is the result ;
then the head is drawn back and a clear metallic blast is given,
sometimes quite prolonged, strongly resembling the sound of a
toy trumpet. When first heard in a wild state this sound is most
puzzling, and the little pink bird, sitting most probably on a
pink stone, is practically invisible. They nest very early in the
year; the nest is slightly built, outwardly of dry weeds, and
lined with goat’s or camel’s hair ; it is placed in a fairly open
cranny of a rock or under a stone, occasional^ in a wall, and
usually contains five or six eggs of a beautiful pale blue
lightly spotted with dark purple specks. In an aviary, the
Trumpeter Bullfinch is perfectly hardy, and although a bird
which can know nothing but cloudless skies and great heat
throughout the greater part of its range, appears perfectly
indifferent to the greatest cold we ever have in this country.
Some of mine were wintered for me by a friend and endured
the greatest severity of the winter of 1895, in a peculiarly cold
aviary open to the north , and nothing could possibly look more
perfectly healthy than they did — singing all through February.
Of course all birds of the desert must be accustomed to great
and sudden variations in the temperature. All seeds are eaten,
canary and spray millet being the greatest favourites. They are
partial to the seeds of many grasses and weeds, and shepherd’s
purse is very popular. No insect or egg food is touched. They
are fond of the green of dandelion. The young are fed on the
seeds of grasses and weeds disgorged from the crop. They
prefer an open box to build in, placed under cover and on a
beam or ledge. The female pulls the lining of her nest over the
eggs until she commences to sit. They are extremely fond of
salt, and are always nibbling lime in some form or other.

Although, as I said before, this is a very amiable little
bird and not at all inclined to be pugnacious, still, as far as my
experience goes, it will not breed successfully in an aviary with
other small birds : for as soon as the 3roung are big enough not to
require brooding during the day time, the parents will spend
a great part of their time driving away an}^ other bird that
approaches their nest, and thus neglect to feed the young often
enough.

8g

THE PALACE SHOW.

By Reginald Phieeipps.

Mr. Bonhote’s remarks on the Grey Wagtails and other
Birds raise the question as to where the line, for judging purposes,
should be drawn between migratory and non-migratory species,
for there are not a few that we commonly regard as non-migratory
of which a number of the members troop off to the Mediterranean,
Algeria, &c., and the remainder move far away from their sum¬
mer resorts : those members of the different species which pass
the warmer months in our southern counties going still farther
south at the approach of winter, their places being taken by
hardier specimens which have been breeding, and probably were
bred, more to the north, or possibly in Northern Germany,
Denmark, or even Scandinavia. In just a few species it may be
that every member which passes the summer in this country goes
abroad ; but the absence of these individuals is not noticed, for
we see numbers about, which we think the same, but which are
immigrants from colder climes, like our familiar friends the
Fieldfare and Redwing.

Now all these are “ migratory ” species, so far as the Palace
■Show is concerned, some of the members of the several species
being likewise Birds of Passage ; and, consequently, not only the
Grey and Pied Wagtails (for the latter also migrate in the narrow
sense of the word) but many another so-called “resident” species
should be exhibited in the migratory classes so long as the latter
are erroneously headed “ Birds of Passage and Migratory Birds.”

The uncertainty prevailing as to how birds will be judged
must keep away many an exhibit from the shows : Mr. Bonliote
brings a few eccentricities in judging under notice. And un¬
certainty also occurs in connection with Waxwings, Bearded Tits,
&c. This year not a Waxwing appeared ; and no wonder if its
previous treatment at the Palace be considered. Bast }rear
several very good Bearded Tits were exhibited in the A.O.V.
British, and also in a migratory, class ; they were not marked
Wrong Class in either, but were ignored because (so I was told)
they were foreigners. This year they were received and
noticed in the A.O.V. British class ; and yet I think I may
venture to assert as a faCt that not only these individual birds but
all the Bearded Tits and Waxwings ever exhibited in this country
have been foreigners.

It will be seen therefore that, in respedt of migratoiy and
foreign “British” birds, it is impossible, from the nature of
things, for any judge to judge alwa3rs correct^ ; but that is not

go

any reason why judges, as a body and as individuals, should not
judge consistently, and therefore satisfactorily, which they
certainly do not now succeed in doing, the contradictions in the
judging, and the grumbling, going on year after year in a
manner by no means creditable to those responsible for the
management.

Surely it would not be a very difficult matter for the
Palace and other large show authorities to decide, and to print
in their schedules, in what classes well-known doubtful species
should be placed, and thus save many a sneer at their expense,
and inspire a sense of confidence among exhibitors.

My visit to the show this year was very hurried ; and I did
not get through one-third of the classes; but a glance at the
catalogue seems to expose other birds in wrong classes besides
those mentioned by Mr. Bouhote. The Ring Ouzel is one of our
regular Birds of Passage ; and yet at show after show, as I pointed
out last year, it is received and honoured in a non-migratory
class; and the Great Shrike, exhibited in the same class, is, as
a rule, a winter visitor only. A Crossbill was exhibited in class
ioi and another in No. 104, yet neither was rejected.

Dr. Simpson has referred to the Red-sided Tit as a rare
bird. Rast year, in a moment of weakness, I ventured to infer the
same of Mrs. Palmour’s Orange-flanked Parrakeets, Brotogerys
pyrrhopterus, from South America, which (or one of them) she
still persists in calling Trichoglossus pyrrhopterus from the
Sandwich Islands. Yet hardly had the words appeared in print
than I obtained a pair myself; and during the year a few more
pairs arrived. Last spring I thought I really had secured a rare
bird, a specimen of what appeared to be Wallace’s Lory, Eos
wallacei-, but during the summer a few more trickled over; and later
such a number reached this country that they became common.
But I may well add here that at the Zoo one was obtained and
named the Purple-breasted Lory, Eos riciniata. On referring
to the N.H.M. Catalogue, I find reference made to a third, Eos
insular is, the three differing apparently only in the extent of the
purple patch on the crown, occiput, and nape. When the flood
of these birds came over, I found the purple in all stages, on
some connedted with the purple collar, on others not, on others
again with hardly a trace of purple on head or nape. These
specimens were in poor plumage for the most part, and were
probably immature ; but one could hardly help feeling that the
three were probably but one species in reality. Mais a nos moutons:
I have been told that the Red-sided Tits, Partes varius, have not
been seen in this country for twelve years ; but in the late autumn

91

large numbers arrived, of which the majority, I fear, have since
died. Some years ago I gave a substantial sum for a pair of
Ornamented Lorikeets ; several have come over since ; and late
last autumn they arrived in shoals. Really I am not exaggerating
very much, but one cannot help feeling the reverse of sweet-
tempered sometimes ; and none the more sweet was I when letters
came in offering some of these “great rarities” at very fancy
prices, although for a time almost any number of the Lories and
Lorikeets mentioned and to be mentioned were obtainable at
20 /- a head, and the Tits for a very small sum. One feels
inclined to say that one will never give a high price for a bird
again, no matter how “ rare.”

The class for Lories and Lorikeets (excluding the strangers,
for the Yellow - naped Parrakeet was a good bird) was chiefly
noticeable for the general bad plumage of the exhibits — quite a
number appearing in the travel -worn dresses in which they
reached this country recently — and for the presence of a rare
species which seems to have been pretty generally overlooked.
Of the “Ruby Lorikeet” of the catalogue, it will suffice to say
that it was an ordinary specimen of Eos rubra, the common
Scarlet Lory. But Mr. H. B. Smith’s “ Lory,” No. 1827 if I
mistake not, was a new species at the Palace, and one I never
saw, that I know of, before December last, when some few
arrived along with the other Lories and Lorikeets already
referred to. This was Forsten’s Lorikeet, Trichoglossus forsteni,
from the Island of Sumbawa ; I only glanced at the “ Green Nape
Lorikeet,” but it appeared likewise to be a bird of this species.
If not particularly noticed, Forsten’s might readily be taken for
an Ornamented Lorikeet; but a closer examination reveals several
points of difference. In a bad light the head seems dark brown,
but, under more favourable conditions, the front is found to be
strongly tinged with dark blue-purple, which changes into a
dark red-purple at the back. What, for the sake of convenience,
I will call the collar, in the Ornamented is of a bright yellow on the
sides, but of a bright red behind. In Forsten’s Lorikeet, the
collar is well-defined, and of a greenish-yellow colour. Behind
this conies a dark, ill-defined, purple yoke, followed by some red,
which, on examination, proves to be an irregular extension of the
bright red breast. It is larger than its Ornamented brother,
but, in call and movements, not unlike it.

I am not fond of criticising the critics, but cannot forbear
remarking that, before I went to the Palace, I read in one of the
daily papers an account of the show, in which, among other
“ rare ” birds, a Brazilian Hangnest was mentioned, a black bird

92

with a wonderful nest (fully described) which, by some mistake,
had not been exhibited in the cage with the bird. Being fond of
the Hangnests, I wondered to myself what species this would be,
and made a point of inspecting the class. It turned out that the
“ black” Hangnest was a timid Shama, which I found crouching
in a corner of its cage, only the black feathers being exposed to
view. It is sad that even a critic, and the critic of so important
a journal, should have been led into error by so simple and
common a blunder as the mixing up of the numbers of the
exhibits. The Hangnest was only two cages removed from the
Shama ! So much for the critics, including of course the most
humble of your servants."1

REVIEW.

Foreign Fancy Birds for Voting Fanciers, by Dr. W. T. Greene,
M.A., F.Z.S. f“ Pigeons & Cage Birds" Office).

This is an unpretending little sixpenny pamphlet written
in Dr. Greene’s well-known attractive style, and likely to be of
considerable use to the novice in aviculture, if only by intro¬
ducing him to the subject and leading him on to the study of
larger works.

We cannot help thinking the title to be singularly in¬
appropriate — the word “ Fancy ” is quite inapplicable to foreign
birds, which are not bred for fancy points like poultry, pigeons
and canaries ; and we protest against aviculturists being called
“ fanciers.”

We have noted several of the author’s statements with
which we are unable to agree, but as a whole this little book is
much freer from inaccuracies than some other of Dr. Greene’s
later works, and he has wisely refrained from expounding his
favourite scientific heresies, which are made rather too obtrusive
in some of his books. Perhaps this is partly explained by the
fact that in Foreign Fancy Birds scientific names are conspicuous
by their absence, and no sort of classification is attempted.

According to Dr. Greene, “ it is quite certain that an
aviary, even on a small scale, can, if properly managed, be

* Since writing tlie foregoing, I have come across a pair of Forsten’s
Lorikeets which appear to be in adult plumage ; and the difference be¬
tween them and the specimens I had previously seen is marked. The most
striking point in the bird I find is the magnificent bright-red, unbarred,
breast, shining out in contrast with the rich purple of the abdomen and the
curious wavy yellow-green breeches. It is a remarkably handsome creatnre.
— R.P.

93

made to ‘ pay.’ ” We are afraid that there are very few members
of the Avicultural Society who have found this to be the case,
however carefully they may have followed Dr. Greene’s advice.

Dr. Greene has often declared that only True Finches
feed their young from the crop, and that this regurgitation “is the
crucial test of a finch,” yTet now, in Foreign Fancy BFds, in the
section devoted to the Zebra Finch, he tells us that “ both
parents attend to the yamng, whom they feed assiduously with
softened seed brought up from their crops.” We are very glad
to find that Dr. Greene has at last recognised the fact that not
only True Finches, but all, or almost all, small birds which feed
their young on seeds, partially digest the seed in the crop before
giving it to their young.

Foreign Fa?icy Birds contains many useful hints about
aviaries and the management of birds, and our readers will find
it well worth its very small cost, for it is really a marvel of
cheapness.

The illustrations are of very varying merit.

CORRESPONDENCE.

IS GRIT DANGEROUS TO PARROTS?

Sir, — With reference to the above subject, it would be interesting to
know if it has been proved by post-mortem examination whether wild Parrots
and Parrakeets eat grit in a natural state.

In India I believe all the members of the Parrot family are Parrakeets.
The natives of this country are very fond of keeping Parrakeets, and they
never, by any chance, give them grit. In India, I think Parrakeets are
never seen picking their food off the ground, although they may them¬
selves be on the ground to feed off a low crop like “gram.” Parrakeets in
this country, when they feed on grain, do so when it is on the stalk and in
a more or less soft condition. When caged, in India, they are generally fed
on soaked “gram,” which is soft enough to cut with the nail. It may be
that if Parrots are fed on soft food, in accordance with nature, they do not
require grit, but do require it to enable them to digest unnaturally dry
food.

Chapra-Saran, C. Harrison.

India.

SOME RARE BIRDS.

Sir, — The following notes may interest some of our members, as well
as be the means of getting at the proper names of the birds.

With reference to the Yellowish Weaver shown at the Palace — Class
107, No. 1644 — I have had four pairs of them, but only one hen lived. The
first two pairs cost about 10s. 6d. a pair, the others 7s. 9d. a pair. The
first I bought as Indian Bottle -nosed Weavers; the others as Golden
Sparrows, which name suits the birds better, as the cocks are a deep rich

94

yellow, except the flights, which have the feathers almost black, giving the
appearance of a black saddle when at rest. They have the same dash as
newly-imported Weavers, and no doubt this was the cause of their death,
through being hurt in their wild career. The cock put me in mind of the
Queen of Bavaria Parrakeet, illustrated in Dr. Greene’s “Parrots in
Captivity,” — of course in colouring only.

Now about a pair of birds which came with some Aurora Finches or
Crimson-wing Waxbills. I had three, one died. They were sent as female
Aurora Finches, but are totally unlike them in every way. About as large
as an Avadavat and of similar shape, but not nearly so long in the tail, in
fadt, with a very stumpy tail. The bill is like red wax, eye-ball black, iris nut-
brown ; legs and feet, grey; head and frontlet, black; back, wings, and upper
tail coverts, blackish; breast, chestnut with greyish-white bars straight across
from under wing coverts, from breast to abdomen, and thence to under tail
coverts gradually the colors and markings tone down till tliej'- loose them¬
selves in an ashy-grey. The deepest color is on the sides just under the
wings. They are a true pair, I am sure, as the cock sings an inaudible song
and struts about so as to show his superiority. One peculiarity is that they
have never perched, either in a cage or in the room where they have
moulted and been, now close on two years. The one I take for a hen is not
quite so bright in color, but in every other respect exactly like the cock.

W. OSBABDESTON.

THF S LENDER-BILL COCKATOO AT THE CRYSTAL PALACE.

Sir, — I do not pretend to be “infallible; ” nevertheless, my friendly
■critic, Mr. Septimus Perkins, seems to infer, and wish one to believe, that
the Slender-bill, Licmetis tenuirostris , is not a Cockatoo. Then if not, pray
what is it ? Are we to call Cockatoos Parrots, and vice versa ?

If the Slender-bill is not a representative of the Cockatoo tribe, our
worthjr authorities who have written so much on avicultural subjects have
made a gross error. Not long ago, my collection contained no less than
eleven different kinds of the Cockatoo family, and after having kept these
-species for upwards of 20 years, I fail to see my way to include the Slender-
bill under any other category than amongst the Cockatoos.

In my opinion the only possible class to which the Slender - bill
Cockatoo could be admitted, was 130 ; granting at the same time that the
bird cannot lay claim to possessing much of a crest, such as adorns many
■of the other Cockatoos ; nevertheless, he is evidently proud of what
nature has granted to him, which is a rounded white crest in miniature, the
feathers at the base being rosy or orange-tinted, thus giving him a claim to
associate with others eligible to compete in the above class.

With regard to the Macaws, the Palace authorities have for some
years past seen reason for discontinuing a class for these birds, owing to
insufficient support from exhibitors. When the Costal Palace Schedule
has been perfected, we shall probably have fewer complaints. The one who
has the responsibility of adjudicating upon the Parrot classes has, hitherto,
done his duty to the satisfaction of many ; but to please eveiyoue would be
imposssible. Quot homines tot sententicc. H. T. T. Camps.

[If we understand Mr. Perkins correctly, what he complains of is that
while both Macaws and Cockatoos are Parrots in the wider meaning of the

95

term, Macaws are allowed to compete in the class for “ any other species of
Parrot ” while Cockatoos are not. Mr. Camps replies by pointing out that
classes are specially provided for Cockatoos while they are not so provided
for Macaws ; and that the wording of class 130, “ Cockatoos, Lemon, Salmon,
White, or Orange Crested,” is descriptive of plumage and not indicative of
species. Probably many exhibitors understand class 130 to be limited to
four named species, and if this is not so it would be better expressly to
make the class one for “any other species of Cockatoo.” It would also
seem desirable to make class 128 read “ any other species of Parrot or
Macaw.” There seems to be an unwritten law by which Macaws are ad¬
mitted into class 128 and Slender-billed Cockatoos into class 130. These
little subtleties are well known to experienced exhibitors; but they are
puzzling to the novice and also to the outside public, and it would be well
if they could be avoided.]

THE SHOW CIRCULAR.

To the Editors of the Avicultural Magazine.

Dear Sirs, — As a member of the Avicultural Society I wish most
respectfully to take exception to the circular of the British and Foreign
Bird Show, inserted in the current issue of our Magazine.

I cannot see my way to subscribe to the proposed prize fund for the
Show. Am I to be therefore considered as not appreciating at its true worth
your arduous labours in the editing of the Magazine ? It is because I do
value highly your work in our Society, that I venture now to protest against
the wording of this circular. In one place, attention is drawn to the fact
that “ it is the only occasion on which the members have been asked to
contribute to any special Fund.” If it should be considered desirable that
members should be so asked, it would be much more desirable to raise the
annual subscription to the Society7 : to which I would gladly assent.

Taking this opportunity of thanking you for the great interest you
liave always taken in aviculture, I am, yours respectfully,

Arthur A. Stater.

Sir, — I take the sole responsibility for the circular to which
Mr. Slater takes exception, and I am willing to admit that it is not perhaps
very happily worded. Nevertheless I must state that a copy of it was
sent to each member of the Executive Committee before it was issued with
the Magazine.

It was certainly not for a moment present to my mind that it would
be supposed that there would be any sort of reflection on those who did not
contribute to the prize fund, and I am astonished that anyone should take
that view of it.

As to my remark that it was the only7 occasion on which the members
liad been asked to contribute to any special fund, it is a statement of a fact,
and in my experience of similar Societies a very unusual fact. I see no
reason for raising the subscription, and I am sure that such a course would
lead to a falling off in our membership, which has hitherto steadily increased,

I should like to take this opportunity7 of repeating in the most
•emphatic manner that the Show has nothing whatever to do with the
Avicultural Society7. As, however, a Show is being got up the exhibitors at

96

which are to be (practically) limited to members of the Society, it seemed to
me that the members might fairly be appealed to to contribute towards the
prize fund. The offending leaflet was sent round with the Magazine just as
any advertisement might have been sent. There has been no reference to
the Show in the Magazine itself, and it has never been brought officially
before the Council.

I am as strongly opposed as it is possible to be to our Society ever hold¬
ing a Show ; I am moreover not myself an exhibitor. Still, we must recognise
that our Society is largely supported by exhibitors and I would deprecate a
policy of hostility towards Shows. Shows undoubtedly have their uses, and
even those who most loudly denounce them are often to be seen at Shows
apparently enjoying themselves. I cannot help feeling that some of the
opponents of Showsare actuated chiefly by the idea that Shows are “ vulgar.”
Hitherto our Society has carefully abstained from pronouncing officially for
or against Shows, and I believe that to be a wise policy. I am not sure however
whether it would not be worth while for the Society to interest itself in the
appointment of competent judges, and also occasionally to offer special
prizes to be competed for by members only (the cost of such prizes not to
come out of the general fund). This is a question for the Council to
consider, and I should not urge such a course if there were any general
opposition to it. So far as the discussion in these columns on the “ Ethics
of Exhibiting” can be said to have led to any conclusion, it tended to show
that the general feeling was rather favourable to the practice of exhibiting,
if properly conducted. So long as a thing is not shown to be in itself evil,
it is surely better to try7 to influence it for good rather than ignore it
altogether.

In conclusion, I may perhaps be allowed to explain that my motive in
organising this Show is to raise funds for the objebt for which it is held,
and not enthusiasm for exhibiting.

Horatio R. Fieemer.

SEEDS FOR FOREIGN FINCHES.

Sir, — Is not the distinction which we draw between British and Foreign
Birds a very artificial one ? and is it not a distinction without a difference
which may incidently lead to very grave errors in treatment ?

The popular notion, encouraged by many writers on foreign birds, is
that while British birds should be fed on a variety of seeds, most of which
are of a more or less oily nature, foreign finches require nothing but
canary and millet seed. I believe that, so far at least as the Fringillidcz are
concerned, this is a mistake.

I have a bird-room aviary7 devoted to foreign Fringillidce and con¬
taining at present a Half-white Finch, Green and Grey Singing Finches,
a St. Helena Seed - eater, three Alario Finches, Serin Finches, and several
similar birds as to the exact species of which I am doubtful. These I
have for some months been giving, in addition to unlimited canary-seed and
a small quantity daily of white millet and Indian millet, German rape-seed
almost ad lib., linseed occasionally, and a small allowance of hemp-seed nearly
every day. At present this treatment seems to be highly successful, though
of course it has not yet been tried long enough to properly test it.

I do not think that the Ploceidcs will eat oily seeds, nor do I think they
require them or would benefit by7 them.

Horatio R. Fieemer.

THE

Hvtcultural /nbaga3tnet

BEING THE JOURNAL OF THE

AVICULTURAL SOCIETY.

VOL. II. — NO. 19. All rights reserved. MAY, 1896.

A FEW NOTES ON BREEDING SOME
AUSTRALIAN PARRAKEETS.

By John Sergeant.

What can be prettier, more attractive, or more interesting
than an aviary of the lovely Australian Parrakeets ? And when
one reflects that, given suitable surroundings, some of them will
breed in confinement almost as readily as the domestic Pigeon,
and, at least, with no more trouble, it is surprising that a greater
number of people do not keep them.

Since I became interested in foreign birds I have bred in my
aviaries Rosella, Pennant, Turquoisine and Elegant Parrakeets,
and, it is almost needless to say, the Budgerigar. Amongst these
the ubiquitous Budgerigar, of course, comes first as the species
that adapts itself most readily to its surroundings, next is the
Red Rosella (the Mealy species, for some reason or other, is
rather capricious and troublesome), Turquoisiues and Elegants
follow, and, lastly, the gorgeous Pennant and the Mealy Rosella.

Budgerigars are so well known and so universally kept that
I will not take up space by giving any hints on their treatment
when breeding.

This almost applies to the Rosella, but as it has not yet,
perhaps, become quite so common and well-known, I will devote
a few lines to it. From my experience of the Rosella, I think it
is invariably necessary to wait until your birds are about two years
old before you can expect them to nest. So that in buying birds it
is best to select the largest you can find and those that are in the
most brilliant plumage, as being presumably adults. It is not very
difficult in the case of the Rosella to discover the sexes, as the
hen is always lighter in colour, smaller and flatter in the head,
and has altogether a more feminine look about her. Rosellas are
not so intolerant of the presence of other birds as other members
of their family, and they can be safely turned into any aviary
that is not overstocked with birds. A nesting log (the best are

97

procurable at Abrahams’) should be liuug high up in a well-lit
situation, either in the inner aviary or in a sheltered position in
the outer aviary. They generally commence nesting in the early
spring months, although some imported birds I have had
persisted in nesting in winter, with, naturally, no result ; but
after a time they came to the conclusion that they had better fall
in with the vagaries of the new climate, and have since always
nested in summer. When after some days you have missed the
hen from her usual perch, do not on any account allow your
zeal to outrun your discretion by permitting yourself to take the
log down to look inside, or you will in all probability make her
forsake her eggs. During incubation, and subsequent rearing of
the young, I give an occasional dish of bread sop, and a few oats,
with plenty of hard fruit, in addition to hemp and canary seed.
The hen lays from three to five eggs, and they hatch generally in
about twenty-one days, and the young appear in about thirty days.
After the young are hatched the cock takes almost sole charge
of them, and is most assiduous in feeding them. When the
youngsters are once out of the nest they usually thrive apace,
and grow almost as big as their parents in a surprisingly short
space of time.

These notes on the Rosella appty equally well to the other
Plotycerci , viz., the Mealy Rosella and the Pennant, except that
I have never been able to induce these birds to breed in an aviary
containing any other members of their own family.

Pennants I consider the most interesting and, at the same
time, the most beautiful of the very lovely family of Broadtails,
but, unfortunately, like the Mealy Rosella, they are most
particular about being molested by the presence of other birds.
I should say that anyone who really wished to breed Pennants
should devote a small aviary to a pair, and then he would have
much more likelihood of success than if he proceeded as I have
advised for the Rosella.

Barnard’s, another species of the Platycerci, I have kept,
but never could induce them to breed, although they had an
aviary to themselves.

All the Plcityce7'ci are very hardy, and may, if first turned
out in the spring and allowed time to get gradually acclimatized,
be kept out of doors all the year round, without any fear of our
winter affecting them. I have frequently seen my birds fly
down to the fountain as soon as I have broken the ice on a
winter’s morning, and, entering the water, have thoroughly
enjoyed a good bath.

98

Turquoisines and Elegants have been so much in demand
lately that, like some mining shares, you might almost say there
has been a “ boom” in them. But it is not surprising when one
knows the birds, for they are the most fascinating of all the
Australian Parralceets that are known to aviculturists in this
country. They, like the Pennant and Mealy Rosella, will not
nest so readily unless given an aviary to themselves, although I
have reared two broods of Turquoisines and one brood of
Elegants in my large aviary, tenanted by nearly fifty other birds.
Still, I consider this an exceptional experience and one I could
not repeat with any other birds, because these two pairs were
very tame, and then, again, they had a very quiet corner all to
themselves in which I hung their nesting logs, which were
entirely hidden by heather. Given aviaries to themselves, these
Parrakeets are no trouble to the aviarist, and, although not so
prolific as one could wish, considering their desirability as pets,
the}^ will rear at least one brood regularly each year. These little
Parrakeets require a quantity of green stuff, and if they can be
turned into an aviary where there is a nice lawn they will do all
the better. I never give mine any addition to their seed diet,
•except a soft biscuit each day when they have young. Although
•several of my Turquoisines and Elegants have wintered out of
doors, I am never going to repeat the experiment, as I lost three
last winter but one, during the severe frost, and it is evident
they are not quite as hardy as other Australian Parrakeets.
Turquoisines and Elegants sit about eighteen days, and the
3?oung appear in about twenty-eight days. They seem to be
subject to no adverse influences when once fledged, and rapidly
reach maturity.

I should mention that all the Platycerci that I have ever
kept were very fond of mealworms, and I alwaj’s give them a
•daily supply during the early days of nesting, but discontinue
them when the hen disappears and commences to sit. Fruit in
season my birds always have, grit should always be supplied and
plenty of green food, but if you have grass in the aviary this is
generally sufficient.

These notes, which I must now close, are necessarily very
incomplete, as I am writing against time ; some time, perhaps, if
no one more capable takes up the subject, I may go into the matter
•of breeding Parrakeets more fully, and describe my ideal
Parrakeet aviary.

99

THE GROSBEAKS.

By H. R. Fieemer.

(Continued from page $q) ,

The Cuba Finch ( Phonipara canora).

There seem to be great doubts about the classification
of the genus Phonipara. Dr. Sharpe places them among the
Grosbeaks, but adds that they are very probably Buntings. Dr.
Butler, on the other hand, leans to the opinion that the genus is
allied to the Ploceidce or Weaver Finches, and places it between
the Fringillidce and the Ploceidce. Whichever view we adopt, we
are surrounded with difficulties. This paradoxical little bird
differs from the Fringillidce in building a domed nest like a
Weaver, and differs from the Ploceidce in laying speckled eggs
like a Finch. The fadt which to my thinking tells most in
favour of this bird being allied to the Fringillidce rather than to
the Ploceidce is that it is an inhabitant of the New World, from
which, so far as I am aware, the Ploceidce are entirely absent.
Nevertheless, even this fact is not conclusive, for in the Opossum
we have a solitary example of a marsupial inhabiting the Western
Hemisphere, and if such a remarkable exception to a general
rule can be found among mammals, we cannot deny its possibility
among birds, whose powers of locomotion are so much greater.

The Cuba Finch is about the size of the Avadavat, but
stouter in proportion to its length. The colours of the male are
as follows : — Back of the head, back, wings, and tail, green ;
forehead and face, black ; on each side of the neck a crescent¬
shaped patch of yellow, meeting on the throat ; breast, blackish
grey, fading to a dingy white on the abdomen ; beak and legs,
black.

The female has a brown, instead of black, face ; the yellow
collar is less bright ; and the breast is lighter.

If I could keep one pair of small birds, and one pair only,
I should most certainly choose Cuba Finches ; and I think most
aviculturists would make the like choice. There is a charm about
these little birds which is possessed by no other species. They
are not so gorgeously coloured as the Gouldiau Finch, not
such good singers as the Grey Singing Finch, not so graceful in
form as the Waxbills, not so tame and confiding as the Alario
Finch. They have a fair share of these various desirable
qualities, and may be called good all round birds ; but it is
difficult to say in what their charm lies, unless it is in their

IOO

bright, cheery disposition. They are ever on the move, hopping
merrily about in an inquisitive Robin-like style, and with every
jump giving a lively chirp, while the cock constantly breaks
forth into his pretty chattering song. There is not much music,
perhaps, in this short song, but all true bird-lovers delight in it —
it is such a bright, good-tempered, unpretentious little song.

The French call the Cuba Finch Chanteur de Cuba , while
the Zoological Society of London, followed by Mr. Wiener and
Dr. Butler, call it the Melodious Finch. It does not deserve
these names, and I feel sure the unassuming little bird would
never think of claiming them. But Dr. Russ goes quite to the
other extreme when he says “ It has no song.”

The Cuba Finch has often been bred in Continental
aviaries ; in England it has hitherto been very rare, consequently
few aviculturists have been able to experiment with it. I have
been unable to find any account of its successful breeding in
this country, though probably it has been reared more than once.
An interesting account of the nesting of a pair of Cuba Finches
belonging to Dr. Simpson will be found on page n of Vol. I of
the Avicultural Magazine — but though one young bird was
hatched it died very soon afterwards.

Mr. Wiener remarks on the facility with which Cuba
Finches breed, and adds, “ To breed them is very amusing,
for they will build a nest nearly as cleverly as any Weaver-bird,
and very similarly constructed. Branches of arbor vitae or firs
are most to their taste, and to these they will fix a nest about the
size and shape of a Goose’s egg, with a tube opening downwards

attached to the side, which serves as a door . Male

and female are frequently found sitting together.” I infer, from
Mr. Wiener’s phraseology, that this bird had not been bred in
his own aviary.

Dr. Russ was very successful in breeding this bird, both
in a cage and loose in his bird-room. He describes the nest as
being built “ in a thick tangle, a purse with a long entrance tube
running obliquely to and below it, only rarely an open cup, of
agave- and cocoa-fibre, strips of bast, wool and hair artistically
felted together ; completed in six to eight days.” He states the
plumage of the young to be “ brownisli-olive green ; collar pale
yellow, in the male already distindl ; face and breast blackish
brown ; underside dusty grey ; little beak dusty brown. Up to
the first moult in dull plumage, then the blackish mark shows
itself, continually getting darker, moreover, the colouring of the
breast and simultaneously the previously narrow yellow stripe

IOI

becomes gradually broader. The production of a brood takes
four weeks. Each pair yearly produces from three to as many as
seven broods.”

The eggs appear to vary somewhat in colour and markings,,
but are usually white with a faint bluish tint, and are thickly
spotted with fine reddish brown marks. They are five-eights of
an inch in length.

Mr. Wiener calls Cuba Finches “quarrelsome little birds”
and “veritable fighting cocks.” Dr. Russ says: “Disposition
showing great likeness to that of the Astrilds. Not spiteful, but
in the immediate vicinity of the nest very snappish towards
larger birds.” Both Russ and Wiener state that the young must
be removed as soon as their parents build again, otherwise there
is a risk of their being killed by the male bird. Perhaps when
breeding the Cuba Finch may be rather short tempered. When
I possessed a pair I always kept them by themselves, but my
solitary male bird has lived for more than a year in a mixed
aviary with Waxbills and other small birds, and always behaves
in a most amiable manner to all his companions. At one time
he struck up a close friendship with a hen Dufresne’s Waxbill,
and the pair were constantly to be seen sitting side by side,
preening each others’ heads. When kept in pairs these little
birds show much affedtion for one another.

The favourite food of the Cuba Finch is spray millet, and
on either this or Indian millet, with white millet, he will live
long and happily. He is fond of mealworms, but is much better
without them. A little egg occasionally, for a treat, does him
good and is much appreciated. In summer-time let him have
plenty of green food and a turf. Egg and soaked ants’ eggs
would probably suffice for the rearing of the young, and the
parents should be accustomed to this food before hatching.

Considering its diminutive size, the Cuba Finch is by no
means sensitive to cold.

The Cuba Finch has a variety of English names : that of
Melodious Finch has already been mentioned, Cuban Finch is
another. Some old writers give it the curious name of Brown¬
cheeked Grosbeak, and it will be found under that name in
Bechstein.

This bird is a native of Cuba.

(To be co?itinue(T) .

I

102

MIGRATORY BIRDS.

By Charles T. Rothera, B.A.

Probably nothing in the whole range of natural history is-
more wonderful, or requires still further elucidation, than the
subjedt of the migration of birds. But it is not so much to the
questions of the overpowering impulse that seizes our feathered
visitors at definite periods, nor the amazing powers of flight they
display, nor the prodigious rate at which their long journeys are
performed that I propose to refer, but rather to relate my
experience with some of them as inmates of the out-door aviary
I described in the Magazine for last November, and so to touch
on the general question of acclimatization.

The first migratory bird I tried to keep was one of the
White-throats. I caught it in a snap cage in my garden in the
late summer, and in the hope of catching another I kept it for
several days in the lower portion of the cage and fed it frequently
with small green caterpillars’ from the geraniums, but no other
bird was decoyed to the trap, and ultimately I removed the
captive to the aviary where it lived peaceably with the small
foreigners. Here it was fed on insectivorous food and got its
share with the Tits of ant’s eggs and mealworms. The ensuing
winter and spring were of quite average severity and dulness,
with a good deal of frosty fog and rime, but my little friend
shewed no signs of discomfort and was conspicuous among the
briskest and sleekest of the birds in the section until early autumn
when it died.

My next experience was with a hen Nightingale, the survivor
of a pair of which the cock was killed by a Nuthatch. I found it
necessary to part the two birds, which were hand-reared from the
same nest, because one persistently drove the other from the food
and would soon have caused its death by starvation, and the hen
was put with the little foreigners. She behaved just like the
White-throat, lived on the same kind of food with the addition
of some finely chopped raw meat, and was so tame that she
would run up to the keeper and take food, especially a meal¬
worm, from his fingers. She got through the spring moult with¬
out difficulty, but died in the autumn.

A Ray’s Wagtail lived a long way into the winter, but did
not get quite through, and Wheatears I have never been able to
keep from one year to another. Meadow Pipits reared by hand
from the nest survive the winter without any trouble or extra
attention.

103

It would seem, therefore, that given reasonably suitable
food, several species of migratory birds can readily endure the
rigours of our winter, and this suggests that their emigration is
induced or impelled either by the difficult}^ of obtaining food, or
by a love of change that was initiated when the conditions of
life were different from the present and has since become
ingrained as an instindt.

I have no knowledge of the habits of foreign birds in this
respect, but I find no difficulty in keepingthe Waxbills, particularly
the St. Helena, for years, and I have kept a hen Cordon Bleu
through one very severe winter, no provision whatever being
made by lamps or otherwise for warmth or to enable the birds
to feed during the long dark nights. The black and white-
headed Nuns, Alario Finches, Parsons, White-throated Finches,
Whydahs and various small Weavers all do perfectly well.

Though the Indigo bird lives year after year, I have never
been able to winter the Nonpareil, which in most respedts appears
to resemble it so closely.

The Blue-winged and White-headed Eove-birds live well
with us, as also the Red-faced when once a pair can be established,
but I have found these birds go off, even when kept indoors with
every possible care, after the manner of the Grey Parrot. Four
pairs purchased at different places, and in two instances personally
seledted for their bright, sleek, healthy appearance, died off
during last year within a few weeks of purchase, though I have
kept them easily before.

I am especially interested in the subjedt of keeping
migratory birds, as I have to keep them out of doors, and shall
be glad of hints and notes from others’ experience.

RARE FOREIGN BIRDS.

(SECOND SERIES).

VII.— THE PECTORAE RAIE.

Rallies pecloralis.

By D. Seth-Smith.

The subject of the present article is, I venture to think,
worthy of a place under the above heading, being very seldom
seen amongst aviary birds.

I obtained my pair in September last from a well-known
aviculturist, who had recently received several from North-East
Queensland ; but of the distribution of this species in its native
country, and of its habits in a wild state, I know nothing, not

104

having been able to find any mention of it in the works on
foreign birds at my disposal, which, by the way, are few.

In size the Pectoral Rail about equals our handrail ; the
beak is, however, slightly longer and more pointed.

The prevailing colour is brown, prettily speckled with
white, underparts striped black and white. There is a band of
light-brown on the breast, and a streak of white passes over the
eye to the back of the head.

When viewed closely this Rail is decidedly handsome, its
striped and speckled plumage being very pleasing.

It can run very fast indeed, but very seldom flies. It loves
shallow water in which it can wade and bathe, but will not take
to deep water unless compelled to do so, although able to swim
well. In one of my aviaries there is a pond of about a foot in
depth, and when first the Rails came into my possession I was
anxious to see if they were good swimmers, so I placed a piece
of wire netting in such a way as to prevent their reaching the
opposite side of the aviary without crossing the pond, I then
drove them towards it, but, after trying in vain to find some way
round, they simply flew over. However, the next time I placed
another piece of netting but a few inches above the surface of
the water, so that the birds would have to swim to get under it,
so, finding themselves compelled to do so, they both took to the
water and swam across, just as a Moorhen would have done.
The reluctance with which this species takes to deep water seems
to show that it is more closely allied to Crex pratensis than to
Ralhis aquaticus. Their food consists of chopped raw meat
and bread crumbs, varied with eggs and bread crumbs, scalded
cockroaches, worms, slugs, snails, and numerous other insects,
which they find for themselves in the outer portion of their
aviary. They also peck up a good deal of seed that the other
inmates of the aviary throw down.

One, the smallest, and probably the male, is quite tame,
and will readily pick up mealworms or cockroaches tossed to it,
but the larger of the two is somewhat sh)^.

I am in hopes that they may breed in the spring, but I
fear it is doubtful.

This species, in common, I believe, with all the Rails, has
the peculiar habit, so noticeable in the Moorhen, of jerking the
tail at almost every step.

It would not be wise to keep a bird like this, with so
strong a beak and with a partiality for raw meat, in a small
aviary in which there were very small birds, but, given plenty of

io5

room, it makes a very delightful aviary inmate, and its pretty
ways and graceful movements have made it a great favourite of
mine.

DANGEROUS BIRDS.

By Chas. Iy. Rothera, B.A.

The young aviculturist, anxious to extend his collection
beyond the few pet Canaries which are certain to form its
nucleus, probably searches the readily accessible books for
information as to what birds are likely to prove a desirable
acquisition ; and he is pretty sure to find a word of warning
against one or another species on account of their habitual
cross grain.

My experience, gleaned from observations extending over
a good many years, of birds in a very mixed collection, leads me
to believe that it is unfair to brand a whole race as villains
because an odd individual may have displayed aggressive
tendencies.

Thus, I found myself at the outset warned by one
authority against the Virginian Cardinal and the Red-crested
Cardinal, but I have kept both in the same division of the
aviary, sometimes pairs of each, sometimes odd ones, and never
had any trouble — well, hardly ever. I must admit that I had

rows when I put a new, brilliant cock Virginian into the
aviary where an old, dull, cripple-winged cock was established
but owing to the inability of the old one to get about freely,
nothing serious ensued. This, however, does not prove that the
Virginian is generally troublesome, but only that two cocks may
disagree even in the absence of a hen : for I was at that time
wanting a hen. So, too, I have found Red-crested Cardinals
perfectly harmless, except on one or two occasions, one of which
at least was peculiar. I had, what I believed to be, a pair. A
nest was built, and eggs were laid and carefully incubated by the
two birds alternately. But when it became apparent that no
young ones were forthcoming, I took down the nest and found
eight eggs in it, in two very distinCl clutches. These being
removed, the two birds, which had hitherto lived in perfeCt
amity, set on and fought like Whitechapel termagants until one
was killed ; when the viCtrix, not content with her success,
actually stood upon the dead body of the vanquished and
stripped it of half its feathers. On the introduction of a cock
bird, nesting was successfully undertaken and no further trouble

io6

ensued, except such as was perfectly reasonable and proper for
the due protection of the nest.

As the hen birds of both these species sing as freely and
as well as the cocks, I regard them as very desirable inmates of
a mixed aviary.

Again, the Greater or Ox-eye Tit is held up to reprobation,
and is particularly accused of being partial to the brains of
smaller birds. I have never found them so, and I am seldom
without representatives.

English Robins, too, have a bad reputation. I have no
personal experience that will justify this, except as among
themselves. I find it impracticable to keep two together, though
I am very desirous of establishing a pair if I can. A friend of
mine had some Canaries and small foreign birds killed by a
Robin, who was caught in flagrante delicto after several deaths
had been attributed to mice. I am of opinion that it had not a
sufficiently liberal allowance of animal food, and so was led to
murder to satisfy its natural cravings.

I have found the various Weavers terrible fellows among
themselves when in colour, but at other times they appear to be
inoffensive, and at all times they are indifferent to other species
of birds.

I have already recounted my experience of the Pin-tailed
Whydah ; he is, when in colour, a Turk among Armenians.

The Rosellas seem dangerous : a fine Mealy (a cock bird)
proving himself a perfect hawk, and a hen Red Rosella showed all
the same propensity, but through being injured in one wing she
could not become formidably aggressive. By the way, she has
just died, the oldest bird in the aviary, having been introduced
in 1889.

The mode of attack of the Parrot tribe is peculiar. The
aggressor creeps quietly up behind its victim and seizes it by
the leg, which, with a single nip it either breaks or bites off
altogether. This is apparently only the playfulness of the tribe,
for they indulge in the joke on any bird that is careless enough
to allow them to approach, and without any indication of
personal antipathy. Young birds fresh out of the nest fall an
easy prey to this method of attack. Budgerigars, Grey- and
Red-headed Rove Birds, R.osellas, and Ringnecks (all of which
I class under the general name of Parrots) all amuse themselves
in this way ; but I have not observed it in the Cockatiels — which
are absolutely inoffensive — nor in the Moustache Parrakeets.

io7

I have heard the Hawfinch charged with precisely the
same offence, but have not found the charge justified. I have
two pairs at the present time.

The Thrush tribe are universally dangerous in my ex¬
perience, and a strong cock Skylark in full song will attack a
Turtle Dove or even a Pheasant, and will show fight to a Rosella.

My advice is : Do not keep two cocks of one species
together in the presence of a hen or hens if peace is desired.

THE ASPECT OF THE BIRD ROOM.

By H. R. Fillmer.

This is a matter of considerable importance to the
aviculturist, although perhaps it is not often that he has any
choice in the matter. Usually there is only one room in the house
which can be appropriated to the exclusive use of the birds, and
their owner has to take that or nothing. Still, some are more
fortunately situated, and many on removing to a new house can
seledt one which possesses a room suitable for a bird-room.

For foreign birds a southern aspedt is undoubtedly the
best, as it secures a maximum of sunshine during the winter,
when it is most needed. Moreover, it is sheltered from the
winds which blow from colder quarters, and in the middle of the
summer when the heat is apt to be excessive even for foreign
birds, the sun’s rays, in consequence of the great elevation of
the sun at midday, do not penetrate far into the room. A room
facing north is too cold, and is also very frequently damp ; still,
good results are often obtained in such a room, and undoubtedly
diredt sunshine is not so necessary as it is sometimes supposed to
be. An eastern aspedt is also too cold, but it has the advantage
of the morning sun, and if a south room cannot be obtained
perhaps an east room is the best alternative. A west room will
answer admirably in the winter on account of its warmth, but it
is very unsuitable in the summer, for it then becomes intensely
hot in the afternoon and evening, while the temperature falls
rapidly during the night, and is at its lowest in the morning
when the birds especially need warmth. In the summer a west
window admits much more diredt sunshine than a south one, as
the rays of the afternoon sun shine horizontally through it,
therefore it becomes overheated in the latter part of the day. This
high temperature would suit the birds if it could be maintained —
but it cannot, and nothing tries them more than rapid changes
of temperature.

A regular rather than a high temperature is desirable for
foreign birds. If you have to put up with a west room you must
be careful to have a sun blind outside the window.

THE PARROTS AT NORTHREPPS HARE.

“The Gurneys of Earlham,” by Augustus J. C. Hare, is a
work which by no means specially appeals to the aviculturist,
nevertheless, the following extracts from letters published
therein, and which were written by Richenda Buxton from
Northrepps Hall in 1855, will be found interesting by our
readers.

“ The Scarlet Lowry* flew down to greet us from his stand opposite
the drawing room window when we reached home ; the other Parrots and
Cockatoos were flying about in great glee. A pair of Cockatoos are sitting
on their two eggs in the box near the chimney ; whenever the hen bird
leaves the nest her mate takes her place. The young Cockatoos are
delighted to follow us about the garden.

“ The hay is being made and the school-children are coming to play
in it, and an express was sent to Cromer for plenty of strawberries and
milk for their supper. This has been spread on the lawn, and, as usual,
has quickly attracted the Parrots. The Scarlet Lowrys are in the acacia,
two Cockatoos on the grass, and stealing bread and butter from the
children ; many others are walking and screaming around.

“I sat some time under the chestnut tree, much amused by watching
five Cockatoos in full gambols in the beech tree ; apparently the beech-nuts
must be ripening by the attraction they seem to have.”

The fadl that Parrots and Cockatoos were allowed their
freedom in the grounds at Northrepps, is, of course, well known,
but we do not remember to have read any detailed account of
the results of these experiments in acclimatization. Unfor-
tunatety, “ The Gurneys of Earlham ” contains nothing on this
subjedt beyond such incidental references as those which we
have quoted.

CORRESPONDENCE.

THE PALACE SHOW.

Sir, — If we could get a few experienced aviculturists to write such
letters as that of Mr. Phillipps in the April number of our Magazine, we
might reasonably hope, firstly, that the Palace and other Show Committees
would take steps to prevent the recurrence of such mistakes as those
mentioned ; and, secondly, that newspapers professing to report important
Shows would send representatives who would at least know a Shama from a

15 Apparently an eccentric way of spelling- “ Iyory.”

109

Hangnest. The ridiculous error referred to was caused not exactly by a
fault of iny own, but by an accident. When I received the labels there was
nothing whatever enclosed to guide me as to which cage each belonged to,
excepting the price, and as each of the two birds in question had been
entered at the same selling price, I had to put the labels on the cages at
random. Perhaps the Secretary of the Crystal Palace Show will accept the
hint ; and when, in future, an exhibitor makes more than one entry in a
class of equal prices, he will inform such exhibitor beforehand as to the
correct respective numbers.

I am Sony that just at the moment when Mr. Pliillipps was looking at
the SMma the bird was “ crouching in a corner of his cage.” At home he
is finger-tame, and if I had to part with all my birds except one, this
particular bird is the one I should elect to keep as a pet.

I can fully sympathize with Mr. Pliillipps in his reference to the
rarity, for the moment, of individual birds which suddenly become common,
and the pair of Red-sided Tits which occasioned his remarks are a good case
in point. In the late autumn of last year I received a letter from a
prominent dealer to the effect that he had a pair of very rare birds that he
should like me to see, his letter concluding with the remark, “When I tell
you that I have never before seen the variety, you will easily understand
that they are rarities.” I was, of course, at his establishment at the earliest
possible moment, and bought the birds for three pounds. The very next
day I was offered, and accepted, the choice of eighteen birds of the species
at one pound the “pair.” A week after they were advertized in the fancy
papers at twelve shillings and sixpence per pair! I am certain that the
original dealer acted quite bond fide, and he has since assured me that he
himself paid fifty shillings for the pair. Notwithstanding that I paid very
much more for my birds than their real value, I am very pleased to possess
them. They are charming little things, and perfectly tame. For some
time I kept the four together in a large cage furnished with virgin cork, but,
as they were so exceedingly fond of a bath that it was impossible to keep
clean drinking water in their cage, I turned them into the small birds’
aviar}'. Here they are in their element, and climb about with all the
acrobatic perfection of our British Tits, and hammer at a hemp-seed or
sunflower-seed in exactly the same manner. A mealworm will at once
bring them all to my hand.

To refer again to Mr. Pliillipps’ letter. The anomaly is therein
mentioned of Bearded Tits being entered in 1S94 in two separate classes, and
ignored in both, and in 1895 being awarded a prize in the A.O.V. British
Class. One of the reporters of a fancy paper, presumably inspired by the
judge, remarked of this class (the quotation is from memory, but correct
substantial^) “A Bearded Tit took second; a more brightlj^-coloured
specimen being passed as a foreigner.” The “ more brightly-coloured
specimen ” was my own, and, as it happens, I have the written guarantee of
the vendor that it is a bona fide British nestling. I exhibited the same bird
early last year, and he was similarly “passed.” After the judging I found
the bird under the bench, so I asked the judge if he had seen the bird, or if it
had been misplaced by accident. He told me that he had “ passed ” the
bird as being too good to be British, but that, if he had known it to be
really British, it would have been in the mone}". If one shows a Siskin,
Redpoll, Rinnet, or a representative of many other so-called “British”

no

birds, the judge does not require a guarantee as to the country of its birth,
but, on the contrary, gives the prize to the individually best bird in the
class, with the almost certain knowledge that it is a “foreigner.” This is a
state of affairs that should not exist at the present day, and the sooner some
•distinct understanding is come to the better for all concerned.

Henry J. Fueejames.

BUDGERIGARS.

Sir, — There seems to be a general impression that imported
Budgerigars are brighter in colour than aviary bred ones. East year I left
some young ones in my aviary until they got their adult plumage, and
when I came to separate them I found, on closely examining them, that
they were both larger and brighter than their imported parents, which I
consider are very fine ones. My aviary is a very large, open, outdoor one.
I made a verj^ convenient nest b}^ nailing half a husk on to a board about an
inch thick. In this board I cut a groove for the birds to enter by, and a
good large hole about 2jin. in diameter over the nest part. On the top of
this board is a thin board screwed at one corner, so that it can be slipped
round when you wish to see inside. The whole is then fastened to the
ceiling by L hooks, so that it can easily be slipped out if you wish to look
at the nest. The bird does not much mind strangers looking at her nest.
She had six eggs, but I hear some young ones now.

I should be glad to know if two cock Virginian Nightingales would
be likely to agree, with plenty of room and no hens present.

A. A. Thom.

[No. Two cock Virginian Cardinals would not be likely to agree.]

THE RED-SIDED TIT.

Sir, — From Mr. Phillipps’ remarks, it would appear that avicul-
turists have not been very successful with this delightful little bird. I
have a very healthy individual which has been in my possession since the
25th December. Its diet consists of a little Abrahams’ food, ants’ eggs, and
a small quantity of hemp-seed daily ; also one or two Barcelona nuts with
the shell cracked. One or two small cockroaches or a mealworm now and
again are also relished.

I think an important point is a cosy resting-place for the night. In
one corner of the cage I have hung up a hollow log with a very small
entrance hole ; to this my bird always retires long before dark.

It is an amusing bird, very lively and active, taking a special pleasure
in climbing rapidly along the top of the cage head downwards. The only
song I have heard consists of a few very low, rather sharp, notes.

R. A. Todd.

THE DWARF FINCH.

Sir, — I quote from the latter part of a paragraph in the April number
•of the Avicultural Magazine, re “The Palace Show,” by Reginald Phillipps.

“ One feels inclined to say that one will never give a high price for a
bird again, no matter how rare.”

Ill

I know that it pays to wait — unless you have the purse of a
Rothschild.

Some years ago, the late Mr. Anton H. Jamrach, knowing my love
for the smallest of the foreign imported birds, would write to me when he
had any rare consignment. It was early in 1884 he asked me to call and see
some tiny Finches from Madagascar. He had never seen them before, and did
not know their name. I found on my arrival at his place, two pairs of wee,
broadly-built Finches, distinguished by a circular mark about the size of a
three-penny piece on the throat, that looked as black as an ink-spot in the
dimness of the travelling cage. He asked four guineas a pair. I was afraid
to risk this sum for them, and brought back with me a pair of Bourke’s
Parrakeets for the same money.

On the 30th April, 1884, I again heard from Mr. Jamrach as follows : —
“ Enclosed is the name of the Madagascar Finch, Spermestes nana-, habitat,
Madagascar. I don’t think I shall ever get them again, as it was by chance
from an orchid collector who was in the interior of Madagascar. . . . ”

I11 November, 1893 — nearly ten years after — -a dealer advertised
“ Black-Throated Finches from Zanzibar,” 7/6 per pair. 1 at once secured
a pair which proved to be Spermestes nana, and they are still in as good
condition as when they were purchased.

This proves that “Fverytliing comes to the man who waits.”

W. T. CATEEUGH.

“AMONG BRITISH BIRDS IN THEIR NESTING HAUNTS.”

Sir, — I send you a prospectus of a forthcoming book on the eggs of
British Birds, entitled “Among British Birds in their Nesting Haunts.”
Illustrated by the Camera, by Oswin A. J. Tee.

The prospectus seems to hold out much promise of a work on British
Oology, unique in the fidelity of its illustration. Most of us possess books
on the eggs of British Birds, more or less beautifully and elaborately
illustrated, but in all that I know great latitude has been given to the artist’s
fancy. Mr. Tee has the unusual advantage of being at once an ornithologist
and photographer and a daring climber, and to judge from a specimen
illustration there seems every prospect of his book being a treasure to
every lover of British Birds and their eggs. I must say that I should have
preferred some scientific order in the arrangement of the plates.

O. Ernest Cressweee.

THE QUAIL FINCH.

Sir, — The bird Mr. Osbaldeston seeks to know the name of in the
April number of the Avicultural Magazine is the Quail Finch.

J. Abrahams.

THE

Bvtcultural /Hbaga3iitet

BEING THE JOURNAL OF THE

AVICULTURAL SOCIETY.

VOL. II. — NO. 20.

All rights reserved.

JUNE, 1896.

THE ANATI D AL.

By D. Seth-Smith.

The group of birds known as the Anatidce or swimmers
comprises a large number of species, some of which make, most
delightful and interesting studies for the aviculturist. In a
large garden aviary where there is plenty of covert and a small
pond, one pair of ornamental ducks may be kept with ease ; and.
few birds will call forth the admiration of visitors sooner than a
pair of gorgeous Mandarins or Summer Ducks. No mention
has been made as yet in our magazine of this family, although
it includes many lovely and rare species, well worthy of the
aviculturist’ s attention.

This' branch of aviculture would, I feel sure, be more
popular were it better known how hardy most of the foreign
ducks are, and how very easily they may be kept, and how readily
they will breed in a confined space. Mandarins will often breed,
if fairly tame, in an enclosure but six feet square or less, and no
doubt many other species would do likewise, while a very small
amount of water satisfies them. It should, however, be remembered
that many newly imported specimens are very timid at first, and
it is therefore advisable to give them as large an enclosure as
possible, with plenty of covert.

Those who are fortunate enough to have a stream passing
through their gardens would find little difficulty in making a
perfect paradise for ornamental ducks : probably with a small
amount of trouble and expense it could be opened out so as to
form a fair-sized pond, through which fresh water would be
continually flowing. The banks might be thickly planted with
rushes or any plants that would produce thick covert, under
which the ducks would make their nests. The enclosure should
be formed by a fence, five or six feet high, formed of wire netting
nailed to wooden posts, and let into the ground to a depth of a
foot. At the top of this another piece of netting should be

H3

fastened so as to lean outwards at an angle of 450, to prevent cats
or foxes from climbing over. There should be a plot of grass
within the enclosure, as many kinds of ducks, and especially
geese, are very fond of grass.

The best food for almost all the foreign ducks is a
mixture of buckwheat, barley and wheat, and plenty of green
food such as duckweed, lettuce, cabbage, etc. If there are
very many ducks in an enclosure together and some appear to
be quarrelsome, it will be as well to take the eggs away from any
very valuable duck and hatch them under a light hen. The food
of the young ducks may at first consist of hard-boiled egg
chopped fine and mixed with breadcrumbs and chopped lettuce;
also oatmeal and vermicelli, that has been scalded, are good.
When the ducklings are a week old, ants’ eggs should be given
in addition, and in a short time they will eat soaked seeds.

All the ducks must, of course, be pinioned unless they
are to be kept in a small place that is wired over the top. The
ducklings should be pinioned when about six or eight weeks
old, by cutting off the first joint of the left wing with a
sharp pair of scissors, and when properly done there will be very
little pain, and often no loss of blood. It is most important that
the same person should always attend to the birds and that no
dog should be allowed to approach their enclosure, as ducks take
fright very easily. The nest of any foreign duck should never
be approached, unless indeed the eggs are to be taken altogether
with a view to hatching them under a Bantam or other light hen.
Any alteration in the surroundings would in all probability cause
the duck to forsake her nest entirely.

There should be at the disposal of the aviculturist a large
wooden shed, well lighted, into which he can drive the more
delicate species in cold weather, especially such as have recently
been imported, and are consequently not thoroughly acclimatised.
The floor of this shed should be covered with straw, and the
ducks should be kept very clean and supplied with plenty of
water. Perhaps it will be as well to give the names of a few of
the most desirable exotic ducks, for the benefit of any member
who may think it worth his while to go in for this branch of
aviculture: — Mandarin (Aix gcilericulata), Summer or Carolina
(Azx spo?isa),'Ba.h.a.ma.(Dapi/a bcihamensis), Chilian Pintail (D.spini-
caudci), Spotted Bill (Anas pcecilorhynca), Rosy Bill (A. peposacci),
Japanese Teal (Querquedula formosa ), Chiloe Widgeon (Mareca
chiloensis'), Ruddy Shellduck (Tadorna casarca'). And, of course,
many others, as well as many charming and interesting species of

1 14

geese, which, of course, require a larger place and a great deal
of grass.

Personally, I cau only keep one pair of ducks at a time,
the space at my disposal being very limited. At present I have
a pair of Summer ducks, usually known to dealers as Carolinas ;
they are exquisitely pretty and very hardy. At the present time
(May 15th) they are busily searching for a nesting place ; they
are quite tame, but know a stranger at once.

In conclusion, let me say that I know of one book only
011 this subjefit, and that should be in the possession of all
interested in the Anatidce ; the title is “ Ornamental Waterfowl,”
and it is written by the Hon. Rose Hubbard, who, by the way,
is a member of our Society.

A CHAFFINCH SINGING MATCH.

By Albert Rettich.

Some years ago, when writing for some foreign weeklies,
I gave an account of a Rondon Chaffinch Singing Match, which
met with some approval, and it has occurred to me that a
translation might perhaps be of interest to the readers of the
Avicultural Magazine .

The natural song of the Chaffinch, in spite of its brevity
and consequent iteration, finds many admirers in all countries.
Man, however, is constantly endeavouring to improve upon
Nature, and although in some directions his efforts had better
not have been made, yet it must be admitted that the song of
many wild birds can be trained to please the human ear better than
Nature’s teaching.

Scarcely any two wild Chaffinches sing alike ; the caged
nestlings are therefore trained to imitate the songs of two or
three different old birds, neither of whose strains resembles the
others. Clever youngsters learn to sing each of the several
songs in turn, thus combining in one bird the vocal powers of
them all. Such accomplished songsters as these are greatly
appreciated by the amateur ; but they are not used in singing
matches, points in such competitions being awarded only for the
frequency with which the bird repeats the one strophe of his
natural song ; and a champion “battler” at singing matches would
by 110 means be a desirable cage - bird : the objectionable
reiteration of only one short strophe having been encouraged
to such an extent, that a really good “ match-singer ” will repeat
the same “ lay” some 250 times in a quarter of an hour, which is
the ordinary time limit of singing matches.

1 15

My foreign readers had the account of one match inflicted
upon them, which ran somewhat as follows :

A match arranged between “ Costermonger Joe ” of
Bricklane, and “ hong Bill” of Kingslaud, is announced by the
landlord of the “ Cock and Bottle ” of Shoreditch, to come off,
say, on Saturday week.

The “ fraternity ” know the combatants “ Shoreditch'
Bobby ” and the “ Kingsland Roarer” to be “ stunners ; ” all love
a good match, especially when it becomes known that the winner
will “stand” a gallon or two of beer to his friends who grace the
meeting with their presence. The stakes of a sovereign each
are already handed over to the genial host, and the time for the
finches to be “ on the nail ” is fixed for eight p.m. precisely.

At last the long expected hour approaches. The bar is
full, and the parlour nearly so. There are a few women enjoying
their “quarterns,” some carrying the inevitable bab}q and a
crowd of men whose short, black pipes are not likely to get cold
again that evening. Many of them are holding one or two
square parcels wwapped in coloured handkerchiefs, from which
issue the songs of various birds — Linnets, Goldfinches, Mules
and Chaffinches. Possibly some more singing contests are now
being fixed, between the proud possessors of “ stars.”

In the parlour all the gas-jets are lighted, but have some
trouble to penetrate the fumes of tobacco, beer, etc. At last the
contesting parties enter, each dressed in his Sunday best. The
host conducts them through the welcoming crowd to two^
reserved tables and attends personally to the wants of the
honoured guests. Then, with much noise and unnecessary
reiteration, order is requested. Naturally, the various songsters
before mentioned, excited by the general hubbub, have been
noisier than ever, and are now relegated to darkness in another
room to quiet them : only the two principals remain, closely
covered up.

The two markers take their places, and as the clock strikes
the two cages are uncovered and hung up. The battlers look
around for a moment, shake their plumage, whet their beaks and
one may take a grain of seed, but before it is cracked he hears a
familiar sound uttered by his opponent. Immediately he replies by
a full strophe of his song, to which the other answers with fuller
power. Before each marker is already a stroke of his chalk, and
now the combat is fairly “started.” The chalks are busily
employed to mark each properly delivered strophe, and keep
pace with each other for a time, until “ Bobby ” takes it into his
head to betake himself to the food trough.

Meanwhile, the “Roarer” continues steadily to pour out
his heart, and gains considerably in chalk marks. “ Costermonger
Joe” is getting very uneasy and cannot understand this “ trick”
of his much-renowned bird. Never before did he think of food
while in the presence of an opponent. In order to draw his
bird’s attention upon himself and from the food trough, he
moves uneasily in his seat and ventures at last to cough aloud.

It must be understood, that while a match is proceeding
no words of encouragement are allowed ; no whistling or other
means may be resorted to, to recall a truant to his duty. Fair
play is rigorously enforced. Coughing cannot be stopped.

At last, Joe can stand it no longer: accidentally his beer
glass gets knocked over and falls on the floor with much clatter.
Bobby peers across the room to ascertain the cause of the
unusual disturbance and catches sight of his master, and
immediately he resumes his battle-cry. The ruse has succeeded,
although there is a tumbler to pay for.

The chalk marks on the tables are getting very numerous.
The Roarer has challenged without a fault for thirteen minutes
and is forty points ahead of Bobby, but now he feels rather
“ dry.” He stops working, takes a drink of water and — hops to
the food box. But “ Kingsland Bill” does not give his bird
time to lose ground by feeding like the other. In a moment he
whips out the brightly-colored handkerchief the Roarer knows so
well, and pretends to wipe the perspiration from his anxious
brow. His finch takes the hint, and gallops through the
remaining two minutes of the appointed fifteen in grand style.
Bobby also had tried hard to make up for the precious time he
had lost so wantonly, but could not recover all of it. Although
credited with 212 marks, the Roarer beat him by 28 strokes.

Immediately protest is entered by Costermonger Joe, fair
play having been violated by the use of the coloured cloth. Bill
retorts by calling into question the fairness of the beer glass
episode. One word leads to another, the spectators mingle in
the strife, expressions of opinion and S3unpathy with either party
are getting more and more select, and battle of another kind
seems imminent. Joseph declares he has won, but Tong
William insists on “fighting” him for the stakes. This mode
of settling the question being declined by Joe, the landlord is
called upon to exercise his functions of umpire. With character¬
istic disinterestedness he declares the whole match null and void,
and orders a fresh match to be sung for the same stakes that
day week and on the same spot.

H7

The original publication of the above description of a
Chaffinch Singing Match was with the object of illustrating
some of the means resorted to, to induce the birds to sing at
their best. Ordinarily, birds are encouraged by whistling or
speaking to them ; but such highly-trained specimens as the two
mentioned are recalled from any lapse of duty by certain signs
or movements of their masters.

RARE FOREIGN BIRDS.

(SECOND SERIES).

VIII. — THE MADEIRAN CHAFFINCH.

Fringilla maderensis.

By A. G. Butler, Ph.D.

This species is strictly confined to Madeira, and when
fully adult is decidedly more beautiful than our British species ;
but when in its first plumage, though slightly larger than our
bird, can hardly be considered finer in colour though somewhat
greyer and paler.

My colleague, Mr. W. R. Oglivie Grant, who visited Madeira
a year or two ago, brought home a fine series of adult skins of
this species, and I was so much struck with their beauty, that I
put a note in my “ Foreign Finches in Captivity,” p. 16, suggest¬
ing the advantage of importing it as a cage-bird. Acting upon
this suggestion, our enterprising member, Mr. J. Abrahams,
immediately wrote for specimens and (having secured them) very
generously gave me a pair.

The birds received are evidently quite young, and there¬
fore do not answer to the scientific description in the Museum
“ Catalogue of Birds ; ” Mr. Grant, to whom I spoke about them,
informed me that he had seen similar examples in Madeira and
considered them to be birds of the year (that is, not over a year
old).

I find this species tamer than our British bird, less
excitable, but also less inclined to be friendly to its mate.
The hen is decidedly afraid of the cock bird and gets out of his
way as soon as he snaps his beak at her. I placed my pair in a
flight-cage, 4 feet by 2, and 16 inches from front to back, hung¬
up a small Canary nest box at the back, and covered it with fir
sprays. At first the female spent nearly the whole of her time
in the box, the male contenting himself with occasionally driving
her out and taking her place. I put in nesting material, but it
was entirely ignored until about the first week in May, when

both sexes began to play with it ; but at the time of writing this
note, no attempt has been made at the serious preparation of a
nest.

The male bird, Mr. Grant tells me, sings like our British
bird, and this I can quite believe ; for, in the second week in May,
he began to record his song precisely in the fashion of Fringilla
ccelebs ; and now I am looking forward to hearing him sing, as I
wish to discover whether his performance will be more like the
Kentish or Essex vocalist of our country. The call-note is not
like that of F. ccelebs : it is more musical, not so shrill, and is
rapidly repeated four or five times in succession.

Speaking of Chaffinches, it may interest our members to
know that I have divided a clutch of five English Chaffinch eggs
between two hen Canaries ; and, should they rear them, next
year I hope to pair the birds with Canaries, in order to breed the
so-called impossible mule.

THE BIRD SHOW AT BRIGHTON.

By H. R Firmer.

To Mr. Housden belongs the credit of first providing a
Bird Show as an attraction to a Bazaar, and he has sent his
birds to many Bazaars in aid of charities in which he is
interested. But Mr. Housdeu’s exhibitions have been “ Eoan
Collections,” and not Bird Shows proper, the element of compe¬
tition being absent ; so that I think it may be fairly claimed that
the Show of British and Foreign Birds which was held in the
Royal Pavilion, Brighton, on the 2nd, 4th and 5th of May, 1896,
in connection with a Bazaar in aid of the Building Fund of St.
Augustine’s Church, Preston Park, Brighton, was the first
Exhibition of its kind which has ever been held.

The available space at the Pavilion is limited, therefore
only two rooms could be spared for the Show ; so that a very
large Show was out of the question. I11 order to restrict the
number of exhibits, it was decided to accept entries only from
members of the Avicultural Society and their friends and from
residents in the immediate neighbourhood. The result was that
their were only 243 entries, but these were quite as many as
could be properly shown in the space available. The British
Birds, Mules, and Canaries were judged by Mr. J. H. Verrall ;
and the Foreign Birds by Dr. C. S. Simpson. Messrs. J. Hills,
A. F. Hudson, D. Seth-Smith, J. Storey, and W. Swaysland
acted as Stewards, and to their most efficient help the success of
the Show wras entirely due. Where all worked so well it seems

ii9

invidious to select one name for special mention, still, I feel that
the hardest of the work fell upon Mr. Storey, and that it was he
who was the Secretary’s chief assistant, and without his aid the
Show could scarcely have been held.

It is satisfactory to be able to report that the Show
achieved its objeCt, and undoubtedly attracted to the Bazaar a
large number of people who would not otherwise have attended :
the “ gate-money ” was thereby considerably increased, and it
was not the fault of the Stallholders in the Bazaar if the money
expended by every visitor did not largely exceed the fee for
admission. It is to be feared that the enjoyment of those who
came simply to see the birds was considerably marred by the
Bazaar element, and especially by the touting for subscriptions
to raffles for articles which were invariably useless and not
always ornamental. The pertinacity of a few of the ladies,
although perhaps creditable to their perseverance, provoked
some unfavourable comments, and must have tended to drive
away visitors. One visitor from a distant county remarked that

he had always believed that touting at Bazaars in - shire

was carried to the extremest point, but that he found it still
worse in Brighton ! Although there was a very fair attendance
and over 1,000 people paid for admission in the three days, still
there were not nearty so many there as there ought to have been.
I lay the blame for the comparatively small attendance partly
upon insufficient advertising and partly upon the deterrent effeCl
of the Bazaar. After all, it requires more moral courage than
most of us possess to walk through a Bazaar, however much we
may want to see the birds. This makes me all the more grateful

to those who did attend. A good many members of the

Avicultural Society were present : for in addition to those acting
as Stewards I had the pleasure of seeing Miss Hopwood, Mr.
Frostick, Mr. Fulljames, Mr. Norman H. Jones, and Mr.

Maxwell, and possibly some others whom I have for the

moment forgotten.

After this long preface, I propose to put down a few notes
about the birds exhibited.

Class i (Goldfinches) contained eleven entries. One bird
was disqualified as a foreigner ; and another marked “ wrong
class” because it was a Cheverel, the Judge being of opinion
that it should have been exhibited in the Class for Pied, Albino,
and Rare-feathered specimens. The Cheverel Goldfinch is such
a well-known variety that it seems to me it can scarcely be
considered a rare-feathered bird ; moreover, in my opinion, as the
Class was open to all British Goldfinches, even an Albino might

120

properly have been entered in it — and I cannot see that the fa<5t
of there being a special class for Rare-feathered birds made
any difference. Still, such experienced exhibitors as Mr. S. Cook,
Mr. Storey and Mr. Swaysland agreed with the Judge’s decision,
so that no doubt he had good authority for the course he took.

Class 2 (Bullfinches) contained seven birds. The second
prize-winner, a large bird (hand - reared) was cheap at the
Catalogue price (10/6) and was sold on the second day of the
Show. A bird exhibited by the London Fanciers’ Supply
Association was a most industrious piper, but his musical per¬
formance proclaimed him to be no Britisher.

Class 3 (Linnets, Redpolls and Siskins) was well filled,
containing 19 entries, 7 of which were Siskins, 6 Linnets, 5
Redpolls, and 1 a Twite. All the Redpolls were Mealies. Miss
A. Morgan’s 1st prize Siskin was a magnificent specimen, and
obtained the Special given for the best British bird.

Class 4 (All other species of Finches, Grosbeaks and
Buntings) also contained 19 entries. Here were 6 Hawfinches, 2
Greenfinches, 3 Bramblings, 2 Chaffinches, 2 Crossbills (male
and female), 1 Reed Bunting, 1 Cirl Bunting, 1 Lapland Bunting,
and 1 Ortolan Bunting. The members of the Avicultural
Society were more successful in this class than in the other
British classes, for they secured three of the four prizes. Mr.
Storey’s beautiful Cirl Bunting well deserved its position as first
prize winner.

Class 5 contained 2 Missel Thrushes, 3 Song Thrushes, 2
Blackbirds, and a Ring Ouzel. The first prize Blackbird was a
beauty.

Class 6 (Migratory Birds) contained a Whin chat, a Yellow
Wagtail, a Blackcap, a Pipit, a Shorelark, and 2 Nightingales :
the 1st prize being awarded to Mr. Fulljames’ Yellow Wagtail,
and the 2nd to Mr. S. Cook’s Nightingale. I was surprised that
the 1st prize should have been secured by the Yellow Wagtail, as
I have found that species easier to keep in good condition than
the other species shown, but possibly my experience has been
exceptional. Miss Hopwood’s Whincliat had always been fed
on Gasparin’s food, and certainly did credit to its diet, but I found
by experiment that although it had been fed for months solely on
that food (and mealworms) it preferred egg and ants’ eggs when
it got the choice. The bird was pronounced by competent
judges to be a female.

Class 7 (All species not included in the above). This
Class was of necessity somewhat of a mixture, and contained a

12 1

Cornish Chough, 3 Starlings, a Jay and a Robin ; a Great Tit
entered by Mr. Bonhote was unfortunately absent. The first
prize was awarded to a Starling, the Chough coming second.
The Chough was a most voracious creature, and I am glad that I
had to board him for a few days only ; nothing came amiss to
him and although his very large food-tin was replenished several
times a day he was always screaming for food. As I hear that he
reached home without his prize-card I suppose he ate it on the
journey.

The seven Classes for British Birds contained 78 entries,
only one of which was absent. All the Classes were fairly filled
and made a nice little Show in the Saloon. Coming now to the
Foreign Birds, for which 20 Classes were provided, we find a
less satisfactory state of affairs : for several Classes had to be
amalgamated with others, and some were very poorly filled.

Class 8 (Budgerigars) was amalgamated with the Rove
Bird Class.

Class 9 (Ring-necks) contained 5 entries. The first prize
was gained by Mr. Maxwell’s really magnificent Pink-cheeked
Parrakeet, the other exhibits being Malabars and Resser Ring-
necks. Mr. Swaysland’s Malabar received an extra first prize.
One of the Ring-necks was the winner of the Talking Bird
Competition.

Class 10 (Kings and Crimson-wings) contained a pair of
each species and three single Kings. The First prize was
awarded to the Rondon Fanciers’ Supply Association’s very fine
King, and the second to Mr. Doherty’s Crimson-wings.

In Class 11 (A. O. V. Parrakeets), with which the Class for
Rories and Rorikeets was amalgamated, the first prize was
awarded to Mr. Housden’s beautiful Ceram Rory, and the second
to Mr. Swaysland’s Tui Parrakeet, which obtained the cup
offered for the rarest Parrot in the Show and which unfortunately
died at the Show on the- Sunday. The Class contained besides,
an Adelaide Parrakeet, a specimen of Conurus pavzca in perfedt
feather, a Patagonian Conure, a Pennant, and an Ornamented
Rorikeet.

Class 12 (Rove Birds), with which the Budgerigars were
amalgamated, contained only 4 entries, one of which was absent.
There were two good pairs of Budgerigars, and some handsome
Blue-winged Rove Birds belonging to Mr. Storey, which were
remarkably steady and well shown, but they appeared to be two
cocks. The only prize was awarded to Mr. Maxwell’s grand
Peach-faced Rove Birds.

122

Classes 13 and 14 (Greys and Amazons) also had beeh
amalgamated, and contained together only 5 entries, one of
which was absent. There were two Grey Parrots, neither of
them remarkably good ; a passable Blue-fronted Amazon and
the prize-winner, a splendid Double-fronted Amazon belonging
to the London Fanciers’ Supply Association, which was claimed
on the first day of the Show.

Class 15 (Cockatoos) contained a good show of those
objectionable Slenderbills, there being no less than 4 (two singles
and one pair), but the prize was awarded to the only other
exhibit, a fine Leadbeater belonging to Mr. Maxwell.

Class 17 (All other species of Parrots) contained seven
entries, one being absent. The first prize was awarded to Mr.
Swaysland’s pair of Fclecti, which were in perfect condition and
shown in a roomy and handsome cage. Mr. Gibbins’ Illiger’s
Macaw received the second prize. The Class contained besides,
a cock Fcledtus belonging to Mr. Storey, which was superior in
size and colour to Mr. Swaysland’s, but slightly rough in one
wing ; a Black Parrot belonging to Mr. Gibbins, which was
more remarkable for rarity than beauty, and shown in a very
unsuitable cage ; a good Senegal Parrot belonging to Mr.
Swaysland ; and an Illiger’s Macaw belonging to the London
Fanciers’ Supply Association, which many considered to be a
better bird than the winner of the second prize.

Class 18 (Doves) contained 8 entries, 3 absent. The first
prize went, as a matter of course, to Mr. Housden’s celebrated
pair of Australian Crested Doves, shown, or rather concealed from
view, in an immense, awkward, wicker cage. TheLondon Fanciers’
Supply Association secured the second prize with their pair of
Diamond Doves. Mr. Storey exhibited a first - rate pair of
Australian Crested and a rather mournful Green-winged. Mr.
Swaysland sent a pair of South American Doves of some species
not known to me.

Class 19 (Whydahs and Weavers) wTas a good class of 13
entries, the only absentee being Mr. Fulljames’ Giant Whydah.
That exhibitor’s Crimson-throated Whydah, which was in perfect
health but not quite in full colour, secured the 1st prize and also
the cup awarded for rarity in the “small foreign” Classes.
Mr. Fulljames also showed a Napoleon Weaver, a Half-masked
Weaver, an Abyssinian Weaver, a Madagascar Weaver, a
Grenadier Weaver, and a Lesser Grenadier Weaver (indistin¬
guishable, in my eyes, from the ordinary Grenadier or Oryx
Weaver). Mr. Housden’s Yellowish Weaver obtained second.
Is this bird a Weaver, or is Mr. Abrahams right in saying it is a

123

Sparrow ? Although sorry to differ from Mr. Abrahams, I incline
to the opinion that it is a Weaver : for I cannot identify it with
any species of Sparrow. Mr. Swaysland’s Whydah, which
obtained the 3rd prize, was catalogued as a Yellow-shouldered
Whydah ; but it was so out of colour that it was difficult to
identify ; it appeared, moreover, to be badly crippled. Mr.
Swaysland also exhibited a Pin - tailed Whydah and an Oryx
Weaver.

Class 20 (Gouldian Finches) contained 5 entries, but the
only bird which put in an appearance was a single cock of the
Black-headed sort, and he felt his loneliness so acutety that he
soon drowned himself in his water-tin. The prize was withheld.

Class 21 (Waxbills and Grassfinclies). Eleven entries,
one absent. Here all the entries but two belonged to Mr.
Fulljames, who obtained 1st for his Sydney Waxbill, and 2nd for
his African Fire Finch. He also exhibited a pair of St. Helena
Waxbills, a female Crimson Finch, a Cherry Finch, a Lavender
Finch, and a pair of Parson Finches. Mrs. W. A. Hammond’s
fine Parson Finches received the 3rd prize, the only other
exhibit being a poor pair of Diamond Sparrows.

Class 22 (Java Sparrows) contained 6 entries, but no less
than 4 were absent. Neither of the entries which put in an
appearance was of much merit.

Class 23 (Mannikins). Nine entries. Mr. Fulljames had,
through an unfortunate accident, sent a specimen of the common
Bronze Mannikin along with one of his rare Rufous - backed
Mannikins, instead of the other of the pair of Rufous-backs :
consequently the exhibit was disqualified. He exhibited besides
a pair of Bronze Mannikins ; a pair of Three-coloured Nuns,
which received 2nd ; a specimen of the rare Masked Finch,
which, being a Grass-finch, should have been in Class 21, but
which received a special prize ; a pair of Chestnut Finches ; and
a pair of Nutmeg Finches. Mr. Maxwell’s Munia pcctoralis was
1 st, and the L. F. Suppty Association’s Chestnut Finches 3rd. The
only other entry was another pair of Chestnut Finches. It was
strange that the 1st prize winner should have been catalogued as
Estrelda pectoralis , for the owner must have known that the bird
is a Mannikin or he would not have entered it in a Mannikin
Class, and if a Mannikin, how Estrelda ?

Class 24 (Grosbeaks, True Finches, and Buntings). Eight
entries, one absent. Mrs. W. A. Hammond’s lovely Indigo
Bunting was easily first, being an unusually brilliant specimen.
Miss Jackson’s Green Cardinals were 2nd. Miss Jackson’s

124

celebrated Grey Cardinal is at last showing signs of age, and
was scarcely in show condition. A pair of Pileated Finches,
another Grey Cardinal, a pair of Saffron Finches, and another
good Green Cardinal, completed the Class.

Class 25 (Tanagers, Bulbuls, Sugar Birds, and Zosterops).
Mr. Housden’s Red-vented Bulbuls were 1st, thus occupying the
same position as at the last Palace Show. The rare Blue-winged
Honeysucker shown by Mr. Fulljames was not in show condition.
The only other entries which put in an appearance were two
excellent Tanagers, belonging respectively to Mr. Maxwell and
the R. F. Supply Association.

Class 26 (Crows, Jays, Starlings, & c.) Mr. Arthur’s
splendid Mexican Jays were 1st, and Mr. Swaysland’s Green
Glossy Starling 2nd. Here were besides, a Brazilian Hangnest,
a Brazilian Blue-bearded Jay, two seed-eating Troupials, and a
Siberian Nutcracker.

Class 27 (All species not included in the above). Mr.
Seth-Smith received the 1st prize for his Pectoral Rail, a rare
and pretty bird, in perfect feather and well shown — the same
bird received the special for the best in Classes 25, 26, and 27;
Mr. Fulljames’ Red -sided Tit was second — my own choice Ra¬
the second place would have been the same exhibitor’s Sulphur
Tyrant, which is by far the finest specimen of its species that I
have ever seen. There wrere two Shamahs, of which the one
belonging to Mr. Fulljames received the 3rd prize, but there
seemed little to choose between them. Mr. Maxwell’s Shamah
which did not get the prize, was a lively, healthy bird, and a
perpetual singer. The Class also contained two pairs of Pekin
Robins, one pair of which was very good. Here were nine
entries, two absent.

The Classes for Foreign Birds contained 122 entries, of
which no less than 23 were absent, so that there were actually 99
at the Show.

The Classes for Canaries and Canary Mules were fairly
well filled, but those birds being beyond the province of our
Society I will say nothing about them.

Class 31 (Non-Canary Hybrids). Mr. Vale’s Goldfinch-
Bullfinch did not arrive, so that the only two competitors were
Mr. John Robson’s Siskin-Redpoll and Mr. Vale’s Goldfinch-
Greenfinch, of which the first took the prize.

Class 32 (Pied, Albino, and Rare-feathered Specimens).
Most of the entries could only be called Rare-feathered by

125

courtesy, and the prize went to a Redpoll with a small patch of
white on the back of his head.

Class 34 (Collections of not less than 4 birds). Mr.
Swaysland obtained the prize for “ Six Mixed Foreign ” — they
were certainly very mixed. He also sent six Weavers and six
Canaries. Mr. Storey showed five Cordon Bleus, which were
unfortunately somewhat affedted by the cold of the night before
the judging, otherwise they would no doubt have been the prize
winners.

I11 the Gift Class Mr. Gale’s Canary was first and Mr.
Storey’s Starling second. There was a pretty Blossom-headed
Parrakeet given by Mr. O’Reilly, and there were three entries of
small Foreign Birds.

The special prize for “ most points throughout the Show ”
was won by Mr. Swaysland, who obtained a few points more
than Mr. Fulljames. But for the unlucky mistake about the
Rufous-backed Mannikin, and the entry of the Masked Finch
in the wrong class, Mr. Fulljames would undoubtedly have
won this prize.

REVIEWS.

Foreign Finches in Captivity , by A. G. Butler , Ph.D., etc.

( L . Reeve & Co.J Parts VII. & VIII.

This valuable work is approaching its conclusion. The
parts now under consideration conclude the description of
the Grassfinches, deal with the Mannikins, and commence
the Whvdahs. Illustrations are given of the male Bicheno’s and
Cherry finches : we wish that it had been possible in all cases
where the sexes differ to illustrate both. In the case of the
Silverbills the difference could hardly have been shewn on paper.
An acute observation of Mr. Abrahams’ referring to the Silver-
bills, but which may be extended to a good many other species
where the sexes are very much alike, is that “ in trying to dis¬
tinguish the sexes of a pair of this bird, it is only the first
glance that enables you to appreciate the difference, for if you
gaze at them for a little time, so much are they alike, that you
cannot tell one from the other.”

Dr. Butler regards the Bengalee as a cross between the
Striated Finch and the Indian Silver-bill. The resemblance to
Uroloncha striata is, of course, very obvious, but we must confess
that the hybrid theory appears to us rather far-fetched.

The Sharp-tailed and Striated Finches, the three varieties
of the Spice Bird, and the Chestnut andThree-coloured Mannikins

126

are illustrated and described. Two species we should like to
Rave seen included, are omitted, namely, the Rufous-backed
Mannikin f Spermestes nigriceps J , and the White-breasted (Munia
pect oralis J .

It is impossible in the space available to do justice to the
author’s untiring industry : we can only advise our readers to
get the book before it is out of print. In Part VIII. are included
illustrations and descriptions of the Black, and White-headed
Mannikins, the Java Sparrow, the Magpie, Bronze and Two-
coloured Mannikins, the Combasou, and the Pin-tailed Whydah.

CORRESPONDENCE.

TITS NESTING IN A LETTER-BOX.

An interesting case of the nesting of a pair of Tits in a letter-box is
reported from a village in the South of England. The hen remained on
the nest while the box was being used. Our informant wishes his name
and address to be suppressed, in fear that its publication might lead to the
taking of the nest.

WASHING COCKATOOS.

Sir,— I am most anxious to know the opinion of experts upon
washing Cockatoos. Is soap injurious to the powdery substance in their
plumage P My birds, through staying so long in town, are in a most
unpresentable condition ; and their daily ablutions, or shower baths from
the watering-pot, do not cleanse them in the least. I have washed them
with soap, but it certainly leaves the feathers in rather a dry condition.

My Parrots look in splendid condition, but then they bathe almost as
frequently as Jackdaws. Edith Hawthorn.

PROBLEMS IN BIRD BREEDING.

Sir,— Various specimens shown at our Bird Shows clearly demonstrate
that among British birds kept under suitable conditions it is possible to
obtain mules, one of the most conspicuous among such exhibits being the
cross-bred Goldfinch and Bullfinch.

What the conditions are, under which such mules are raised, I am
not aware. Generally speaking, mules of which the Canary is one of the
parents are the product of the lieu Canary ; and this is naturally so,
because the hen Canary will more readily sit in confinement than will a
British bird, and so the cock Goldfinch or Linnet or Siskin is usually put
with her. Probably the British mules we see at the Shows are bred from a
hen Goldfinch or Linnet which has been hatched by a Canary, and so
having been raised in a cage from birth, has become familiar and steady
enough to sit.

But in a large aviary of mixed British birds, though more or less
breeding goes on, never within my experience has a cross occurred
naturally. One season, a cock Goldfinch and hen Brown Linnet
appeared desirous of making a match, but nothing resulted except an

127

abortive nest. The constancy of birds to their own species is remai'kable,
and it is extremely interesting to observe the alacrity with which a lonely
bachelor will greet a mate of his own kind when she is turned in among
the general crowd. What excitement he displays ! How he drops his
wings and spreads his tail and raises his crest, sidling tip to her with a-
manifest determination to make the most of himself !

But why will some birds breed so much more readily than others ?
The Greenfinch makes a very early start, and follows with a second and
third nest before the preceding brood is off hand, turning out three or four
each time. The Goldfinch generally breeds successfully, the cock bird
being attentive and the hen sitting steadily ; but in confinement they are
apt to build a slight nest which may come to grief and let the young ones
through the bottom. The Brown Linnet and Redpoll will also breed, and
one season we reared two nests of Bullfinches from one lien; but have had
no success since. Last year the hen— not the same one — seemed anxious to
build, making a start now in one place now in another, and dropped an egg
among the gorse, but never settled down to steady business. Last year the
Goldfinches were a failure. But the Chaffinches have never made any
attempt at nesting — why is this ? The birds are very steady, the cock sings
lustily, suitable material is supplied : but nothing results. Last year we
thought we were going to have a nest, and indeed one was constructed by
the hen, but no egg was laid. The Tits, too, Marsh, Blue, or Oxeye, show
no disposition to breed, though the first are extremely familiar and seem
immortal. Only once have I seen anything like love passages, and these
occurred between a pair of Blue Tits ; but the}' never approached nest¬
building, though several suitable places were provided. Is it a question of
food ? In a perfectly wild state, the Blue Tit is most fearless in selecting a
position for her nest, a favourite place in towns being down a street gas
lamp post, the bird finding its way down the standard at the point where
the gas pipe passes out at the top just inside the head of the lamp. I have
known several lamps occupied in this way. Why then will they not bree
in an aviary ?

Returning for a moment to the subject of cross-breeding, I have
found the Pied Wagtail pair readily with a hen Grey Wagtail. Their nest
Wras built in the corner of the husk-tray suspended below the seed-box,
probably the most exposed and disturbed position she could have found in
the whole place ; but she sat steadily and hatched two young ones, which,
however, she failed to rear. Both parents had been caught wild, the
preceding Autumn. Why do not such crosses occur frequently in nature ?

I have an interesting problem to solve, before me now ; perhaps some
of the members of the Society can suggest a solution. I keep five game
Bantam hens for the purpose of rearing fancy Pheasants and Ouails : three
of these I keep in one pen, two in another, in my garden. Of the three,
one has already sat and brought up a brood, another is now sitting, the
third has shown no disposition to sit and is laying very sparely. Of the
other two, neither has yet laid an egg, much less become broody, though
both sat last year. I know nothing of their ages. I bought them when
brood}7, on the 27th of May, last year, and now they look fresh and healthy,
but are worse than useless. All five are fed alike, principally on mixed corn,
with cabbage, lettuce leaves and chickweed.

Charles L. Roi'hera.

THE

Bvtcultural /ISbagasine,

BEING THE JOURNAL OF THE

AVICULTURAL SOCIETY.

VOL. II. — No. 21. All rights reserved. JULY, 1896.

* THE NESTING OF THE ROSY-FACED LOVE-BIRD.

Agapornis roseicollis.

By Reginald Philupps.

In taking up this subject, it will be well to give a brief
sketch of my bird-room and aviary, so that my Rove-birds’
surroundings may be understood, as birds, even the same
individuals, will oft-times adt very differently under different
circumstances. My cages are large, the smallest being four feet
by two feet by two feet high. My garden is covered over with
wire-netting, and can be opened as one aviary or divided into
two. All round there are various sheds, shelters, nest-boxes,
and the like, which are altered and re-arranged from time to time
according to the various natures of the occupants. The part
farthest from the house is as full of living trees and shrubs as
the ground will bear, the latter being also sown with grass, rape,
wheat, nasturtiums, peas, and various flowers and plants,
according to fancy : I aim at making this portion of the garden
a miniature wilderness. The other part of the aviary comes up
to and against the house, and- into this the window of my regular
bird-room opens ; and in warm weather this window is usually
left open, so that the birds can fly backwards and forwards as
they please. Everything is done to make the garden a's natural
as possible, so that the instincts and habits of each species may
have free development. At the time that I had my Rosy-faces,

I had several large Parrakeets, and various foreign Crows and
Pies ; the presence of these large birds may or may not have
affedted the nesting instincts of the Rove-birds.

At first I kept my Rosy-faces in a cage ; afterwards, and for
the space of nearly two years, they flew about where they liked,
and seemingly behaved as in their natural state ; and their

* This article is a continuation of Mr. Phillipps’ article on the
Love-bird which appeared in the Magazine for February last (pp. 49-52),
and should be read in connection therewith.

129

behaviour during the latter period was so conspicuously different
from their behaviour while caged that I may well divide the
remainder of this paper into two parts.

I.— The Nesting oe the Rosy-faces in Captivity.

In the cage already alluded to, there was but one nesting-
place, a log-nest placed on its side but slightly slanting upwards.
The Rosy-faces very soon commenced nesting ; all the fore-part
of the log was strewn with bits of hay, straw, etc., but at the
extreme end there was a very nice little nest, lined with pieces of
hay and bark which had been chawed up by the female until
exceedingly soft and pleasant to the touch. The female (never
the male) carried up the materials for the nest among the feathers
of her thighs, and lower back or upper tail-coverts, but as often
as not in her beak. And it is, I think, only when in captivity that
these birds make use of various strange nesting materials, and
carry much, or even any, of it to their nesting places in their
mouths. During the closing winter and early spring, over one
dozen eggs were laid at various times, but were destroyed by the
male ; possibly the female may have lent a helping hand, but I
had not any proof that she did. They did not throw much energy
or zeal into their work, neither did they betray any signs of un¬
easiness on the approach of anyone ; beyond being a little more
spiteful than usual towards some birds in other cages, they
behaved much as usual ; in short, they nested in that half-hearted
way that birds in captivity often do.

Even when caged, the female preferred bark to any other
nesting material, hay and straw cut up into short lengths coming
next ; but on these failing she would take strips off the perches,
or almost anything that came in her way. When she had not
any boughs to peel, her delight was to squat herself down in the
midst of a tump of hay, and chaw away at it for nest-lining.

I cannot say whether the eggs laid at this time were fertile
or otherwise.

II.

The Nesting of the Rosy-faces in their Naturae State.

Whilst flying about loose in the garden, these birds seemed
to be perfectly at home, and to behave so naturally that I have
ventured to adopt a rather bold heading for this section of my
paper. Neither in bird -room nor garden did the Rosy-faces
associate with any of the other birds, but kept to themselves, and
seemed supremely happy in their own company. The female, at
any rate, in season and out of season, seemed to be filled with

130

but one thought — how best to increase and multiply the species ;
and she pursued her self-appointed task with so much zeal and
perseverance that, if she had had a proper mate, my aviary would
have been well-nigh filled with Rosy-faces. She never now
carried nesting materials in her beak or amidst the feathers of
the thigh ; she never made use of any material for her nest but
the bark of living trees, so long as she had the run of the wilder¬
ness ; and when shut off from her chosen trees she fell upon
those in the other aviary as far as they would go, occasionally
taking tiny strips from the perches, but never touching hay or
straw, nor picking up any stuff of any kind from the ground.
Artificial nesting places of every kind — logs, barrels, cocoa-nut
husks — all were ignored ; and for many a day did the pair pursue
their hunt for a suitable spot in which to build, evidently attaching
the greatest importance to this point. The cracks and crevices
they squeezed themselves into and explored were marvellous ;
for a time a chink between two cages in the bird-room, where a
slight ledge afforded walking space for a mouse, seemed to be
the nearest approach to what they desired — but as there was not
anything to lay the eggs upon, just a clear drop of some three
feet to the floor, the place was reluctantly abandoned ; but not
until after the happy pair had passed several very uncomfortable
nights hanging on by their eyelids did they wholly desert it.
Eventually they found a spot in the garden, which in some
respects evidently pleased them. Between the ceiling and roof of
one of the sheds there was an empty space several feet in length
and breadth, and some three or four inches high along the
highest part. Into this they managed to force an entrance
through a hole barely large enough to admit a mouse or a Blue
Tit, and there during the summer the busy little lady gathered
together a large mass of prepared bark. During the colder
months, when confined to the house at night, they found a very
similar place in the bird-room, with an entrance hole no other
bird could make use of, and there, also, the lady piled up a
marvellous stock of material ; for on most days in the autumn
and spring they were let out into the garden for a fly, and also
during the winter on mild days ; but, of course, this second and
more permament nesting-place had not been sought out and
adopted until after I had closed up the entrance to the first.
They seemed to have a decided predilection in favour of making
use of the same nest time after time ; but as the female practi¬
cally never ceased working, even when sitting rarely failing to
carry home a load when returning from a fly, the size of the nest
was ever on the increase. I may mention that I never succeeded

I3I

ill finding a trace of mite or insect amongst this material, which
was in regular use for considerably over a twelvemonth. In both
places, the tump seemed to consist wholly and solely of strips of
bark, although a few strips from the perches must have been
there somewhere.

I have seen it stated, or have been told, that these birds
build a dome-shaped nest. Not in any case did my birds do so ;■
moreover, I cannot conceive it possible that a dome, however
nominal, could be constructed out of such limp material without
external support such as is usually present in some form or
another with the nests of the Rong-tailed Tit and the Common
Wren. Of the chawed bark, as used by the Rosy-faces, not a
single piece has sufficient strength to bear its own weight. The
nests were shallow cup shaped, with a lot of loose material
attached externally, much like those of a Redstart or Spotted
Flycatcher when placed on a ledge or beam.

When nesting, the female flies on to a young bough of a
growing tree, bites off — by passing her beak along sideways,
nipping away as she goes — a strip of bark some three or four
inches long, doubles it, by giving a nip about one third of its
length from one end until the two sides form an acute angle,
and tucks the piece, at the angle, under one or more of the
feathers of the lower back or upper tail coverts, leaving both
ends sticking out. This performance is repeated until some
half-dozen pieces have been hooked on, though the number
varies according to the time occupied in obtaining the bark ;
she then flies off in anxious haste to her nest. In my garden,
the bark was almost always taken, if obtainable, by the Rosy-face
from a Balsam Poplar ( Populics balsamifera) ; the Madagascar
Rove-birds, by the way, preferred the Rime tree. Dr. Greene
recommends the Willow, a tree I have not tried ; but these busy
little fellows set a grand example to the British workman, for if
they cannot get what they like, they like what they can get, and
make the best of it. When on her nest, the female employs her
time in passing the strips of bark backwards and forwards
between her mandibles, mumbling away at them until they are
beautifully soft and nice.

However much the iustiudts of my Rosy-faces may have
been sharpened by the enemies surrounding them, the anxiety
they betrayed to find a nesting-place secure from attack — a large
hole with a tiny entrance such as a rat would seledt — was so
marked, and the search so thorough and prolonged, in each case
the hole found having been previously unknown to me, that it
could hardly have been exceptional, but seemed rather a natural

i32

and normal instindt ; and in this I think we may find an answer
to a question I have often seen asked but never answered : Why
do these birds, of all the birds in the world, carry the material to
their nesting-places tucked away under their coat tails as it were,
instead of in their beaks like the rest of the feathered creation ?
Many and many a time, as I watched these mouse-like creatures
nesting, did I answer this question to my own satisfaction. My
birds could not fly straight to the aperture of their nesting
places as a Tit or a Starling usually can, but had to fly on to the
side of the building and then climb up a few inches, lift them¬
selves up into the aperture by means of their beaks, and then
creep in like mice. As everyone knows, a Parrot, when
climbing, uses its beak as a third hand ; and I could see that if
these birds had not any other means of carrying the stuff than
in their beaks, their task would never have been accomplished ;
it is doubtful even if they could have carried anything into the
hole at all. As it was, however, having their mouths free, they
could carry their loads home easily, and I may say safely, for
when there was plenty of green bark available they rarely
dropped a piece ; it is the Tove-bird in captivitj'' that drops its
unnatural collections about the place, not the free bird. The
female alone sat on the eggs ; but whenever she came off the
male duly received and waited upon her, and escorted her back
to the doorway on her return, in the most gallant manner. He
always slept near her at night, but whether actually in the nest
or not*I do not know.

The female seemed to lay from five to seven eggs at a
time, and many were laid, but not an egg was ever hatched, and
I cannot say that any were fertilized ; the mate was unquestion¬
ably a male, albeit a miserable, feather-eating creature. On the
flat wood, in a large hole, the nests took a very considerable
time to make ; and owing to the abruptness with which the birds
were transferred from one place to another (for others had to
be considered before them), and the long delay which occurred
in finding a nesting-place, many eggs were laid before a nest was
formed, and, being on the flat, rolled about and came to nought,
so that at first the birds had not a fair chance ; but this will not
account for the clear eggs laid at a later period. The number of
eggs laid and wasted during the first few months may well have
caused weakness — or else the male was useless.

The male eventually died very suddenly while the female
was laying. At the time I supposed that he had been killed by
another bird, for he had received a suspicious-looking blow on
the forehead, which I judged had been inflicted before death ;

133

but likely enough he had a siezure, and his condition invited a
tap from the Blue Pie’s beak. I am the more supposed to think
that the bird may have had a fit from a very similar case which
has recently occurred in my bird-room whilst a female Parrakeet
was laying. The latter was a strong robust bird full of health
and strength, but her mate, like the Love-bird, was an old, long-
caged, well-exhibited specimen ; and a sudden seizure carried
him off before I knew he was ill.

On missing her husband, the Love-bird made two or three
wild flies around, calling loudly for him ; and then she returned
to her nesting- place, where she stayed for some forty -eight
hours. She forsook the nest after this, and came into the
garden looking queer ; and not long afterwards I found she was
paralysed. With careful nursing she came round, and, after the
lapse of some weeks, became as strong as ever, saving only that
she never recovered the use of about two toes of one foot. But
thenceforth she was a regular vixen, attacking, and sometimes
breaking the leg of any bird that approached her nesting-
place, of which she once more took possession, and to which
she occasionally carried pieces of bark. She lost no time in
vain regrets or outward demonstrations of sorrow. She wanted
a husband, and was perpetually calling and looking out for one..
She had become like the fat cook in Punch who gave up her
place in order to be married ; “ not that she was exactly engaged,,
but she felt that amiable that she could fall in love with
any man.” For a time she kept company with a Red-faced Love¬
bird ; but he was not of much account, and she gave him up as
hopeless before many weeks had passed.

Mr. Castellan, at p. 41, writes that “Love-birds take
possession of the nests of other birds, such as Weavers, for their
own use,” and mentions statements of others that “ they line
their nests with twigs, bits of straw and bark, etc., which the
hens carry up to their nest-boxes by putting them between the
feathers of their rump.” Unfortunately he does not tell us
which species of Love-bird takes possession of the nests of
other birds, such as Weavers, in their natural state. I find it
somewhat hard to believe that the Rosy-face does so. The
references to the twigs and straw apply to the Love-bird in
captivity ; but even so a Love-bird who lined, her nest with twigs
would soon have broken eggs ; and twigs could hardly be
carried to the nest-boxes between the feathers, or otherwise
than in the beak.

I notice that in the “ Royal Natural History,” at p. 129
of Vol. IV. the following words appear in connedtiou with this

134

species. “Andersson writes that these Love-birds are common
in Namaqualand, and are met with in small flocks, never far
removed from the vicinity of water. Their flight is rapid ; and
while on the wing they utter their sharp cry. Their food
consists of berries and large berry - like seeds. Instead of
making nests for themselves, they take possession of those of
other birds; but Andersson was unable to ascertain whether
they did so by dispossessing the rightful owners, or whether
they were content with deserted domiciles. The number of
eggs is not mentioned.” I feel very strongly that Andersson
was mistaken in supposing that the Rosy-face takes possession
of the nests of other birds. He was probably unaware that
the members of the Agctpornis genus of Parrots construct their
own nests; and, finding the eggs of these birds in their own
nests, he doubtless jumped to the conclusion that the nests
were those of other birds. Unfortunately I have not been able
to get hold of “Andersson” to obtain further particulars.

A ROUNDABOUT PAPER.

By Mrs. Leslie Williams.

Do any of the readers of the Avicultural Magazine
remember the “essay days” which came round so regularly
at school, I wonder? Do they recolledt how the subjedt which
was chalked up on the blackboard for juvenile wits to sharpen
themselves upon, invariably proved so rough and gritty a piece
of paving -stone that the axe of intellect resolutely refused
to put on an edge, no matter how perseveringly scraped and
moistened and ground thereon ?

Like unto those bad old days wras the day when the order
arrived per carte postale from our honoured Secretary to the
writer, for an article wherewith gaping pages should be filled.
Behold me, most anxious to oblige, sitting down to think the
matter out. Immediately ideas in plenty occur to me about
dogs, but they, of course, would be inadmissible ; about cats —
but no, in this paper that dread subject is trebly taboo ; about
birds — not one single fact can I recall that has not been told
before, not one spicy anecdote that did not appear in last week’s
Feathered World, not even the hatching of an egg that has not
been already entered upon the Avicultural Register. Yet stay,
one of my Pigeons laid an egg yesterday. Foiled again ! (with
great stress on the vowels, and a stamp of one foot, to which
the carpet, like the stage, responds with a cloud of dust) the
Avicultural Magazine does not admit Pigeons within its sacred
arcana.

135

The shrieks of three Parrots, getting the primal airing of
summer in the garden outside the window where I sit, ought to
suggest a few good stories of the witticisms uttered by the dear,
clever creatures ; but no, for they have been all the winter in the
kichen, half torpid, wholly gorged, and stupidly silent. With
the buttercups and daisies their voices are coming back, but
apparently not their wits, for their speech is all inarticulate,
though there is plenty of it. If they lose conversational
powers, though, they learn toleration and good camaraderie in
the basement regions. Happening to look into the kitchen
to-day, about the dinner hour, I saw two plates filled with
“ bits ” touching one another on the table, at one of which the
cat was busily engaged, while at the other Polly No. 3 was
sorting out the choice morsels. Now and then, both choices fell
on the same fragment : then the cat pulled and the Parrot
pulled, and the comestible decided the question according to
its elasticity, but all was done in perfect amity. Night after night
four cats and three Psittacidce (please revise the orthography of
this word, Mr. Secretary) sleep the sleep of the just and the
satiated, divided only by a few impotent wires between feathers
and claws, in my kitchen. Day after day the green trio prome¬
nade at will, and even tweak the unwary tails of the variously
coloured quartette, and peace and harmony still reign unbroken.
On one point only do they disagree — the cats want to sleep in
the day when the Parrots are widest awake and readiest with
their beaks ; and the Polls feel tired and ready for bed at the
hour when the tide of life leaps highest in feline veins. They
are still arguing the question, and I shall be told when a settle¬
ment is arrived at. Meanwhile it is most important that mice
should not get a footing in the dresser drawers, and the kitten
of five tender weeks must be introduced to cockroaches by its
three doting elders, so that night and day are alike lively in the
kingdom of saucepans.

My bird-room proper is a desert, occupied only by mice
and two Pekin Nightingales, who hugely appreciate the absence
of winged company. “ The fewer the Pekins the more the grub
for the Pekins that remain ” is their motto, and though there is a
flaw in the arrangement somewhere, I cannot detect it, for it
takes the 3^olk of one egg ever}^ day to feed the pair in possession,
just as it used to take the yolk of one egg every day to feed the
birds when the room was full of them. Perhaps the mice know
something about this, but if the}r do they are ver}r careful to
keep their information to themselves, and regularly sweep up all
traces of their presence from around and about the food tins.

136

I was watching the Pekins wash one day, and it reminded
me very much of my youth, to strike again the keynote in
which this roundabout article was first pitched. Their bath is
an oval baking tin about three inches deep and eight inches
long, and they went in at one end and out at the other as fast as
the eye could follow them ; but in one little matter their practice
differed from what I remember of mine — they went through
under the water, while I should have gone as much as possible
over it ; and then came out very wet, wherein is no parallel. In
about five minutes they were dry again, and repeated the
performance, and at the end of a hot day the two quarts or so
of water which the bath holds, are mostly bestowed on the floor
all round, and only the sediment of the Leiolriches remains.
(Please do not, Mr. Secretary, alter this latter word when you
are looking over my proof. The proper scientific name of the
Pekin Nightingale is Leiothrix, which comes from the Greek
leios, smooth, and thrix, hair : and my husband, who is a
profound Greek scholar, says the proper scientific plural of the
Pekin Nightingale’s name is Leiotriches . Perhaps some people
may find it difficult to believe this, and in fact one or two have
kicked at it before now : but none of them were Greek scholars,
and so I am very proud of it. I am the only person in the
Society who knows the proper plural, and I will not be done out
of it.)*

The Leiotriches then, are very fond of making nests, but
they are not extravagant over it, for the same material can be
used over and over again. They have made at least six since
February, and have taken us in with every one of them. “ My
last attempt ” sa}7s the hen, coming out of the muddled heap of
hay and withered leaves, “ was unfortunately abortive : this
time, I assure you there is no mistake. In fact, I am in a
position to guarantee a new laid egg for to-morrow,” and we
always believe her, and tell one another in whispers that the
Pekins are reall}7 and truly nesting this time. They once did
get so far as to have an undoubted egg in one nest, but how it
got there I could not say : it was a Cutthroat’s egg, and rattled
inside when shaken.

The very latest nest has a much more business-like air
about it than any of its predecessors : it is not so boldly self-
assertive and does not rock about so much, and it is also much
tidier and better finished off, and the cock has tied two branches
together very ingeniously, so that they make a nice hall or

* In Latinizing the name it becomes Liothrix ; -would not, therefore,
the plural of the Latinized word be Liothriges ? Genera are usually derived
from the Greek and Latinized.— Ed.

137

entrance. I have great hopes from this nest, but can only give
them a fortnight to develop, for after that time the room will be
wanted for a kitten-nursery. What the Pekins will do then, is
not settled yet. They would not be happy in a cage, and two
broody hens have taken the out-of-door aviary, the only other
place where they could have been accommodated, so perhaps
they will have to pay twopence and take their choice of a new
home in the advertisement columns of this Magazine. I shall be
very sorry to part with them, but Persian kittens go off pretty
well at a guinea each, while there does not seem to be a very
quick market for Leiotriches, delightful and amusing pets though
they are.

BREEDING IN THE OPEN AIR IN 1896 AT
MICKLEFIELD VICARAGE.

By the Rev. C. D. Farrar.

I venture to think that my success, so far, will afford both
pleasure and encouragement to our many members. I keep
the great majority of my birds in a very large outdoor garden
aviary ; here they live all the year round in the most perfect
health and plumage, and a death hardly ever occurs except from
old age or accident.

The size of the aviary I cannot give exactly, but its extent
may be judged when I mention that it is full of large growing
bushes and shrubs 6ft. and 7ft. high, in which some of the birds
prefer to build. To show, in passing, how utterly fallacious
many of the so-called Amateur Guides are, I may remark that
birds do not eat shrubs, though we are told by one self-styled
authority, “ that birds and trees are not compatible ; ” and many
of the so-called delicate birds are not a bit tender. By way of
proof, I may say that I had out all last winter, African Red¬
cheeked Waxbills, Cherry Finches, Diamond Sparrows, Bib
Finches, Blue Robins, Green Avadavats and many others which
are supposed to require hot house treatment. Now for my
breeding results, so far.

I. I will take the Blue Robins ; they are a grand pair,
and were out all last year. They began to nest in March ;
selecting a cigar box as their future home. In this receptacle
the hen formed a beautiful little cup-shaped nest : very small for
the size of the bird. The cock did nothing more than select the
site ; the hen did all the building.

During the time of incubation, the cock was most
attentive to the wants of his partner, taking her all the meal-

I3§

worms he could find, and living on Abrahams’ egg-food himself.
The youngsters appeared in due course and were very ugly little
wretches ; something like young Sparrows, of a dull, livid
colour, naked, and with fearsome mouths. They kept the old
birds busy from morn till eve in supplying their wants ; but they
grew splendidly, and at the end of about twelve days they one
morning appeared on a branch outside. Beauties they are,
not a bit like the old ones ; but rather like a thrush, grandly
speckled on the breast, and with a lovely shading of blue on the
wings and tail. They are long since full grown and able to
scrat for themselves, and ever on the look out for mealworms
and “ black clocks.” I am very proud of my success, as it is so
seldom that Blue Robins are raised to maturity.

The “authority” I have before referred to, tells us that
mealworms are “ too stimulating;” I guess that but for mealworms
and clocks, those youngsters would now be stiff and cold.

II. A nest of Bib Finches.* I believe this is almost, if
not quite, an unique event — I mean the rearing of the young.
Eggs, I know, have been laid before, but I have never heard of
any young being reared. My Bibs built a snug nest in a
cocoanut husk in the quietest corner of the aviary, and the first
intimation I had of a family was the voice of the young being
fed. The peculiar call note attracted me, and on going to the
husk, out bounced the fully fledged young. They are just like
the old birds, except they have no “ bib ” and are rather yellow
round the beak.

III. A nest of Bengalese (Yellow and White) ; these
built in a travelling box and reared three youngsters. They are
now busy with their second lot of young : a good lot too, by the
row they make at feeding-time.

IV. A nest of Silverbills, out some four weeks since,
hatched in a cocoanut husk. A second lot of three has come off
this week ; and the old pair are sitting again somewhere, but
they are very sly over their movements.

V. A nest of Green Avadavats. This is their second
nest this year, out of doors. Is not this phenomenal ? They
build a lovely nest like a ball in some bush, of bass lined
warmly with feathers, and lay about five eggs each time ; but so
far, although they sit splendidly, they have not hatched. I think
it has been too cold. They are now at it again. Ret us wish
them good luck and a large and bouncing family ! I do.

VI. Cutthroats. Two pairs with youngsters in cocoanut
husks. I find them most harmless birds in my aviary.

* Spermestes nana. Dwarf Finch is the commoner English name. Ed.

139

I see my Cherry Finches and Diamond Sparrows are both
busy prospecting. I think the latter have a nest in a quiet
corner, but I shall not look. Fast year I reared a fine nest of
Red Avadavats out of doors ; is not this rare ?

VII. About twenty Zebra Finches, so far, and a lot more
on the way. I bred about forty last season.

The Blue Robins have hatched again and have three fine
3roungsters half grown.

In March, my Pekin Robins built a lovely nest, like a
Blackbird’s, in a large elder bush ; but, unfortunately, just at
the critical stage, the poor cock died.

VIII. A curious cross : a hen Common Waxbill has
paired with a Pheasant Finch cock, and they have a nest full of
young ones.

I have just put up my Turquoisiues to breed, and also a
pair of Kings. The man at the shop pulled the Queen’s tail
out, catching her, so they may not breed yet.

CORRESPONDENCE.

BREEDING COCKATOOS.

Sir, — Having but recently returned to England, after many years
residence abroad, I am glad to see by the interesting contents of the
Avicultural .Society’s Magazine, that the number of lovers and breeders of
foreign cage birds is increasing in this country, that my former efforts are
still kindly remembered by some few persons, and that the notes I published
years ago relating my successes and failures in keeping and breeding birds,
have, in some instances, been of use to a new generation of amateurs.

What was once my aviary, tenanted by several hundred foreign birds
of almost ever}- description, has, I believe, been converted by a subsequent
tenant of my former residence into greenhouses, or ferneries or vineries. In
constructing that aviary I had the great advantage of the friendly advice of
an unequalled aviculturist, the late Mr. Vekemans, many years managing
director of the Zoological Garden at Antwerp.

Those readers of the Magazine who think of building an aviary,
would do well if, when travelling on the Continent, they paid a visit to the
Antwerp Gardens. More ideas as regards the suitable housing of birds can
be gathered there, than in any other Zoological Garden I have ever visited.

Of my former collection, only one specimen remains, a small Lemon-
crested White Cockatoo, purchased more than 25 years ago for a very few
shillings. When I bought him he was not a young bird, and I had no
family, he is now the playmate of a grand-daughter; and I hope that he
will live to be the pet of grand-children of my grand-daughter.

This bird had been in my possession perhaps a dozen years, when the
supposed “he” astonished us by laying a series of eggs. At intervals of
several years the same thing has happened since.

140

It may be that the change from London to a more sunny climate had
something to do with this ; but I have often asked myself whether Australian
Cockatoos do breed every year, and whether they breed at all during the
first few years of their life.

Considering the very few natural enemies these powerful birds have
in their native country, their numbers would have increased prodigiously
if they bred very freely in freedom, and we should have heard more of
their destructiveness.

I believe it would prove a highly interesting study to attempt breed¬
ing these easily-tamed birds in confinement, and success should not be
difficult to attain for those who have patience. Unfortunately, I cannot tell
how to select a pair, male and female being so much alike. I should seledt
a healthy specimen at hazard, and, when the bird is thoroughly domesticated
and in perfect condition, let him or her see a number of other specimens
of the same species, when our bird would soon tell us which mate would be
suitable. Allowing two to occupy the same cage will always be a little
risky at first. Love-making between birds often begins with a fight, in
which case interference by their owner might end in scratches and bites ;
non-interference, in one of the birds being injured. A case has been
reported to me where a quarrelsome pair of Parrots were soothed and made
very affectionate towards each other, by a small drop of aniseed oil being
rubbed on each wing. This essential oil is sometimes used by pigeon-
breeders, to bring newly-purchased stock back to the Pigeon-liouse. As it
proved useful as regards one kind of Parrots, it might be tried on cockatoos,
and could do no harm.

But I should only try the smallest kind of White Cockatoo, the
larger kind are so powerful that nothing but steel bars and cast iron seems
able to resist their beaks.

The very pretty Leadbeater might be tried also, for he is compara¬
tively gentle.

The Rose-breasted I found a stupid bird, his plumage always of a
dingy tint, and if bred, his progeny would neither have value nor easily
find friends. Aug. F. Winner.

BUDGERIGARS.

Sir, — Mr. Thom is quite right about aviary-bred Budgerigars. They
are larger, better coloured and better marked ; the necklace especially
coming out better than in the imported birds.

Where are the Australian birds that could compare with the birds I
have shown at the Crystal Palace for some years ? And they were all bred
in my aviaries, winning ist, 1893; 1st, 1894; 2nd, 1S95 ; and 2nd and 4th,
1896, The ist and 3rd in 1896 were yellows, consequently my natural
coloured ones would have been ist and 2nd had the yellows been absent. I
do not care for the yellows, they look too washed out. The two I bred
once were pure 3-ellow albinoes with pink eyes. I have 36 pairs breeding
this year, and have about 50 young on the wing, with about the same
number in nests. A dealer has contracted to take all I breed this year ; but
I have heard that it is doubtful if he will get a sale for them all, as he is in a
small way of business. Some persons doubt about an aviary being made to
pay, but I. find breeding Budgerigars can be made very profitable with
proper management. Char EES P. Arthur.

DANGEROUS BIRDS.

Sir, — Following up Mr. Rotliera’s most interesting article on this
subject, I should like to give my experience.

First, I must agree with him that, in many instances, a whole family
of birds has been branded dangerous because of the peculiar temperament
of perhaps one specimen under observation ; and, in the few notes I am
going to jot down, I wish it to be understood that of the birds I shall
mention I have had many different specimens and have watched them
closely.

I think the varying accounts one hears from time to time as to the
savage propensities or otherwise of different birds is, in many instances,
accounted for by the small size of the aviary they are kept in. Bi ids
generally are much better tempered when kept under more natural
conditions ; and are much less likely to fill up their time by bullyin
other birds when they have sufficient space to fly about and exercise
themselves in. Of course this does not apply' to all birds, and when
you find that many different individuals of any given species are always
dangerous in a large aviary, then I say it is time to discontinue keeping
them in mixed company.

I have always found the English Robin ready to fight all comers on
the slightest provocation ; and when he has had nothing better to do, he has
stood on the food pot or near the water and had a tussle with every bird
that came to eat or drink : this generally ended in the death of some bird.

American Mocking Birds are exactly the same, only with increased
bulk you have increased wickedness and pugnacity.

The English Thrush, when given a large aviary, will very seldom do
more than snap his bill at any other bird. I have had no experience of
him in a small aviary, but should think he would become dangerous.

Blackbirds, I have found, will do no more harm than steal the other
birds’ eggs, which of course, makes them undesirable inmates of any
aviary where you have breeding-birds.

The Pied Wagtail I have already written about, but even he may'
remain sans reproche for months, and then break out all at once into cold
blooded and premeditated murder.

The Greater or Ox-eyed Tit has always been sadly maligned, and I
am only too glad to join Mr. Rothera in helping him to regain his fallen
character: I have always found him harmless.

Shamas and Dials are generally harmless to other birds, but will fight
to the death among themselves ; but, as Mr. Phillipps has already told us,
if you have two well-matched male Shamas, it is almost worth while
risking everything to hear them sing against one another : it is simply
sublime.

If you introduce a pair of Virginian Cardinals into an aviary already
containing a pair of Red-crested Cardinals, or vice versa, y^ou will generally
have trouble ; but if the two pairs be introduced simultaneously', they will
settle down amicably.

A cock Virginian will occasionally' murder his spouse, especially if
she happen to be a good singer and rival him.

The Pintail Whydali is an absolute nuisance wherever he is. I have
had many, and there is not a pin(tail) to choose among them.

142

I think it unwise to keep Parrots and Parrakeets in a mixed aviary :
as Mr. Rothera says, they are not so much vicious as they are mischievous,
and therefore should be kept in aviaries by themselves, where a knowledge
of the family weakness will stand the weaker members in good stead when
they see a larger brother eyeing their legs and sidling up to them in that
confiding and innocent way that they have.

In these few lines, if I have seemed sometimes to contradidl Mr.
Rothera, I hope he will forgive me and not think that I am criticising his
article. He has given his experience and I am giving mine, and if the
readers of the Avicultural Magazine can pick up any information from
either experience that will be of use to them, we shall both have
accomplished our object.

John Sergeant.

CITRIR FINCHES.

Sir, — I should be greatly obliged if any member of the Avicultural
Society could give any information on the Citril Finch (F. Citrinella ) in
confinement. I have never seen this bird alive, but judging from the plate
in Gould’s “ Birds of Europe ” I should imagine it to be a very pretty
aviary bird.

I bought two birds last autumn, advertised as Citril Finches, but I
was quite sure on receiving them that they were not the true species. I
.gave one of these to my friend, Mr. Verrall, of Rewes, who informed me it
was the same kind as some he bought twelve years ago from Mr. Abrahams,
as Brazilian Finches, and that their scientific name was Sycalis luteiventris.
They are rather uninteresting birds and only worth keeping for their very
peculiar song.

Two birds I got this spring, advertised as Citron Finches, were
bright-plumaged Serins ( S . serinus) .

Mr. Abrahams is the only dealer I have spoken to who seemed to
know the true kind ; and I hope he or some of our importers ma5r, before
long, let us have a look at F. Citrinella.

G. C. SwaieES.

Sir, — I, also, purchased two of the so-called Citril Finches referred
to by Mr. Swailes. They were both cocks. I afterwards obtained from Mr.
Swaysland a true pair of the same species. The hen made a nest in a cigar
box, a few weeks ago in my aviary, but unfortunately died suddenly just as
I hoped she was going to lay. These birds are near relations to the Saffron
Finch ; there are several species, or rather sub-species, which very closely
resemble one another, but so far as I can make out, my birds are Sycalis
arve?isis, and undoubtedly Mr. Swailes’ were the same. Some months ago,
Mr. Swaysland had several specimens of a smaller species (probably S.
minor) .

Sycalis arvensis is extremely like a Green Canary in appearance, but
in disposition resembles the Saffron-finch. Rike the Saffron-finch, it is
rather quarrelsome, though mine have never done any damage, and its
love-antics are of the same boisterous and unloverlike character. Rike Mr.
Swailes, I do not care for the bird. I have never seen the true Citril Finch,
but I understand that it differs from the Serin chiefly in the shape of its
beak, which is sharper and more Siskin-like. The Citril Finch is placed

143

among the Siskins by modern ornithologists. It will be remembered that
Bechstein considered the Citril Finch and the Serin Finch to be the same
species.

Horatio R. Fieemer.

A STRANGE FOSTER-MOTHER.

Sir, — In June, last year, I had occasion to make a journey to Brazil.

The R.M.S. Nile stopping but a few hours at Lisbon, there was only
time for a very short visit to the town. I find that on such occasions a
visit to the market-place of a foreign town is time well spent, for there one
can see at a glance a good many of the ways and habits of life of the
people, and occasionally something quite new.

In the Lisbon market, amongst the many stalls for the sale of fruit
and vegetables, eggs and fowls, butter and cheese, etc., there was also a
bird-dealer’s shop, which, at first sight, seemed to contain nothing at all
new or striking, until my eye fell on a young Cuckoo in a square wire cage.

On the top of this cage there was placed a little Parrot-stand, to the
perch of which was attached, by a leg-chain, a common Grey -breasted
La Plata Parrakeet. This little fellow climbed about as far as his chain
allowed him to do. Whilst watching him, I heard the young Cuckoo give
a little screech. The Parrakeet climbed down, as I thought, from mere
curiosity ; but, much to my surprise, the young Cuckoo came up to the
bars of his cage, opened his beak wide, and the Parrakeet fed him most
tenderly and copiously out of his crop. The Cuckoo had evidently called
his neighbour and temporary foster-parent, and visibly enjoyed the meal
he gave him.

A Cuckoo must evidently have a strange power over other birds to
make them thus supply his wants.

Had I not seen this strange spedtacle with my own eyes in the Lisbon
market-place on June 16th, 1S95, I should have thought such a thing next
to impossible.

Aug. F. Weiner.

BREEDING CORDON BLEUS.

Sir, — I was hoping to send you an account of the rearing of a family
of Cordon Bleus, but alas ! after living for ten days the little ones were
found dead this morning. The parents were the occupants, with ten other
small Finches and Waxbills, of a waggon-cage, 26m. in length and i6in. in
width. As the hen had laid five eggs on some chickweed and grass, I put
a nesting-basket at the top of the cage, which she at once took to, and
shortly again began to lay.

I need not tell you how greatly disappointed I feel at this failure.
This is the first time that a Cordon Bleu has ever laid whilst in my
possession, yet for seventeen years I have had a great many of these pretty
creatures.

W. T. Cateeugh.

THE

Bvtcultural Machine,

BEING THE JOURNAL OF THE

AVICULTURAL SOCIETY.

VOL. II. — No. 22. All rights reserved. AUGUST, 1896.

MY PASSERINE PARRAKEETS.

By O. E. Cresswele.

The progress which aviculture has made in the last few
years is evidenced by nothing so much as by the number of
birds which breed in European aviaries, some even in cages,
which twenty years ago had never been known to nest in
captivity. There always seems to me a double pleasure in
inducing my pets to breed ; for, firstly, it is interesting to every
lover of birds to watch their method of building, incubation,
and rearing their family ; and, secondly, the fact of their
breeding is a pretty good proof that the birds are comfortable,
happy, and healthy.

For this reason, I think the story of the breeding of a
pair of Passerine Parrakeets (commonly called Blue-winged
Eove-birds) in a bell cage, 2iin. high and 13m. in diameter at
the base, may not be uninteresting to some members of our
Society. There may be some who have no regular aviary and
are obliged to keep their birds in cages, who are glad to know
what species may possibly in such circumstances reproduce their
kind.

I11 the summer of 1892, I bought a pair of these sweet
little Parrakeets. It never occurred to me that they might
breed in a cage, and, so far as I can recoiled!, I never gave them
a cocoanut husk till the following year. Their cage, through
the winter, was kept in a comfortable bird-room, but its inmates
were very quiet and undemonstrative. Through the lovely
summer of 1893 I changed their residence, and the cage was
daily carried out into the garden. They became very lively and
were specialty excited at hearing the sound of Swallows over¬
head, whose chattering much resembles their own ; and I saw
some signs of breeding. However, in the middle of September,
I went abroad, but heard, later on, that the hen had laid an egg.

145

She laid five and sat well ; but soon after my return in October
she was disturbed, and deserted the nest. Examination showed
that her eggs were all fertile, and ought to have hatched. The
birds then showed no signs of breeding again, and spent the winter
as before. The summer of 1894 was far less hot, and it was only in
the later summer months that the cage was carried out of doors.
They then at once showed signs of breeding, and actually
incubated while the cage was carried in and out ; but no eggs
hatched, though several were fertile.

In 1895, I had their daily outdoor airing begun earlier,
and the result was that the hen laid her first egg in July. At
irregular intervals she laid seven, but one was thin-shelled, and
broke, and I had to regularly overhaul the nest— this she now
allows me to do with perfect composure — I took away three
clear eggs and left three apparently good. In due time one
was hatched, and, exactly a week after, another ; by this time
the first-born had grown immensely and I fancy suffocated the
younger, which was soon found dead. The survivor, in its
earlier stages, was certainly a most hideous little creature. Its
head was about the size of the rest of its body, and that looked
like a lump of raw meat. For four weeks it showed no sign of
down, then all at once specks of green appeared, and the feathers
developed SO' fast that in another fortnight it was fledged and
scarcely distinguishable from the mother. All through the
time of incubation the cock diligently fed the hen, and at night
slept in the cocoanut with her ; and both parents fed the baby.
Before it emerged from the cocoanut, I heard cracking, which I
discovered to be that of hemp which, apparently, the parents
had carried up whole. I used to throw in more, and the nestling
quickly ate it. A tiresome stage ensued, when the little creature
used to scramble down to the ground and could not climb up
again ; but this only lasted three or four days. Then the trio
lived happily together for about three weeks, and very pretty
they looked in a flowery verandah. An evil day arrived when
the mother wished to nest again, and the father continually
chased the poor baby round the tiny cage. I was obliged to
remove it to a separate one, and, as ill luck would have it, just
then some chilly autumn weather came on, and, stupidly, I did
not remove the cage to warmer quarters : the little thing grew
feeble and was heard to wheeze at night. I removed it to the
equable and warm temperature of an invalid’s room. It became
the tamest and most interesting of feathered creatures I ever
knew. It grew weaker, but always tried to twitter cheerfully,
and seemed to thank for being lifted up to its cocoanut when too

1 4b

feeble to climb. At last it succumbed to lung disease at the age
of about three months. The mother’s desire to nest increased
to a perfect mania ; batch after batch of eggs was laid, which
came to nothing, and the extraordinary thing was, that when I
removed clear ones she immediately replaced them by laying
more. On one occasion, when she had seven and could not
cover them, I took two out ; this was in the morning, and in the
afternoon of the next day she had laid two more. She sat and
laid continuously from July till March, by which time she had
laid nearly forty eggs. Naturally she seemed exhausted ; but
nothing seemed to stop this production of eggs but the entire
removal of the cocoanut.

I hope I have related enough of the doings of this little
pair to encourage other aviculturists to try their race. They
cost 8/6, and when once shown at a County Exhibition, paid for
themselves by winning a first prize of 10/6.

AVICULTURE A HUNDRED YEARS AGO.

By C. S. Simpson.

The literature of aviculture is but scant}’’, and the pursuit,
fascinating though it is, can hardly be said to have a history.
A book in my possession, published in 1806, is entitled, “The
Naturalist’s Cabinet, containing interesting sketches of animal
history, illustrative of the natures, dispositions, manners, and
habits of all the most remarkable quadrupeds, birds, fishes,
amphibia, reptiles, etc., in the known world ” : it is in six
volumes, two of which are devoted to birds. It is possible
that a few extracts which throw some little light on aviculture
as practised a hundred years ago may be of interest to readers of
the Avicultural Magazine.

A very large number of species are described, and with
considerable fullness and accuracy. I think, therefore, we may
fairly assume that those which are omitted were unknown, or at
any rate, but little known at that time in England. As may be
supposed from the comparatively scanty and infrequent inter¬
communication of those days few species of foreign birds were
kept as pets.

The Parrots known to our author (I forgot to mention
that the book is by the Rev. Thomas Smith) appear to be four
only in number. These are the “ Ash-coloured Parrot ” (of
course our old friend Polly Gre}r), the “ Ethiopian or Guinea

147

Parrot” (Red-faced Rove Bird), the “ Yellow-Winged Parrot”
(apparently the Yellow-shouldered Amazon), and the “ Green
Macaw” (which from the description I judge to be Illiger’s
Macaw).

Of these four species, the “ Ash-coloured Parrot ” is said
to be “ the species now most commonly brought into Europe,”
and the “ Guinea Parrot ” is described as being “ so common in
this country that it does not meet with that degree of admiration
which is due to its superior elegance.” Of the “ Yellow-winged
Parrot,” it appears that very little was known, and the “ Green
Macaw” is called “this rare and beautiful bird.”

The account of the Grey Parrot consists almost exclusively
of stories of its talking powers : We are told of the “ Guinea
Parrot ” that “ these birds abound not only in Ethiopia and
Guinea, but also in Java, where they are seen in immense flocks.
The trading vessels continually bring away considerable numbers
in cages ; but they are so tender that most of them die in their
passage to our colder climates. It has also been remarked that
many of them have dropped down dead through timidity at the
firing of a vessel’s great guns. Should they survive their voyage,
they live a long time if kept together in pairs, and have even been
known to propagate.”

With reference to the proper treatment of Parrots in
confinement, our author is for the most part discreetly silent,
but we are told of the “Yellow-winged Parrot:” “ The food
commonly given him consists of hemp seed, nuts, fruits of every
kind, and bread soaked in wine : he would prefer meat, but
that kind of aliment has been found to make him dull and heavy
and to cause his feathers to drop off” while the Green Macaw
“ eats almost every article of human food : it is particularly fond
of bread, beef, fried fish, pastry and sugar ” : Poor Green
Macaw !

The Toucan (by which is apparently meant the Ariel
Toucan), is described as being easily tamed, and was presumably
therefore known as a cage-bird. The “ Icteric Oriole” (Brazilian
Hang-nest), we are told “ feeds on inserts, for the purpose of
killing which, the Americans keep it in their houses.”

The “Grenadier Grosbeak” (Oryx Weaver) is described,
but does not appear to have been known as a cage-bird, but the
“Weaver Oriole” (presumably the Oriole Weaver) was known,
for “ two females having been brought (from Africa) and kept
together in a cage, it was observed that they entwined some of
the stalks of the pimpernel, with which they were fed, in the

148

wires : some rush stalks were put into the cage ; on which they
presently made a nest large enough to hide one of them, but it
was as often deranged as made, the work of one day being
spoiled the next. This evinced that the fabrication of the nest
in a state of nature was the work of male and female, and that
the female is not able to finish this important work by herself.”

The Cardinal Grosbeak seems to have been well known to
our grandfathers, but none of the other Cardinals are mentioned ;
the Mocking-bird and “Blue-bird” (Blue Rock Thrush) were very
highly esteemed as cage-birds, and these practically exhaust the
list of foreign cage -birds known to our author. From this
scanty list, Australian species are altogether absent : indeed, no
Australian species is mentioned in the book at all. The Canary
was, of course, known, and held a well-established position as
a cage-bird ; the author remarks, “ they appear to have been
brought into Europe about the fourteenth century, but they are
now so commonly bred in our own country that they may be
easily procured. It is about five inches and a half in length; the
plumage in general yellow, more or less mixed with grey and
in some with brown on the upper parts. .... Buffon
enumerates 29 varieties, and many more might probaoly be
added to the list. .... The Canary will breed freely with
the Siskin and Goldfinch ; it likewise proves prolific with the
Einnet, and also admits, but unwillingly, the Chaffinch, Yellow
Bunting and even the Sparrow.”

Turning to Britisli birds, most of those species which are
now kept as cage-birds were popular a hundred years ago.
Meat seems to have been the staple diet for soft-billed birds, but
mealworms, chopped egg, and ants’ eggs were also used. The
following directions for feeding Nightingales are given : “ Their
food should always be sheep’s hearts or other raw flesh meat
chopped fine, and it should always be mixed with hens’ eggs
boiled hard ; they should have ants’ mould ; they must be kept
very clean, for otherwise they will have the cramp and perhaps
the claws will drop off. In autumn they will sometimes abstain
from their food for a fortnight and sometimes longer, unless two
or three mealworms be given them two or three times a week, or
two or three spiders in a day ; they must likewise have a little
saffron in their water. Figs chopped small among their meat
will help them to recover their flesh. When their legs are gouty,
to which they are very subject after having been kept in a cage,
they should be anointed with fresh butter or capon’s fat, three or
four days together. If they grow melancholy, white sugar candy
should be put into their water, and they should be fed with

149

sheep’s heart, with three or four mealworms in a day, and a few
ants with their eggs and some of their mould at the bottom of
their cage, among which, some hen’s egg boiled hard and
chopped very small, should be strewed, and some saffron put
into their water.” White sugar candy and sheep’s heart would
be very likely, one would think, rather to increase than to cure
the poor bird’s melancholy, but the stimulating effect of meal¬
worms seems to have been well known. Indeed, if we omit the
raw meat, the diet of ants’ eggs, mealworms and hard boiled egg
has not been much improved upon in the present day.

The following story, which is related with the utmost
simplicity as sober fact, is, I must confess, more amusing than
credible. Our author is quoting from a correspondent :

“While I was at Ratisbou,” says this correspondent, “I
put up at an Inn, where my host had three Nightingales. The
Nightingales were placed separately, so that each was shut up by
itselfin a dark cage. It was usual then, about midnight when all
was dark in the house, to hear the two Nightingales jangling and
talking with each other and plainly imitating men’s discourse.
The third hung more remote, so that I could not so well hear it
as I lay a-bed. Rut it is wonderful to tell how these two provoked
each other : and, by answering, invited and drew one another to
speak. Besides the daily discourse of the guests they chanted
out two stories, which generally held them from midnight to
morning: and that with such modulations and inflections, that
no man could have taken to come from such little creatures.
One of their stories was concerning the tapster and his wife,
wdio refused to follow him to the wars, as he desired her. There
was a long and earnest contention between them, and all this
dialogue the birds repeated. They even repeated the unseemly
words which were cast out between them and which ought
rather to have been suppressed and kept a secret. But the birds
not knowing the difference between modest, immodest, honest
and filthy words, did out with them.”

Apparently the “Nightingale story” of our grandfathers
was the forerunner of the modern “ Parrot story.”

The diet and treatment advised for other insectivorous
birds is practically the same as for the Nightingale, sheep’s heart
being considered, apparently, the most important item.

Linnets are to be reared on “ rapeseed soaked in water,
scalded and afterwards bruised ; to this should be put twice as
much white bread that has first been soaked in water and after¬
wards boiled in a little milk, mixing them together in a kind of

150

soft paste, and which should be prepared fresh every day, as
sour meal is very fatal to all kinds of birds.”

This is very well, but our author goes on to recommend
the same diet for young larks : the proper food for adult larks,
we are told, is “bread, egg and hempseed.” It is curious that
the tradition of hempseed as the orthodox food for larks has
survived, and holds its own among modern aviculturists.

FOREIGN FINCHES IN CAGES.

By Aug. F. Wiener.

After a long interval, during which I had not kept any
birds, it occurred to me that I would try to keep a few foreign
finches in an ordinary cage in my library. Formerly I had kept
11137- birds in a large specially constructed aviary ; the attempt,
therefore, to keep foreign finches during winter in an ordinary
family room, and to maintain them in a state of perfect health,
was, in some respects, a new departure for me. As I succeeded
beyond my most sanguine expectations, I may perhaps be able
to give some of our readers a few useful hints.

In my former aviary I had a little fountain in each
compartment, the jet of which fell into a flat cement basin,
forming a miniature pond about an inch deep. I had observed
that the small finches were so particular about the purity of their
drinking-water, that they always drank from the jet as it issued
from the pipe, and used the miniature pond for bathing only,
though it was thoroughly cleansed with a hard brush aud
emptied once a day.

In my cage I used a syphon glass, placed in such a
position that there was practically no possibility of any dirt
falling into the water. This glass was carefully and thoroughly
washed every day. I much prefer glass drinking fountains, as
they show any impurity at a glance; reveal it at once if forgotten
to be attended to ; and cannot leak.

As a bath, I used a cheap little zinc trough of oval shape,
about six inches long, three or four broad, aud one-and-a-half or
two deep. At first the birds were shy to use it; the metal
bottom frightened them, as it gave no kind of foothold they did
not venture to splash, and jumped out of the bath as quickly as
they got in. My putting a handful of fine sea sand into the bath
produced surprising results. The birds jumped in at once,
sometimes three or four at a time, in fadt as man3T as the tin

I5I

would hold. Their splashing stirred up the fine particles of
sand, which evidently produced a gentle friction very much
relished by the birds, who came again and again, sometimes
bathing as often as four, five, and six times within an hour of the
bath tub being supplied, and were afterwards busy for a long
time completing their toilet, which work, in turn, gave them
a good appetite. I found that these grains of sand must have
adted on the plumage much like a curry comb and a brush
adt on the coat of a horse. I never saw finches, anywhere,
in better plumage and with a more perfedt gloss on their
feathers ; and only regret that this very simple idea of imitating
the puddle in which Sparrows delight to bathe did not occur to
me years ago, when I had an opportunity of trying it on a
greater variety of birds.

Sea sand, and by preference such as contains particles of
small broken shells, in the drawer of the cage, and renewed
daily, cannot be too much recommended.

Except for the most delicate tropical finches, such as
Cordon Bleus and Fire-finches, I believe the warmth of an
ordinary living-room quite sufficient to keep foreign finches in
health during winter, if they be well fed. I never troubled about
the temperature falling during the night. Even in the tropics
there are sometimes cold nights.

What we must try to give to our birds, is as much light
and sunshine as possible, but on no account a draught. I
shudder when I see a poor bird’s cage hung in the window, just
in a line with the cutting draught, at the place where the two
window-sashes meet, and in a line with the fireplace.

If we bear in mind that a bird eats an astonishing quantity
of food in comparison with his small size, and that he assimilates
his food very rapidly, we can understand at once that during the
eight hours daylight in winter, a tropical finch cannot eat
enough. His constitution is adapted to the eleven to thirteen
hours daylight and feeding-time of the tropics, for a bird will
feed almost all day except during the mid-day siesta.

When the lamp was lighted in the room where my bird
cage was, I put a simple paper shade in such a position that the
cage was somewhat shaded. About ten in the evening I had
this shade removed, when the birds would wake up, just have
about fifteen or twenty minutes feeding, and then return to their
perches and their slumber.

I always gave plenty of good ripe millet in the ear. The

152

work entailed in pulling out each grain seems to delight the
birds and to give their appetites a great zest. Perhaps there is
some truth in the theory that the husk of the millet contains a
little silica which is lost by the ears being threshed, and that this
silica is very beneficial to the digestion and to the growth of the
feathers. I also gave ordinary white French millet and Canary
seed ; but never sugar, meat, eggs. Sometimes a little green-
meat, never fruit.

My little lot of Indian Amaduvades and African Green
and Grey Singing-finches and Orange-cheeked Waxbills were
pictures of health, and beautiful indeed ; they lived for }Tears.

THE SERIN FINCH,

By Septimus Perkins,

This charming little creature is reckoned as a British
Bird by the ornithologists, because a few stragglers have been
«oceasionall}r taken in this country. It is common in Germany
and throughout Southern and Central Europe. In colour it is a
pleasing mixture of quiet greens and browns and yellows, the
yellow being much more prominent in the adult male than in
the female and immature male. The female is, in fadt, a plain
little brown bird. In size and form the Serin Finch seems to
me to be midway between the Canar)^ and the lesser Redpoll.
Perhaps some hypercritical people will tell me that I am all
wrong, and that the bird is yellow and brown, but not green-
all I can say is that he looks green to me, and I think he makes
what I may call a “ green impression ” on most people.

The Serin Finch is not expensive to buy, but is not
always to be obtained when wanted. A good many, however,
are generally brought over from Germany in the autumn, and it
is then that the wary aviculturist will purchase a pair or two,
with which he may hope to breed the following \^ear.

Canary and German rape seed, with the daily addition of
a little hemp, suit the Serin Finch best as a diet. I have
always found him most inoffensive towards his companions in
the aviar}*, a tame, confiding little bird, and, to my mind,
singularly attractive, in spite of his sober colours.

My pair of Serins were bought in the autumn, when they
were in very shabby plumage and not the best of health. In
due time they improved greatly in both respeCts, but became,
unfortunately, a great deal too fat. In Ma}r of the following
year the hen began to build, selecting a corner of the aviary, on

*53

the floor of the room, as a nesting- place ; although the aviary
abounded with more suitable spots, there being nesting boxes of
various sorts and abundance of bushes. The nest was a neatly
formed but flimsy edifice, rather hastily7- put together, and the
three pretty eggs rolled out one by one upon the floor a day or
two after the hen began to sit. She stuck to her nest so long
as an egg remained in it, but when the last rolled out she gave
up in dispair. No other nest was built. It cannot, surely, be
natural for this bird to build on the ground ? Why mine did so
I cannot imagine.

The eggs were very like those of a Canary, which is now
considered by some writers to be only a variety of the Serin
Finch. It ought to be easy to prove or disprove this by
ascertaining whether the offspring of a cross between the two
are capable of perpetuating their kind.

THE GROSBEAKS.

By H. R. Fieemer.

(Continued from page lor).

The Jacarini Finch ( Volatinia jacarini).

The male of this species has a superficial resemblance to
the Combasou in full colour, the general colour being a very
similar blue-black. There is a silky white spot on the shoulder,
and the under wing-coverts are also white. The winter plumage
is different, for the under surface of the body then becomes
covered with feathers having a whitey-brown edge, and these give
the bird a speckled look.* The beak is black, the legs horn
colour. The female is described as brown in colour.

I have said that the male has a superficial resemblance to
the Combasou, but the resemblance is in colour and size only,
for while the Combasou is a stout, short-tailed bird, the Jacarini
Finch is exceedingly graceful, with a rather long tail widening
somewhat towards the end.

The Jacarini Finch, being very adtive and prettily shaped,
is a welcome addition to an aviary of small birds, but hitherto it
has been so very rarely imported that but few aviculturists have
even seen it. In the spring of 1894, two or three specimens

* This change of plumage is, however, very uncertain in extent,
some specimens change so much in colour that they look like brown birds,
while others (of which my own is one) only become slightly speckled on
the breast.

T54

were offered For sale by Mr. W. Swaysland, of Brighton, and I
became the owner of one of them ; this year he has received a
few more. These are the only specimens that I have ever met
with. There has been one specimen at the Zoological Gardens
in Regent’s Park. This bird is found throughout Central
America and South America to Brazil, Peru, and Bolivia,
specimens from different localities differ considerably in plumage.

Dr. Bowdler Sharpe remarks that this bird is probably a
Bunting. To me it seems very unlike a Bunting, for it will eat
nothing but seed, while all the Buntings are passionately fond of
insedts.

It appears to be absolutely without song.

Until a few days ago I should have described this as a
most peaceable and inoffensive bird, but my specimen has lately
taken to chasing some of the other birds in the aviary, so I fear
that I may have been somewhat hasty in giving him a good
character.

The Thick-billed Cardinal f Pyrrhuloxia sinuata).

This is an extremely rare bird in captivity. One was
exhibited at the last Crystal Palace Show, and that is the
only specimen that I have seen. Indeed, I can scarcely say
that I saw that bird, for it was in a box cage, and the

light inside the Bird Show tent at the Palace is by no means
good. The impression on my mind after my very imperfect
sight of the bird is that, in colouring, it much resembled the
female Virginian Cardinal. For a detailed description of the
plumage I must refer my readers to the British Museum

Catalogue. There also they will find a drawing of the head

of this species which they can compare with the drawing
of the head of Cardinalis cardinalis : they will then see how
greatly the beak differs in shape from that of the Virginian
Cardinal, both mandibles being strongly curved, especially the
upper. The beak is much like that of some of the little
Spermophilce.

I know nothing of the habits or character of the species.

Its range is described as being from the “ Southern border
of the United States, from the valle}r of the Rio Grande west¬
ward and southward into Mexico.”

{To be continued').

155

CORRESPONDENCE.

“AUTHORITIES” AND THEIR CRITICS.

Sir,- — Your contributor the Rev. C. D. Farrar, speaks somewhat
sneeringly of the opinions of others, and though he is much to be con¬
gratulated on his success, the conditions under which it was obtained are
so near those of nature as to be totall}' different from such as are open to
the common run of aviculturists, for whom the opinions he refers to were
probably expressed.

Will he try placing a pair of Budgerigars, perhaps the amateur’s
favourite bird, in an enclosure, say eight feet square, (a very ordinary sized
aviary for those despised persons to have, who cannot or will not afford one
which encloses a whole garden,) with a bush of any shrub he likes to name,
except possibly elder ? All the birds he mentions are either soft-billed birds,
or tiny finches, and even self-styled authorities (where and when did they
style themselves, I wonder ? ) know that such birds as these are not, as a
rule, very mischievous, although in a small aviary the shrubs and bushes
would soon become so dirty as to be an eyesore, and “incompatible”
for that reason. If the Kings and Turquoisiues have been put in
the aviary at Micklefield ReCtory, large as it is, they may probably
effeCt a little damage. And will he read carefully the most interesting
article of Mr. R. Phillipps on the “Nesting of the Rosj’-faced Love Bird,”
in the same issue of the Magazine as his own article ? This may give him
an insight into the destructive powers of certain birds (for Agapomis
roseicolLis is not the only member of his family kept in aviaries— though he
is rare, the Red-face is not) which might help him to understand why
amateurs, starting small aviaries or bird-rooms, have been advised not to
fill them with shrubs.

Further, birds almost in a state of nature, as Mr. Farrar’s seem to be,
can obtain a variety of food for themselves which might counteract the
evil effects of a too liberal supply of mealworms. But in a state of cap¬
tivity, as they are generally kept, the same birds would certainly suffer
from over-stimulation.

Margarei’ WlREIAMS.

Sir, — I think that the Rev. C. D. Farrar is a little too sweeping in
his remarks. If it be a disputable statement to make that “ birds and
trees are not compatible,” his own remark that “ birds do not eat shrubs ”
is even more open to criticism. It all depends upon the kind of birds. That
many foreign species are very destructive to shrubs is well known to all
experienced aviculturists, so well known indeed that I do not care to take
up space by proving it. As to British birds, Mr. J. H. Verrall -writes to
me, “ Let Mr. Farrar put in his aviary a pair of Redpolls and a Bullfinch
— I do not care how large the aviary may be — with these inmates he will
think and write differently. The only shrub that I could get to live and
increase was Butcher’s Broom (Ruscus aculeatus). Elders, ivy, and grass
I had to renew occasionally. Mine was a large aviary, and never had
many birds in it, as birds will not breed successfully if there are many
inmates.” Horatio R. Firrmer.

Sir, — Mr. Farrar tells us that Cherry Finches, Diamond Sparrows,
and Blue Robins are “ supposed to require hot-house treatment.” I should
like to know who supposed anything of the sort? Does Mr. Farrar imagine
that he has been the first to discover the hardiness of these and many
similar birds ? Mr. Farrar might have found many blunders in some of the
little hand-books to which he refers, but he has been unfortunate in the
points which he has selected for criticism.

Septimus Perkins.

PROBLEMS IN BIRD BREEDING.

Sir, — In his letter under this heading in the June Magazine,
Mr. Rothera says, that “ probably the British mules we see at shows
are bred from a hen Goldfinch or Linnet, which has been hatched by
a canary, and so having been raised in a cage from birth has become
familiar and steady enough to sit in it.” It appears that this is not the
case, for in a letter which I received a few weeks ago from that veteran
breeder of hybrids, Mr. J. H. Verrall, he says “ The first Bullfinch
mule or mules were bred from wild caught hens. All the “ finch and
finch ” hybrids that I have bred were from wild caught hens. I prefer
young wild caught hens to caged nestlings, and so do other breeders.”
This shows how greatly practice may differ from theory.

Horatio R. Firrmer.

TANAGERS AND HONEYSUCEERS.

Sir, — Though I was fairly successful in keeping and breeding foreign
finches, Tanagers, and other soft food tropical birds, were invariably a
source of disappointment to me.

The mixed food on which the tribes of Thrushes and Starlings throve
admirably, was evidently too coarse for them. Feeding these delicate birds
entirely on mealworms and spiders would not do, and the finest dessert fruit
obtainable in a London suburb in winter proved slow poison, I, therefore,
gave up trying to keep these beautiful birds.

When I had an opportunity of tastingthe sweetness of full}' ripe oranges
in Bahia, of pine apples fully matured in Pernambuco and of really ripe
bananas at Rio de Janeiro, I could understand why birds whose constitu¬
tion is adapted to such fruit would go wrong on the seemingly ripe fruit, full
of acidity, which I would offer them in London. Very sweet, almost over¬
ripe, William pears, were the nearest substitute to their natural food that
I ever found, but they are obtainable but for a very short time.

Whilst travelling on the Continent one day I became acquainted with
a gentleman who told me he had some tropical birds, and invited me to
inspect them. He showed me some Seven-coloured Tanagers which he
had kept four years, and which were simply marvellous. The birds were
as beautiful as they are in their wild state.

The fortunate owner of these birds most willingly disclosed to me the
secret of his successful treatment. He fed them on a kind of sponge or
Madeira cake and fresh cream. To obviate all danger that the cream should
turn sour, he fed his birds three times a-day, every time on newly- washed

157

dishes. This kind of luxury a rich bachelor can afford, if he is willing to
keep a servant to attend to his birds.

But the theory of thus feeding Tanagers has pre-occupied me for
years. I think the cream might be replaced by condensed Swiss milk.
This would not be liable to turn sour in twenty-four hours. Perhaps it
would require diluting with its volume or half its volume of warm water,
A mixture of condensed Swiss milk and sponge or Madeira cake should
contain all the elements of food, both animal and vegetable, which the most
delicate Tanager or Honeysucker could require.

This food would be exceedingly cheap, easily obtainable everywhere,
and could not possibly disagree with the birds.

If some of your readers would try it, and publish the results, it would
be very interesting indeed.

It would be indeed delightful if this idea proved to be of practical
utility, and the gorgeous Tanagers could be kept in cages without too much
difficulty,

Aug. F. Wiener.

STRAY NOTES FOR JULY.

SIR, — .Since writing my last letter, the three young Blue Robins have
fully fledged and are doing grandly. I was amused the other morning
while watching the birds, to see the young Blue Robins of the first nest
busily feeding their latest brothers and sisters, just as well, in fact, as the
two old birds. Is not this a new feature in Blue Robin life, as I know how
passionately fond young Blue Robins are of mealworms and clocks ? It
argues a very large amount of self-denial and fraternal love on their parts
to forego these dainties.

I have a nest of Cutthroats just read}7 to come off, and some more
Zebra Finches are out since last month.

The birds enjoy this lovely weather intensely; but during the hot
part of the da}7 they keep in the deepest shade. People put their wretched
caged birds right out in the hot sun ; birds, when at liberty, never sit long
in a broiling heat.

I once saw in some Amateurs’ Guide that Diamond Sparrows never
bathe. It is pure fiction. They delight in a good tub as much as any
other bird ; only they are very shy, and always come to the bath from
some shelter and when they consider the coast is quite clear.

I was fortunate enough this year to get a real genuine Indigo lieu.
Nearly all the so-called hens that come over are young cocks in their nest
feathers. I see that my Indigos are busy courting. The cock has a most
curious habit of hovering in the air in front of the hen ; somewhat like a
lark soaring. A cock Combasou will do the same when ready to breed;
and if there be no hens of his own kind present, with any female, to their
evident indignation and embarrassment.

While I think of it, I should like to ask the Avicultural Society what
constitutes an “ acclimatized bird ? ” It seems to me to signify a bird that
has been over some months and is in perfect plumage. So far as I can learn
my ideas are all wrong. An “ acclimatized” bird means one that has been
bought cheap in quantity at some dealers ; kept a week or ten days ; and

158

then it is advertised as thoroughly acclimatized. I speak feelingly, as only
lately I bought a pair of so-called acclimatized Diamond Sparrows. Well,
if they are acclimatized, appearances are against them — this is putting it
mildly. As they were quite naked on the sides and underneath, I should
{in my simplicity) have denominated them “ very newly come over.” I
suppose this shows my ignorance ! So far as I can gather, it takes ten days
to “ thoroughly acclimatize.”

I am beginning to seriously question very much what is put down in
Amateur Guides. For example, we are always told that Cutthroats and
Diamond Sparrows are most dangerous birds amongst others. All I can
say is that I have never had one such, and I have had a good lot in my
time. Cutthroats will nest time after time in the same box ; and as for
Diamonds. I have seen a Green Avadavat order them to move on ; and they
have promptly done so.

I have just now six beautiful young Gouldian Finches in their nest
feathers, and I am anxiously watching to see if they will turn out Red^
heads or Blackheads. The young cocks sing all day long, though their
song is hardly audible a few yards away.

It is most advisable at this time of year to give plenty' of flowering
grass ; all little finches like it above any-’ other sort of food. I laid in a large
stock last week before my hay was cut.

The present time is a very bad one for mealworms, as many of the
worms have turned into beetles. I am going to try wasp grub as a substi¬
tute, till times are better.

I see that niv Parson Finches are building. These, if you like, are
quarrelsome birds. No other bird is ever allowed to approach the side of
the aviary they' fancy', but I think their bark is worse than their bite. The
song of the cock is the funniest sound you ever heard ; just like a miniature
bugle.

C. D. Farrar.

DANGEROUS BIRDS.

Sir, — It seems to me unsafe to characterise any species as either safe
or dangerous, for many species which are usually' accounted safe produce
most dangerous specimens, and many so-called dangerous species produce
perfectly' harmless birds.

Some years ago I possessed a Silverbill which was a torment to his
companions. This yTear I have been compelled to remove a pair of St.
Helena Waxbills from an aviary in which they were persecuting some
Parson Finches. My Pin-tailed Whydali has lived for nearly two y'ears
among a collection of Waxbills, and has never attacked one of them : on
the other hand he was chased about and nearly killed by a cock Combasou,
which is most peacefully disposed towards all other birds.

Parson Finches vary greatly in character. Last year I reared three
young cocks of this species. Two of these were from the same nest, and
were so much alike that I could not tell them apart. This spring I placed
one of these with a hen, but he became so spiteful to the other birds in the
aviary that I removed him and substituted his brother, who is perfectly
gentle towards all his companions. The hen is now sitting. My old cock
Parson Finch, the father of the young cocks, is likewise quite harmless —

*59

last year he reared two broods in an aviary containing' Ribbon Finches,
Bengalese, Bronze Mannikins and Dwarf Finches.

Ribbon Finches h ive never been troublesome in my aviaries.
Last year more than a dozen were reared by two pairs, each pair in a
different aviary. Neither pair did any harm to the weaker birds around
them.

Birds will often live peaceabl}7 in an avian- for a year or two and then
suddenly turn spiteful. But I never knew a spiteful bird become good
tempered.

Horatio R. Firtmrr.

BREEDING REDRUMPS IN A CONFINED SPACE.

Sir, — The July number of the Magazine contains some very interest¬
ing reading, including “ The Nesting of the Rosy-faced Dove Bird,” by Mr.
Phillipps. The few notes I am sending form, as it were, the counterpart to
his very interesting article. His Dove Birds had often almost unlimited
space, a garden covered with wire netting— a perfect paradise for birds ;
while my Redrumps have bred most successfully in a comparatively small
box-cage, three feet six inches long and rather under two feet wide and two
feet high. I lodged the pair in this box-cage rather late last season. The
first nest, then, produced three fine females, successfully reared and dis¬
posed of. Another nest succeeded, quite late in the season, but the parents
came into moult and the eggs, nearly all good, were eventually abandoned.
The pair passed the winter in their box-cage, in the garden, and the first
egg was laid this season on March ist ; the clutch consisted of five. We
had some rather cold weather during the mouth, but two young were
hatched, and I have them still — male and female. A second nest followed
in due course, of which the first egg was laid on May ist ; six eggs formed
this clutch, and four hatched, successfully reared — three males and one
female — I have them still. The hen is now sitting again on five eggs, the
first of which was laid on July 4th ; they appear mostly good, having
darkened, and, bar accidents and moult, I expect another lot of nestlings.
I think this a very good performance for birds in such limited space. The
pair are unrelated: the hen I bred myself four years ago, and the cock,
about her age, was purchased.

Their box-cage is fitted with two nest boxes, one at each of the back
corners; lids are made to them, and to the cage to correspond, so that the
goings-on can be seen from outside: I get a peep, now and then, when the
hen is off, feeding. The cage is, of course, wired at the front, but half the
wiring has a piece of felt tacked over, for privacy.

These few notes tend to show that great space is not alwaj's necessary
for keeping and breeding birds, even when as large as Redrumps. If their
cage were rather larger, it would not perhaps be a disadvantage ; but it is as
it is, and as long as they do so well in it I shall not change it. The old
birds, and all the young, are in perfect health and plumage, and could not
look better if they were in an aviary twenty times the size. The young are
taken away from the parents as they get old enough to feed themselves,
and are placed in similar cages. They are quite tame.

A. Savage;.

THE

Bvtcultural ilfoagastne*

BEING THE JOURNAL OF THE

AVICULTURAL SOCIETY.

VOL. II.— NO. 23. All rights reserved. SEPTEMBER, 1896.

OUR BRITISH DUCKS.

By J. Bewis Bgnhote.

In the Avicultural Magazine for June, there appeared an
able article on the Anatidce, by Mr. D. Seth-Smith, with which I
was very much interested. There were, however, certain mem¬
bers of the family to whom, if my memory serves me right, he
made no allusion. I refer to those ducks which may be found in
or around the British Isles during most seasons of the year, and
I shall hope to point out one or two features of interest, which
might easily be studied by anyone keeping a few of these birds.
They are some of the most beautiful and brilliantly-coloured of
our indigenous birds, and are for the most part easily kept in
captivity, in which state many breed freely. Our British ducks
may be broadly divided into two classes, the surface-feeding
and the diving ducks. This latter class may easily be dis¬
tinguished by the presence of a web on the hind toe, and the
position of the legs, which are placed further back on the body
than is the case in the other class.

The chief requisite for keeping ducks in health is a pond,
which need not by any means be large or deep, though, of course,
the larger it is the better. The staple food for ducks of any kind
is meal and a little soaked grain ; in addition to this the Diving
Ducks must have a little chopped fish or frogs frequently, if they
are to be kept in really good health. I am, of course, supposing
that the owner has had to make his own pond ; if, however, he
have a fair-sized natural one containing plenty of small fish the
ducks will help themselves.

The easiest ducks to keep, however, and those which I
should especially recommend to the aviculturist, are the Surface¬
feeding Ducks, of which we have eight species in Britain, namely.
Sheldrake, Mallard, Gadwall, Shoveller, Pintail, Teal, Garganey,
and Widgeon.

From an aviculturist’s point of view, these birds are

i6i

especially interesting for two reasons; (i) because of the assump¬
tion during the summer by the male bird of a plumage more or
less resembling that of the female; (2) because of the compara¬
tive ease with which hybrids may be bred from them ; most of
the hybrids being, I believe, fertile inter se. As showing the
interest attaching to judiciously bred hydrids, there was one
bred several years back at the Zoological Gardens between the
Ruddy Sheldrake, an Eastern bird, whose breeding range extends
from China to the Black Sea, and the Australian Sheld-duck.
The result of this cross was a bird very much resembling the
New Zealand Sheldrake, being evidently a throw back to a
primitive type. This is perhaps an extreme case, as many
hybrids have been bred, showing no special features of interest ;
nevertheless, for anyone with a convenient pond and a taste for
aviculture, a large field for the careful and judicial study of
hybridisation is open.

With regard to the first point, much remains to be studied.
The change of plumage may be best noticed in the common
Mallard. In this species, the male bird towards the end of May
begins to change into a brown plumage, similar, but not the same
as, that of the duck. This point, which was noticed by Mr.
Castellan in the Field , a few weeks back, appears to have been
curiously overlooked, and I can find no description of the bird
in this plumage; most of the books on the subject content
themselves with the remark, “During the summer the male
assumes female plumage,” without attempting to describe the
plumage. I may mention that the Mallard always retains a
yellow bill while the feathers on the rump are of a uniform dark
brown with no light edging. As soon as this change is nearly
complete, about the third week in June, it simultaneously loses
all its primaries and becomes temporarily unable to fly ; by the
end of July, it has, however, regained its full powers of flight.

The first signs of the winter dress appear again about
the beginning of August, though it is not completed till the
middle of Odtober.

A change similar to this is undergone by the males of
all true British Surface-feeding Ducks, except the Sheldrake,
where the plumage of the sexes is practically identical ; but
whether this species moults in summer as well as in autumn, or
becomes incapable of flight, I am unable to say.

With regard to the Diving Ducks, I have had no practical
experience, and am unable to find much in the literature on the
subject.

Apparently the Tufted Duck undergoes a change and also
the Eider Duck.

The Eong-tailed Duck f Harelda glacialis) , a scarce visitor
in adult dress to our southern shore, has, according to Dr. A. S.
Elliot, a very peculiar change, both sexes undergoing a complete
moult in spring before moving up to the Arctic Regions to breed.

A few more remarks on the Mallard, before I end. This
species is commonly said to be polygamous in captivity and
monogamous in a wild state. This statement, as far as it goes,
is true, but requires qualifying. It is certainly monogamous in a
wild state, but. as I saw stated somewhere, and know from my own
experience, the drake at the beginning of the season pays court
to several ducks, finally choosing his spouse from amongst them.
In captivity it is still, provided there be equal numbers of both
sexes, monogamous ; although if a drake be kept with three or
four ducks all the eggs will be found fertile.

The ducks themselves seem to have a good deal to do with
choosing their husbands; in any case, when once they are chosen,
they refuse to allow another bird to approach them, warning
the intruder off with a peculiar motion of the head and neck,
uttering at the same time a low guttural note.

I was lucky enough to witness the crisis in the pairing up
of two pairs of my Mallards this year, a perusal of which may
not prove uninteresting to my readers.

I have in my aviaries a small pond, about 12ft. by 10ft.,
having a wire netting partition across the centre to protect some
reeds ; on this pond among some Sea Gulls I keep two pairs of
Mallards. In December last, one of the ducks was sent away by
mistake, and by the end of January one of the drakes, whom for
simplicity we will call A, had paired; and the other, B, used to
wander about by himself, never, however, fighting with A. On
the 7th February, the other duck returned, and was at once
appropriated by A, This was apparently rather too much for
B’s feelings, for he now frequently tried to approach one of the
ducks ; but alas1, they would only shake their heads at him
and draw closer up to A, who would then advance towards
his rival. That was quite enough, and B in vulgar parlance
would ■“ take his hook.” About a week later, on the 15th
February, all the ducks were on the pond, A, with his two
fiancees on one side, and B alone on the other side of the wire
netting. A was very lively, swimming vigorously about with his
tail vibrating rapidly from side to side. Every now and then he
would rise up from the water, lower his head -till his beak

rt>3

touched the water, and utter a short whistle. At this sound B
manifested great anxiety to be at him. At other times A would
first raise his body and then his tail, lay his neck at full length
flat on the water, and swim rapidly about. At this both the
ducks would swim quickly towards him, and thus manifest in
the manner above described their dislike at the proceedings.
Finally B thinks matters are becoming serious, so getting out
of the pond, he enters it again on the other side and goes to
the attack. A drives him off, but he returns again and again,
and at last a hand-to-hand conflict begins. Into the details of
this battle, as to how B got A’s head under his wing, and how
A pushed B under water, it is unnecessary to enter, suffice it to
say that after about five minutes, B, being rather ‘ pumped,”
retires with a slow majestic waddle to the other side of the pond,
followed closely, not by A, who stayed behind to wipe the sweat
from his brow, but by a duck. From that day to this they have
always been in pairs, having carried on their matrimonial
arrangements with varying success.

I have related this true anecdote for two reasons, firstly,
as showing that the Mallard is not usually polygamous in con¬
finement, and secondly, as giving us an insight into the habits
of birds, about which I feel sure no true aviculturist is ever
tired of hearing.

NOTES ON THE TREATMENT OF
NEWLY-IMPORTED GOULDIAN FINCHES.

By W. H. St. Quintin.

In reply to a question as to the treatment which I have
found most suita ole for the two species or varieties of the
Gouldian Finch on their first arrival in this country, I am
afraid I have nothing very special to suggest, at any rate to the
more experienced of our readers ; but there are one or two
points on which I would offer a remark or two. In the first
place, though the summer and early autumn are favourable to
the newly-imported birds, and offer less contrast to the climate
which they have been used to in their own country than winter
and spring, there is one matter which must not be forgotten.
The days are rapidly shortening, and there is less and less
daylight during which the birds can seek their food. If one of
these birds be at all amiss, it will eat very little at a time : it is
therefore important to do everything to induce it to visit the
seed-tray at short intervals throughout as great a portion as
possible of the twenty-four hours. I always, in the duller

1 64

months of the year, place a light near my Gouldians’ cages for an
hour or so in the evening, generally from eight to ten. It is
interesting to see the birds wake up, stretch themselves, and one
after the other go down to the seed and return to their perches
after a hearty meal. This is not an original suggestion, but I am
sure it has an important bearing on the management of exotic
birds at certain times of the year. Draughts, of course, must be
studiously avoided. I never find my Gouldians show discomfort
if the temperature do not fall below 50 degrees or thereabout.
But if I expect a cold night, I generally, on going to bed myself,
move the Gouldians’ cages (waggon-headed ones) to a corner of
the downstairs room, near the fire-place, well out of all draughts,
where the temperature will not fall so quickly as in their usual
position near (but not opposite) some window. If there be an
invalid, his cage is generally taken up to my bedroom so as to be
quite safe from the housemaids. I am convinced that many and
many a valuable and delicate bird owes its death to the cold
blasts to which it is exposed, perhaps before the sun is well up
or the fire well burning, during the period considered necessary
to “ air the room.”

As to green food, I am particular not to give any green
food which shows the least symptom of being “ frosted,” or
which is in a damp condition. Green food in this state must
be objectionable in the case of birds which have been on hard
food, perhaps for months. But, when I dare not offer
leaves of any kind, I often give my birds a tuft of grass, from
the roots of which most of the earth has been shaken. They
find much satisfaction in picking out minute portions of grit,
and also eat the delicate and succulent roots of the grass itself.
There has been, from time to time, correspondence in our
columns on the question of grit. I have, more than once, noticed
that Gouldian Finches of mine, newly - imported, apparently
in good health, have quickly gone amiss and died, when they
found themselves in the presence of unlimited grit and coarse
sand at the bottom of their cage. A horse will drink much less
water in the day if it be always before him, than if it be offered
him occasionally. In the same way, cage birds which have for
a long time always had grit before them, will take a little at inter¬
vals while eating their seed, and, of course, with most beneficial
results. A newly-imported cage-bird, which has had to endure
the most unnatural conditions for weeks or months, suddenly
finds himself in a well-kept cage with an unlimited supply of an
item of his diet of which he has been long deprived, and as
is likely enough to happen, he takes an excessive quantity.

1 65

Such a bird may be seen for minutes together, swallowing grit,
which probably sets up inflammation in the enfeebled digestive
organSv At any rate, I have often had such birds die, and from
no other assignable cause. I avoid shell-grit and coarse sand for
some time, scattering only fine sand on the cage-trays, and give
plenty of cuttle bone, and a little earth at the root of grassy
tufts, as I have said above.

I cannot think of anything else worth mentioning, except
that I am a believer in a variety of food, and, if possible, get 1113^
Gouldians to eat Canar}^ seed as well as white and spra}>- millet.
I have never seen them eat any other seed than the above.
When acclimatized, both in cages and aviaries, I always give an
abundance of green food, grass in flower and seed, chiekweed,
and shepherd’s purse.

THE GROSBEAKS.

By H. R. Fieemer.

( Continued from page igf.) .

The Virginian Cardinal ( Car dinalis cardinalis).

This truly magnificent bird is too well known to require
description, ever)rone is well acquainted with the brilliant
crimsom plumage of the male, and the more sober colour of the
hen. An old writer very accurately describes the female as being
“ brown, with a tindture of red."

I follow Dr. Butler in calling this bird the Virginian.
Cardinal, and that name seems likely to be generally adopted.
The name of Cardinal Grosbeak, used by the Zoological Society
and by Mr. Wiener, is accurate, but somewhat pedantic, and has
never become popular \ while that of Virginian Nightingale is
absurdly inappropriate.

Whatever may be the merits of the Virginian Cardinal as
a songster in a state of freedom, aviculturists are agreed that
when in captivity in England he does not rank very high as a
musician. In the spring he sometimes gives voice to a rather
pretty song, though the notes are few, but during the greater
part of the year his song consists of the repetition of one or two
very loud monotonous notes, which become rather irritating
after a time. His song is not only vastl>7 inferior to that of the
Nightingale, but also to that of the Thrush, the Blackbird, and
many other British favourites. Among Foreign birds the
Black-tailed Hawfinch is greatly his superior, not to mention the
Shama and other insectivorous birds, and the Grey Singing
Finch, Alario Finch,, and other small birds.

Still, I do not wish to unduly depreciate the notes of the
Virginian Cardinal, they are far more tuneful than those of the
Bunting Cardinals ; and, indeed, when we consider the feeble
musical powers of most Foreign birds, and compare the Virginian
Cardinal’s music with the gurglings which pass for song among
the Weaver Finches, we shall be disposed to give the Red Bird a
fairly good place as a songster. Dr. Russ found that this bird
sang at night in his bird-room ; mine never did this, but he
began very earty in the morning, before it was really light.
A female of this species, when kept singly, will generally sing
like a cock, and some aviculturists have observed hen birds
singing at the beginning of the breeding season, even when in
the companj^ of the male bird.

The food of the Virginian Cardinal should consist largely of
canary seed, white millet, and sunflower seed, and to these may
be added paddy rice and maize, and occasionally a few hemp
seeds. He should have green food daily, and plenty of ripe fruit
when in season. Green peas are highly appreciated. In
addition, some kind of soft food should be given at least every
other day, and a few mealworms, for this species is partly
insectivorous and will not thrive on a purely vegetable diet. On
the other hand it is not desirable that he should have access to
an unlimited supply of soft food, and an average of two meal¬
worms per day should not be exceeded. It is a good plan to give
each Virginian Cardinal two mealworms every other day, and on
alternate days a small quantity of egg food and soaked ants’
eggs — but, of course, in a mixed aviary such careful feeding is
impracticable.

The Virginian Cardinal is an extremely hardy bird,
and when suitably fed will endure unharmed the cold of our
severest winters — therefore he is a bird specially adapted for the
outdoor aviary, where he is much more likely to preserve the
rich hue of his crimson coat. Unfortunately, it very frequently
happens that the plumage of the male bird changes to a brick-
dust colour after the first moult. It has been asserted that this
is due to an insufficient supply ofinsedt food, but that is certainly
not always the case, though it may be so in many cases. Then,
again, it has been suggested that want of fresh air may be the
reason — but this loss of colour has been noticed in specimens
kept in large out-door aviaries. Undoubtedly, a bird in an out¬
door aviary, liberally fed, has a far better chance of retaining his
good looks than one kept indoors ; and any attempt to convert
the Virginian Cardinal to vegetarianism, whether in the open
air or in the house, will have a bad effedl on his colour.; but fox

167

the preservation of colour I am disposed to think that green food
and fruit are quite as important as fresh air and animal food.

When kept in a cage and petted, the Virginian Cardinal
will often become bewitchingly tame, but he is naturally a timid
bird, and even when familiar with his master or mistress will
generally be greatly afraid of strangers.

Individuals of this species differ greatly in their behaviour
towards other birds. Some will prove very dangerous in an
aviary of small birds, while others are perfectly gentle, even
when nesting. My own pair took no notice of their small com¬
panions, even when the hen was sitting, and I think they might
have been safely trusted among the smallest Waxbills. I believe
that most specimens are of this peaceful disposition towards
other species, but it must be remembered that should a Virginian
Cardinal turn spiteful, he would not content himself with merely
pulling out a few feathers, but would probably murder his victim
outright. Therefore he should not be placed amongst any but
the commonest small birds until his character has been well
tested, and I should never trust very rare or valuable birds
within reach of his beak. No attempt should be made to-
keep two cocks or two hens of this species in the same aviary,
they would probably fight to the death in the spring.

Dr. Russ gives the following account of the nesting of this
species in captivity. “ The hen builds the nest openly in a bush,
on a thickly branched horizontal bough, on a groundwork of
bents and moss., strips of paper, & c., with rootlets, bast-fibres,
threads, &c., carefully lined with agave-fibre. More rarely in a
Hartz cage open above, or a little basket woven of birch-twigs.
The love antics of the male consist in extraordinary dancing and
singing. The hen incubates alone, usually not fed by the male,
the latter, however, guards the hatch. Time of incubation four¬
teen days. Young fed by both parents leave the nest in about
twenty-two days, commonly sooner. Breeding season five to six
weeks. Raying four eggs, bluish, greenish, or yellowish white,
with dark spots. Nestling down bluish. Young plumage duller
than that of the female, without red beak black - brown.
Change of colour : — In the fifth week the reddish tint shows up
more strongly, the red characters appear, the beak changes
through dull yellow and yellowish red into red a young male
first becomes fully red and his beak coral red in the third year.
Usually peaceable, but at nesting time malicious, especially
towards its own kind ; in the bird-room devours the young out
of other nests, also kills old weakly birds, sometimes its own
young the latter occurs from the want of some kind of food, or

1 68

the pair is not sufficiently secure and undisturbed. It is best to
breed them in single pairs and separate the young as soon as a
new brood commences. Unassuming, vigorous ; must not be
kept too warm, otherwise convulsions.”

Mr. Gednev thus relates the story of the nesting of his
Virginian Cardinals in an outdoor aviary. “ Towards the end
of the month of April, the hen was busily engaged in carrying
twigs about in her beak, flying hither and thither as if in search
of a suitable retreat in which to deposit them. Taking the hint,

I put up a bundle of birch spray in one corner of the aviary,
made a snug hollow in the centre, and carefully packed therein a
large handful of fine sticks as a foundation for a nest. Then I
threw into the aviary a lot of the same material and a bundle of
hay bands cut into lengths of about eight inches and well picked
to pieces. She took the idea. Piling the fine sticks one upon
another, she formed a solid circular foundation like a basin, and
then wove an inner lining of hay with marvellous neatness and
accuracy, leaving a receptacle for the eggs about the size of a
breakfast cup, and giving to the whole a finish as fine and com¬
plete as any blackbird ; her mate meanwhile attending and
examining the structure with a critical eye, though he shared in
none of the labours. The nest, thus formed, was only three feet
from the ground, admitting of free inspection from without ;
and I was greatly entertained by the antics of the cock, who
spent several hours ensconced in it, looking as important as if
he were responsible for the whole affair, and as if it were
he for whom the snug place was specially prepared. Next
morning, however, Mrs. N. was found upon the nest, and when
tempted to leave it, by the offer of a piece of cooked meat, I saw
that the first egg had been deposited. Four others were laid at
irregular intervals, eight days being occupied in the laying of
the five, the hen showing very little desire to incubate until the
hatch was complete. During her absence front the nest, Mr. N.
never left it for an instant, but, perched at the entrance, kept
zealous guard against all intruders, singing lustily meanwhile ;
and there he remained during the whole period of hatching,
except that at such times as his better half indulged in a bath he
occasionally settled down upon the eggs until her return. The
period of incubation extended to fourteen days from the laying
of the last egg, and the young when hatched were quite naked,
resembling somwhat those of the common house sparrow. The
eggs, too, were similar in colour and markings to those of the
bird referred to (dirt}’ white, thickly covered with olive blotches),
though equal in size to that of the Song Thrush. The young

i6g

fledge rapidly, and in favourable weather leave the nest at the
age of five weeks. Although there is great similarity in the
colouring of the two sexes, the nest feathers being very rusty
in appearance, yet the cocks are easily distinguished both by their
superior size aud by a shading of red upon the breast. When
the first brood are reared before mid-summer the parents
invariably go to nest immediately they get the youngsters off
their hands, and although they sometimes interfere with the
arrangements, especially when the old nest is repaired and used
a second time, yet I fancy that the presence of the progeny is a
source of satisfaction to the parent birds, and that it gives them
a greater sense of security in their future proceedings.” It is
evident that the first part of this interesting account, down to
the hatching, is derived from actual observation, but from the
change of tense and other “ internal evidence,” I draw the
inference that Mr. Gedney’s young birds were not reared. In
any case his statement that the young remain in the nest until
five weeks old must be a mistake. I am not aware of any bird
of the Finch Family the young of which remain in the nest
longer than three weeks ; the usual time with such birds is some
days under three weeks.

The Virginian Cardinal will usually nest in an aviary,
either indoors or outdoors, if sufficiently free from interference.
Matters generally proceed smoothly until the eggs are hatched,
but then troubles come, and the proportion of young birds
actually reared is very small indeed to the number hatched. The
difficulty in rearing is due to the half-insectivorous habits of the
bird. Five insects are usually considered necessary for the
rearing of the young, and if a constant supply of these could
always be obtained, success would be comparatively easy. But
live insects, in quantities, are difficult to procure regularly, and
the Virginian Cardinals after once feeding their young on this
diet will often decline to give them anything else, and either kill
them outright or allow them to perish rather than feed them on
soaked ants’ eggs, egg, or other substitute. It is better to
dispense with mealworms entirely while the birds are nesting,
for the}7 are very stimulating, and their use may lead to the
destruction of the young by the parents. Probably blackbeetles
or cockroaches are the best form of insedt food. Gentles might
be used. But after all, I am by no means sure whether soaked
ants’ eggs and egg, with a plentiful supply of fruit and green
food (not forgetting green peas, of which the birds are extremely
fond), would not be the best diet, without any live insects.

Mr. John Sergeant, of Southport, who has succeeded in

170

rearing two broods to fledging, tells me that he adopted the
anti-insedlivorous diet above described, giving also bread and
milk. His young birds did not live to grow up — the first brood
being killed by a storm, the second by other birds — but he came
nearer to success than any other English aviculturist that I can
hear of. I have had no opportunity of experimenting personally,
as this species has never hatched in my aviarjq although my hen
laid and sat her full time.

Mr. Sergeant’s birds were kept in a very large outdoor
aviary; they ‘‘built in a spruce fir, a neat structure of small pine
branches, roots, &c., lined with beech leaves.” Mine laid in a
strawberry basket. In fadt this bird will build almost anywhere.

Newly-imported Virginian Cardinals often die from in¬
juring their heads against the top of the cage when startled, and
when kept in a cage, tame birds will sometimes kill themselves
in the same way. If it be necessary to cage a bird of this species,
it should, unless quite tame and reconciled to a cage, be kept in
a cage with a canvass top.

If suitably fed, the Virginian Cardinal is a healthy bird in
captivity, and sometimes attains a very considerable age. It is
indifferent to cold, and will live out of doors through the severest
winters.

The habitat of the true Ccirdincilis cardi?ialis is said to
be the “Eastern United States, north to New Jersey, and the
Ohio Valley (casualty further), west to the plains.” Three very
similar species, sub-species, or varieties are found in California
and Mexico, the males being indistinguishable from Cardinalis
cardincilis, but the females differing somewhat from the common
species. the end.

REVIEWS.

Foreign Finches in Captivity , Parts IX. a?id X., by Arthur G.
Bzctler , Ph.D., F.L.S., F.Z.S., F.E.S. (L. Reeve and Co .,
6, Henrietta Street , Covent Garden .)

These two parts treat of the remaining species of Whydahs
and the Weavers, and bring the work to a conclusion. We need
say very little more than that the expectations raised by the
earlier parts of “ Foreign Finches” have been full}' realized, and
that the concluding parts show no falling off either in the quality
of the letterpress or of the illustrations. The birds described in
Part IX. are the Paradise, Eong-tailed, Red-throated, and Yellow-
backed Whydahs, and the Yellow-shouldered and Napoleon
Weavers.

I7I

In Part X. we have the Crimson-crowned, Oryx, Orange,
Russ’, Red-billed, Madagascar, Comoro and Baya Weavers.
While in many respects the illustrations of these species could
hardly be improved upon, the distinctive points of the females
seem to us in one or two cases not to be well indicated ; it may
be that the illustrations were taken from specimens which were
hardly typical. For instance, the hen of the Grenadier (Oryx)
Weaver is a darker and more heavily streaked bird than is here
represented, and the hen Madagascar Weaver which is illus¬
trated as a light olive-brown, is in reality darker, and of a more
decided greenish colour. Dr. Butler doubts whether the change
of colour in the Weavers takes place by a complete moult, as
stated on the authority of some travellers. As far as we have
been able to observe both in Whydahs and Weavers in captivity,
the change from winter to breeding plumage takes place by a
moult, the brightly coloured feathers growing up between the
duller ones, which gradually fall out. When the winter plumage
is assumed, however, the change takes place partly by the
coloured feathers turning brown ; but some of the coloured
feathers, for instance the long tail feathers of the Whydahs and
the long tail coverts of the Orange Weaver, fall out.

This work has been reviewed in these pages as it appeared
in parts from the press, but now that it is at last completed, and
the handsome bound volume lies before us, we feel that it
demands some further notice — for the publication of “ Foreign
Finches in Captivity ” marks an era in the history of avicultural
literature.

We have already in this Magazine bestowed the highest
praise upon both the author and the artist, and we can now
only say again that the work of both is of the very highest merit
and that each is worth};' of the other.

The literature of aviculture, at least in our own language,
is by no means voluminous. There are only two books in the
English language which treat of the smaller foreign cage birds
in anything like an adequate manner — these are Mr. Wiener’s
portion of “ Cassell’s Canaries and Cage Birds,” and Dr. Butler’s
“ Foreign Finches in Captivity.” Mr. Wiener’s book has been
for many years the standard work upon the subject, and will
always remain of great value to the aviculturist on account of its
accuracy ; but it is now many years since it was written, avi¬
culture has greatly advanced in the interval, and many birds
which are now common aviary pets were unknown to Mr. Wiener
when he wrote his book ; moreover, the chromo-lithographs in

172

“ Canaries and Cage Birds,” though useful for giving a general
idea of the birds, are neither artistic nor correct.

“Foreign Finches in Captivity” has, therefore, made its
appearance at a time when it was greatly wanted, its only rivals
being a smaller and less pretentious work quite out of date, and
a number of cheap handbooks intended for beginners in the art.
The time was ripe for a work of the highest class, well-illustrated,
and such a work Dr. Butler has given us.

There is probably no other man living who could have
done what Dr. Butler has done : for no one else unites in one
person an equal knowledge of scientific ornithology and practical
aviculture. Mr. Frohawk’s illustrations add greatly to the value
of the book ; for every bird described by Dr. Butler is represented
in life size in the plates, which are coloured by hand. About
eighty species are described and figured, and many other species
are dealt with incidentally.

We cannot help wishing that an even larger number of
species had been figured, but that would, of course, have
increased the size and expense of the book.

The time for an adequate criticism of Dr. Butler’s work
has not yet arrived. Ten years hence it will be more possible.
It is not probable that Dr. Butler’s readers will agree with all his
conclusions : for in aviculture similar causes often appear to
produce different results, and the scope which it affords for
amicable controversy is one of its greatest charms. But there
can be no doubt that “Foreign Finches in Captivity” deals with
its subject in such a masterly and exhaustive manner that it is
not likely to have any competitors in the same field for many
years to come, and that, in spite of its somewhat high price, no one
who pretends to anything beyond the most superficial knowledge
of foreign seed-eaters can “ afford to be without it.”

We offer our hearty congratulations to Dr. Butler on the
successful completion of this important work.

Lloyd's Natural History.

This much advertised work is, we understand, a reprint of
“ Allen’s Naturalists’ Library.” Those parts of it which treat
of birds are from the pen of the Editor, Dr. R. Bowdler Sharpe.
Unfortunately that eminent ornithologist does not shine as a
popular writer, and does not appear to possess much personal
knowledge of living birds. The consequence is that he has
written a rather dull book. The illustrations, which the pub¬
lishers have the hardihood to describe as “ magnificently coloured

173

steel plates,” are simply beneath contempt. Aviculture is, of
course, entirely disregarded, but, considering the author’s ignor¬
ance of the subject, it is doubtless better so.

CORRESPONDENCE.

THE TREATMENT OF NEWLY-IMPORTED GOULDIAN FINCHES.

Sir, — This is the best season (June to August) for the importation of
Gouldian Finches, and no doubt a good many of these lovely birds will lie
purchased by members of the Avicultural Society. Could not a member of
the Society, well versed in the treatment they require for acclimatization,
give us an article upon the subject ? It would be most interesting and
valuable, for so many die through improper treatment.

A. Savage.

[Mr. St. Ouintin’s article in this month’s Magazine has been written
by him in response to this request. Mr. St. Quiutin has been exceptionally
successful in keeping and breeding Gouldian Finches.]

TANAGERS AND HONEYSUCKERS.

Sir, — I was interested by Mr. Wiener's letter about the food for
Tanagers, because, some while ago, I was looking at some very good Poe-
birds in Leadenliall Market, and on asking upon what they were fed, was
surprised to be told “ Biscuit and condensed milk.”

As I have always understood that the food was the difficulty in
keeping Poe-birds, it would be good news to mail}' a bird lover, if a
successful food could be found.

F. G. Dutton.

ALARIO FINCHES.

Sir — I think many members of our Society will be interested in
hearing that a pair of Alario Finches belonging to me have reared two
young ones. They were hatched on the 19th or 20th of July and left the
nest on the 2nd of August. They were reared mainly 011 crushed hempseed,
lettuce, and cliickweed, with the addition of egg-food while in the nest.
Very little, if any, egg was eaten after the young left the nest, and they,
like their parents, now feed chiefly 011 German rape-seed.

I can scarcely suppose that this is the first time that such comparatively
common birds have bred in this country, but I can find no recorded instance
of their nesting successfully in England, or, indeed, in Europe. Dr. Russ,
quoted by Dr. Butler, says distinctly, “have not themselves been bred.”
They have, of course, been crossed with the Canary several times, both
here and in Germany. There is certainly no difficulty about breeding the
species, and only the scarcity of hens can have prevented its frequent
occurrence.

Horatio R. Firemer.

174

A WARNING TO PURCHASERS OF INSECTIVOROUS

BRITISH BIRDS.

[The following letter appeared ill the Feathered World of the 31st July.
The writer, who prefers to remain pseudonymous, is a well-known
member of the Avicultural Society. The letter is here reprinted at
the request of several members, with the consent of both the author
and the Editor of the Feathered Wo/ Id.]

Sir, — I venture to hope for your powerful support in a matter which
must appeal to all lovers of birds. Some little cruelty is, unfortunately,
inseparable from every attempt to keep in a cage a bird that has been born
in its natural freedom. Although this is so, yet some kinds of birds so
easily adapt themselves to confinement, that, with discretion, the cruelty is
reduced to a minimum ; and if our little prisoners be intelligently looked
after, they soon forget that they have ever been free, and become quite as
happy in a suitable cage as though they had never known a different life.
Fanciers of British birds, however, know, of course, that we very seldom
see in bird-shops specimens of Wagtails, Willow-wrens, Wood-wrens
Chiffchaffs, Wheatears, Whincliats, Stonechats, Flycatchers, Hedge-warblers’
or Redstarts. This is entirely due to the exceeding difficulty of “ meating
off” these charming little creatures. The bird dealers will not be troubled
with them, not from any consideration for the birds, but because of the fact
that they die off before they can be disposed of. The professional bird
catchers, therefore, do not find it worth their while to keep those which
accidentally come in their way. For the past three seasons I have noticed
in the Fancy papers advertisements, mostly emanating from one individual
living near King’s Cross, offering these birds at prices ranging from 3s. to 5s.
each. From the repeated appearance of the advertisements, and from the
prices asked, I ultimately concluded that the advertiser was a man who
made a speciality of caging these birds ; but I fortunately paid a visit to the
establishment instead of sending a P.O. What I saw there was sufficient to
touch the heart of any mortal soul but a bird catcher. Scores of these
delicate creatures were in stock from the previous day’s catching; and,
while I was in the shop the proprietor came in with a fresh lot. Then I
found how this inhuman being got his living. In reply to his advertise¬
ments he received daily applications for birds, and the prices were such as
to make it worth his while to go out especially to catch the birds written
for. It is needless to state that upon such expeditions “ all was grist that
came to the mill.” Nothing was set free, ever}’ unfortunate captive being
brought home in the hope that it might be sold while yet alive. The
certainty that scarcely one in a hundred of those sent .away would live for
twenty-four hours made no difference to the advertiser, nor did the fact
that those he succeeded in selling did not represent a tithe of those
originally caught and sacrificed. There is little doubt that, unless steps be
taken to prevent it, the inhuman practice will sooner or later find imitators,
as it will be evident from the continued appearance of the advertisements
that the game is a paying one ; and my hope in writing this letter is, in the
first place, to induce the Editors of the various Fancy papers to forego a few
pence weekly with a view’ of preventing, by closing the market, the wholesale-
massacre of our summer migrants ; and, in the second place, to caution
fanciers that they are buying, at the price of “ meated off " specimens, birds

i75

that in the majority of cases are not even caught until after the receipt of
their orders, and which will most probably not even reach them alive.

VARET.

BIRDS AT BAZAARS.

Sir,— Mr. Fillmer kindly mentions my name as first providing a
Bird Show as an attraction to a. Bazaar. I have sent my collection to
several local Bazaars and Flower Shows, as an additional attraction ; on
several occasions over 1,000 persons have paid for admission (to see the
birds, in addition to other charges). I have always been struck b}' the
attraction that live foreign birds have for all classes, from Royalty down¬
wards. Last month I lent them to a Bazaar in Kent (some miles from my
home) in aid of the Re-endowment Fund of Guy’s Hospital — this Bazaar was
opened by H.R.H. the Duchess of Albany, to whom I had the pleasure of
explaining all the birds on view. In addition to raising large sums in this
way for local and other charities, I think the interest in foreign birds is
extended by this means ; only since this last Bazaar several ladies have
written asking information respecting foreign bird keeping.

In writing of Class 18, at the recent Brighton Bird Show, Mr. Fillmer
says, “The first prize went, as a matter of course, to Mr. Housden’s
celebrated pair of Australian Crested Doves, shown, or rather concealed
from view, in an awkward wicker cage.” This is not quite correct : I
entered my prize-winners ; but just before the show, I was having my
aviaries painted, and the cock bird escaped into the newly-painted aviary —
the result was that it would have passed for a Green-crested Dove; the pair
sent was a pair of their last year’s young, almost as fine as the parent birds,
although not quite so tame.

Respecting the Yellowish Weaver fSitagra luteola), shown in Class 19,
I certainly think with Mr. Fillmer that it was a true Weaver. Its ways and
note were very similiar to those of the other Weavers in the aviary. I am
sorry to say it died shortly after coming back from the show.

I had the misfortune to have a visit paid me by some very un¬
welcome visitors a few nights since, my aviary being broken into by
thieves ; they lowered themselves through one of the sky-lights into the
aviary, a distance of 15 feet; the worst part of it was that, in addition to a
number of birds being stolen, several aviary doors were left open, also the
skylight, consequently many escaped before I discovered that the aviary
had been broken into. A number were flying about in my garden, and Dr.
Butler informs me he saw two in his garden, some distance away.* A
few days after three young men were arrested in the neighbourhood for
burglary, who proved to be the thieves— it is some satisfaction to know
who the thieves were, although I only succeeded in tracing three of the
stolen birds, and recapturing one of those that escaped.

James B. Housden.

* I do not believe that the birds which I caught a glimpse of, but
could not see distinctly enough to recognize, were from Mr. Housden’s
avairies, the song (of one at any rate) was new to me, that of the other
was suspiciously like the late song of the Blackcap.

A. G. B.

THE

Bvtcultural /Iiba$a3tnet

BEING THE JOURNAL OF THE

AV1CULTURAL SOCIETY.

VOL. II. -No. 24.

All rights reserved. OCTOBER, 1896.

REPORT OF THE COUNCIL OF THE
AVICULTURAL SOCIETY FOR THE YEAR 1895-6.

The Society lias made quiet but steady progress during
the past year, adding considerably to its membership, and also,
we believe, to its position and influence.

Forty-four new members have been elected, and the total
number of members is now two hundred and ten.

Comparatively few matters have this year engaged our
attention as a body; but the work of the Executive Committee
has been, as always, very heav}^ ; and the Society is most deeply
indebted to the three gentlemen, forming that Committee, who
have so indefatigably discharged their very onerous duties.

The substantial balance in the Treasurer’s hands enables
us to make arrangements for increasing the attractiveness of
the Magazine in the coming year. A plate, prepared by
Messrs. Brumby and Clarke, Limited, from a drawing by Mr. F.
W. Frohawk, will appear in the November issue, and in those
copies which will be sent to the members the plate will be
coloured by hand. The subject of the drawing is a bird which
will, we believe, be of interest to all members of the Society,
whether they are more especially attached to British or to foreign
birds. This hand-coloured plate has been prepared at consider¬
able expense, and is of the highest class of workmanship. It is
hoped that the funds of the Society may justify the production
of a plate every three months during the year. If our member¬
ship were doubled it would be possible to give a plate every
month. It would be well for all to bear in mind that every
additional member adds to the spending power of the Society,
and, therefore, to the value which it can give in return for the
subscription.

177

We have decided to offer a prize of one guinea for the best
article on the nesting in captivity of some common species-
of foreign bird, and a like prize on the nesting in captivity of
some British bird. The articles may also treat generally of the
habits of the species in captivity and in a state of freedom. The
rules for the competition will be found on page 191.

We also offer a medal to each member who shall, during
the year commencing 1st November, 1896, succeed in breeding,
any species of bird which has not hitherto been known to breed
in captivity in this country. Any member wishing to obtain
this medal must send a detailed account to the Secretary within
eight weeks from the date of hatching of the young, aud furnish
such evidence of the fadts as the Executive Committee may
require. The medal will only be awarded in cases where the
young have lived , to be old enough to feed themselves — but the
Committee shall have power to relax this rule in special cases.
All members are eligible. In every case the decision of the
Committee shall be final.

It is important that the members should not forget that
the success of the Society depends upon themselves. We trust
that all will do their utmost in the coming year to still further
extend our membership, aud also, by writing for the Magazine,
to lighten the labours of the few who are regular contributors to
its pages. We believe that there are very many members who
might, if they were disposed, contribute either articles or letters
which would prove of interest to the readers of the Magazine.
One of the purposes of our Society is the accumulation of facts ;
and we would urge all who have facts to record to communicate
them to the Editor, who will, if desired, gladly undertake the
work of arranging them for publication.

To all who have in various ways helped in the work of
the Society, we tender our most hearty thanks.

Hubert d. asteey, F.Z.S. O. E. Cressweee.

J. Eewis Bonhote. Lucy C. D. Eeeweeyn.

Henry Somervieee Boynton. R. Phieeipps.

Arthur G. Buteer, Ph.D. John Sergeant.

H. T. T. Camps, F.Z.S. W. Swayseand.

V. CASTEEEAN. Geo. C. Wieeiamson, D.Lit.

173

THE BREEDING SEASON OF 1896.

By J. Lewis Bonhote.

This year’s breeding season being completely over, one is
able to look back and refledt more calmly on one’s successes
and failures ; and to see the cause of the failures, and, perhaps,
h>y the experience gained to discover a remedy. Personally, my
failures have been far more numerous than my successes ; this
may, however, partly be accounted for by the fine weather which
we had at the beginning of the year causing many birds to pair
up, which, under ordinary conditions, would have made no
attempts to breed. I will, however, briefly run through the
events in rotation.

On the 2 1st of March, my Wild Ducks began to lay,
being a good fortnight earlier than last year. Ten eggs were
laid, 011 which the old duck sat well, her drake being in
constant attendance near her. The nest was a hollow in the
centre of a common rush, and was lined with hay, down being
subsequently added as incubation proceeded.

Two pairs of Black-headed Gulls paired up towards the
end of March. They were continually running round each
other holding their heads either high up in the air or near the
ground, and incessantly uttering a hoarse cry. The}7 did not,
however, nest ; nor did a Herring Gull, which paired up with a
Lesser Black-backed Gull.

Two Green Plovers also paired up about this time ; they
were both very pugnacious towards the other birds in the aviary,
jealously guarding a small mound. Whenever one was engaged
in a fight his (or her) mate would invariably come up and give
assistance. The cock would frequently go to the mound and call
the hen ; on her approach he would squat, spread out his wings
and tail, and pluck up the grass, throwing it over his back. The
hen would occasionally pick up the grass, and after toying with
it throw it away. What the result might have been I was not
destined to know, as the rats shortly afterwards killed the male
bird and the hen did not long survive him.

On the 1st of April, the Bearded Tits were observed to be
very busily carrying about the tops of the reeds which are in
their aviary. They hollowed out a cup-shaped hole in the
ground and lined it with reed-tops. The building was entirely
carried on by the hen, while materials were brought by the cock.
On the 14th the first egg was laid. The clutch contained seven
eggs, and as they refused to sit I removed the eggs and placed
them under a Canary. During April and May, they had two

179

more nests of six and five eggs respectively, but they refused to
sit and the eggs were wasted — I hope, however, for better things
next year. Of those set under the Canary several hatched ; they
had no down of any kind and were quite black, very much
resembling young Reed Warblers. By the way, would this
similarity be due to the facft that they are hatched under
precisely similar conditions, as they are certainly not closely
related ? For the first week they thrived well, growing apace,
when they suddenly all went off within 24 hours, just as they
were shooting their quills. They were fed by the Canary on
hard boiled egg and ants’ eggs, and were hand-fed in addition
with green caterpillars and gentles.

The 2 1st of April found the Barn Owls sitting; both
sexes took part in the incubation. The eggs, however, proved
unfertile.

Among my small birds I was not very successful. Green¬
finches had nest after nest, but failed to rear beyond ten days.
The Tree Sparrows had several nests, and ended by rearing two
birds. I took, however, no trouble to successfully breed any of
these birds, and supplied them with nothing beyond ordinary
seed and greenmeat.

I lost the cock of a pair of Great Tits while catching him
for the Brighton Show. A few days after the hen laid an egg,
which she, however, broke.

Towards the end of May, a pair of Quails hollowed out a
lovely cup-shaped nest in the grass, but no eggs were ever laid
in it.

O11 April 22nd, I placed a pair of Corncrakes in their
summer quarters out of doors. In a couple of days the cock
was to be heard craking vigorously, and it was soon evident that
they were pairing up ; the cock craking incessantly, walking
about 011 tiptoe, and generally showing himself off. At this time
he would often chase the hen, who would run away dragging
both wings on the ground, and as soon as she stopped, would be
driven on by a sharp peck at the back of the head. Indeed, so
persistent was he with his pecks that the back of her head was
soon bare. In the middle of May, a hole was scratched out but
not lined, and on the 12th of June the first egg was laid. On the
night of the nth of June, the cock was craking most vigorously
up to 11 p.m., which was the last time I heard him crake. Six
eggs were laid, two of which the cock broke by rolling them
about like marbles ; indeed, he seemed to take far more interest
in the matter than the hen, for when she used to go on to

i So

lay he would come every five minutes to see how matters were
getting on, and, as soon as she had laid, turn her off the nest
and play with the eggs !

They would not, however, sit, and I removed the eggs on
the 22nd. The next day, the cock had recommenced craking.
On the 24th, a new nest was hollowed out and lined with bents,
dry grass, etc. On the 28th, they began to lay a second clutch
of eight eggs, and the cock ceased to crake. On the 23rd July,
eight young were hatched, incubation, which lasted 17 days,
having been entirely carried on by the hen. During the first few
days after the young w~ere hatched, the cock was not allowed to
approach them, but was relegated to a small corner of the aviary;
the young were attended with great care by the hen, who fed
them from her beak with egg, ants’ eggs, and live ants, but not
until they were four days old did I see them attempt to pick up
food for themselves. On the fourth day, I was greatly surprised to
see the cock and hen lying side by side and brooding the young
together; thenceforward, they have both undertaken the parental
duties, the young attaching themselves equally to either. If,
however, I show them a Hawk, the hen at once retires to the
farthest corner of the aviary with all the young, while the cock
with outstretched wings and ruffled feathers rushes to the attack,
biting the wire and uttering a piercing cry not unlike that of a
Hawk itself.

For a fortnight matters went on well, when all the young
were seized with a disease — about which I should be glad of
information, if any member could give it to me. Their mouths
became choked up with a yellowish cheesy matter like a deposit
of tubercle. They were so small at the time that at first I dared
not meddle with them, but after losing five of them in the course
of a week, I tried cleaning out the mouths of the remainder,
morning and evening, and then washing them out with ‘Sanitas/
and thus succeeded in curing two of them, which are now seven
weeks old and fully feathered birds. The old male bird suffered
from the same disease last year, when full grown. Can it be
hereditary ?

This is, I believe, the first known instance of Corncrakes
breeding in confinement ; but should members know of other
instances, I should be glad if they would inform me.

Such is my breeding season. In some ways it is a
disappointing one, but were there no difficulties to be overcome
the pleasure of aviculture would, in my opinion, be greatly
diminished.

REVIEW.

British Birds, their Nests, and Eggs. By Various Well-known
Authors. (B nimby & Clarke, Limited , Hull).

We cannot too prominently bring under the notice of our
members and their friends this new popular work on British
Birds. Books on British Birds are numerous ; but to the
aviculturist, or would-be aviculturist, the majorit}?- are of but
little value. Well do we remember — it is ancient history now —
the publications of Morris’ two grand works, “ British Birds,”
and “ Nests and Eggs of British Birds,” liowr we looked forward
to the issue of each part, and the eagerness with which we
examined and criticised its contents. Now the young — and true
aviculturists are ever young — of this country have a chance which
has not occurred for a generation, and may not come round again
for many a day. The above named work has already been
started in weekly parts at sixpence each ; and monthly parts at
two shillings each will appear, doubtless, before these lines are
printed. The whole work is to be new, which will be something
novel indeed in the bii'd-book line, as most aviculturists know
onty too well. And the book is to be unique in another way.
Not only are we promised the usual information which we
naturally look for in a large work, but it is to tell us about our
feathered friends when in captivity ; moreover, every bird, and
the egg of every bird breeding in the British Isles, are to be
illustrated. The plates of the eggs are to be coloured ; and
when a bird’s eggs vary much illustrations of several typical
specimens are to be given. The first plate has appeared ; and
the eggs are not the meaningless daubs one usually sees but
are “life-like.” The hapless lot (so far as worldly profit is
concerned) of the publisher of Morris’ Birds may well have
hindered the publishers of this work from giving coloured
plates of the birds themselves, and nothing can adequately take
their place ; nevertheless, the illustrations which have already
come out are works of art, and of real value. Different portions
of the work will be written by different authors ; to the study of
live birds may well be adapted the familiar proverb, On pent plus
fin que les autres, mais pas plus fin que tons les autres : no matter
how clever a man may be, he cannot know everything about every
bird ; so each author will take up the group with which he is
most intimately acquainted. The parts now coming out are
being written by our fellow aviculturist, Dr. Butler, of the Natural
History Museum ; but our readers need not fear that because he
comes from a Museum he must needs be an old fossil ; not only
has he thousands of birds’ skins at the Museum to fall back upon

182

for examination, but he is himself a birds’-nester, egg-colledtor,
and naturalist, and the owner of extensive well-stocked aviaries ;
and, being thus -well stocked himself, he cannot but give us most
interesting and valuable information.

Discarding precedent, the work begins with the Thrushes,
and at once touches a soft place in the hearts of thousands upon
thousands of the inhabitants of these Islands. Commencing;
with the princely Missel Thrush, we are treated to much useful
matter ; the illustration of the bird is good, although the
position savours too much of the Song Thrush, and fails to
exhibit the magnificence of the adult wild male. We are very
glad Dr. Butler does not tell us, as some naturalists do, that this
bird does not sing. Of wild birds, it is quite one of our favourite
songsters; not that the song is very excellent, but the bird is
about the earliest songster of the 3^ear, and from being the
wariest of the wary becomes at this season comparatively
trustful and confiding. Credit for its song is far too often given
to the Blackbird and the Song Thrush, even by those who have
spent their lives in the country. When Morris’ “ Missel
Thrush ” appeared, the reference to its singing “ Perched on
the topmost bough of some tall tree ” produced a warm and
animated discussion among us. About the place were many
magnificent elms ; and we all were familiar with soul-inspiring
songsters perched on their tops in early spring, — but were these
Missel Thrushes ? Some said aye, and some said no ; but when
the season came round the point was soon settled. At break of
day one early-spring morning, our gun, which seldom went
otherwise than straight in those youthful days, went off, and
from the tip-top of an elm came tumbling down, from bough to
bough, our favourite songster — and a Missel Thrush it was sure
enough. It was a cruel adt, which we have never forgotten, and
which we try and atone for by always jealously standing up for
the song of the Missel Thrush. When singing in an ash or oak,
this bird perches high, but not on the top of the tree.

We by no means agree with Dr. Butler that the Missel
Thrush does not attempt to conceal its nest ; repeatedly we have
seen nests which have been admirably concealed, and quite safe
from detection b}^ the ordinary passer-by. If sheep be near,
some of their wool is often used for the outside of the nest, and
some is artfully stuck on to a bough or two near, unquestionably
by the bird, and for the purpose of drawing attention from the
nest. The instance quoted of this bird’s nest having been found
within three feet of the ground, presumably in a district where
there were suitable nesting-trees, is very remarkable. Frequently

i83

we have found them so low that we could almost touch the out¬
side by standing on tip-toe, and once within easy reach of a tall
man, but never in such a position that the inside could be
inspected without a climb, although often a very tiny climb.
Four specimens of the egg are illustrated, but we miss the most
beautiful which these birds lay and which we have occasionally
taken — of an intensely red-brown colour, the blotches as it were
so bountifully “running” as to stain the entire surface with a
rich deep red.

Passing on to the Song Thrush, Dr. Butler gives some
interesting particulars of the movements of the bird, movements
familiar enough to any of our country cousins who may happen
to have a bit of a lawn in front of the breakfast-room window ;
and yet how few of us are sufficiently close observers to be able
to describe in writing what wre have so often seen ! Concerning
the nests commenced early in the spring, we hardly feel inclined
to agree that they are pulled to pieces by the birds (the original
builders) themselves, or that the birds are playing at nesting.
The nest is more or less completed ; and then the birds wait for
a longer or shorter time according to the season — sometimes for
so long that one may naturally regard it as forsaken ; but one
day an egg appears, and all goes well if there be not undue
meddling on the part of the watcher. We have not ever known
an earl)7 nest deserted without special cause ; but these are often
built conspicuously in a thorn hedge or similar place, before a
single leaf has come out to hide them, and idle hands are care¬
lessly thrust in, the nest injured or too frequently inspected, and
consequently deserted. An almost certain find for an early nest
in some counties (and positions of nests of many birds vary ex¬
ceedingly according to the opportunities offered) not mentioned
by Dr. Butler, is a young holly bush consisting of a single
upright stem some seven or eight feet high, in a plantation of
deciduous trees, growing near to or actually in the boundary
hedge.

In the Bird Papers, the unfortunate gentlemen who are
asked times without number how to feed a Thrush in captivity
have to answer the question over and over again until they seem
to be on the verge of despair, or of losing their tempers ; Dr.
Butler comes to the rescue, and by recommending a food will
doubtless lighten their labours, and let us hope save the lives
of a few out of the thousands of birds which are annually
slaughtered by the administration of improper food. We have
ourselves tried crumb of bread as a basis of the food for our
insectivorous birds generally, and we feel moved to make two

1 84

remarks respecting it. (a) What is it made of? if not made
entirely from potatoes too small for the green-grocer, what are
the other ingredients besides alum ? ( b ) What is to be done

with the crust ? we tried ver}^ hard to devour it both as it was
and in puddings ; but there was too much of it — and we objeCt
to wholesale waste. Nevertheless, where only a few birds are
kept, with the other foods mentioned by Dr. Butler added, it will
do very well.

The artist, in endeavouring to picture the singing male
and the sitting female in the same plate, has, we think, hardly
kept quite true to nature. We have seen a Thrush’s nest high
in a tree sometimes ; but it is quite unusual for the nest to be so
high or the singing bird so low that the two are praCtically at the
same elevation. The female is represented as being “ at home ; ”
should any cause for alarm arise, the bird shrinks into her nest
pressing the neck and throat against the inside, the aCtual head
being no longer visible. Five different specimens of the egg are
illustrated, graduating from the rare unspeckled to the opposite
extreme.

Thousands upon thousands of our fellow creatures
scattered far and wide over the Empire will regard Dr. Butler’s
strictures on the song of the Thrush as rank blasphemy ; and so
far as the song of the free bird is concerned we heartily sympa¬
thise with them, for surely every Britisher looks upon the song
of the Thrush as part of his birthright, and outside the range of
criticism.

In every one who has ever been a country boy, the
mention of the Redwing and Fieldfare must ever awaken
pleasing reminiscences of the Christmas holidays, the frost and
snow, the favourite old gun, and the spoils of the chase served
up so much more toothsomely than was ever a Partridge in later
years. Dr. Butler tells us of none of these things, and hurts our
feelings accordingly. We doubt if shooting at higher game when
we grew older and more satiated ever produced the same real
pleasure as did the sport afforded by the Fieldfare and Redwing
with an occasional Missel Thrush, Wild Pigeon, and the like,
except, indeed, when we were given a terrier of our very own
and were allowed to hunt the hedge-rows for rabbits. Of the
two, the Redwing has been by far the most common in every
part of the country we have visited during the winter months ;
compared with the Fieldfare, moreover, it is a tame bird ; and it
happened, consequently, that we used to “ pocket ” (we cannot
say “bag,” but then we had prop£r gamekeeper’s pockets) quite

185

a number of the pretty little Redwings to every one of the wary
Fieldfares that fell to our gun.

Dr. Butler favours us with various details of the lives and
habits of these two birds both in their summer haunts and when
in their winter quarters in these Islands, but thinks it necessary
to defend a statement of his own that he once saw a flock of
Redwings on a thorn hedge feeding on the haws, and, as we
understand him, limits the feeding-time of these birds on haws
to the twilight soon after their arrival in this country. Not only
is the Redwing particularly fond of thorn trees and hedges with
their haws at all times, but a tall thorn hedge is one of its
favourite roosting-places, and a place where a roosting Fieldfare
will never, we think, be found. But here we may raise the
question, Where does the Fieldfare roost ? on this point we are,
unfortunately, not enlightened. Some say it roosts on the
ground ; certainly we never found it roosting in the hedges or
shrubberies, nor yet in the ivy-mantled elms or oaks along with
the Missel Thrushes, Wild Pigeons, Cuckoos, etc. We were
surrounded, however, by large woods, in which any number of
Fieldfares may have roosted unobserved. In our aviary, a
favourite roosting-place of one of these birds was a beam some
seven feet from the ground, where, on a moonlight night, it could
be plainly seen from the house ; this beam was in a very exposed
position, and, being smooth, did not afford any hold to the bird’s
feet ; and yet during a heavy gale we have seen it squatting on
this beam, head to the wind, as securely and immovably as if
it formed a part of it ; where the others roosted we cannot
positively say. We have had not less than five, and might have
had many more, and all from a man who used to net in the fen
country, from whom we received Snipes, Woodcocks, Thick-
knees, and other ground birds, but never a Redwing, so probably
the Fieldfares were netted on the ground ; but it never occurred
to us to ask the question, and we have since lost sight of the
man.

Dr. Butler has been more successful with his caged Field¬
fare than many people, for the captives of the latter are often
dirty and tailless. We have never tried a Fieldfare in a cage;
but in our garden aviary they did well, and were handsome
additions, particularly in the winter when the foreigners were
mostly in the house ; their familiar cry was ever a source of
delight to us, but they never distinguished themselves with their
song. It must be borne well in mind that they are by nature
wild and timid, and, although quiet enough in a small place, will
dash about wildly in an unsuitable large one. You must cut

your aviary to suit your bird with other species besides the Field¬
fare, or it will knock itself about and be a nuisance. With
this and some species the bird may be cut to suit the aviary by
rounding the tips of the wings with a pair of scissors. As a rule,
a very little need be taken off, and both wings should be cut the
same, and of course only the flights should be touched, never the
coverts. If done judiciously, the birds can fly about the aviary as
freely as ever, and the cut is not noticeable ; but they seem to
know they have lost the great power of their flight, and cease to
be disturbers of the peace. The same course may be adopted
sometimes most successfully with quarrelsome birds which will
hunt others to their death, half-an-incli off the tip of the longest
primary in each wing being usually sufficient ; of course we are
referring to birds in large aviaries. The usual custom of cutting
one wing is, according to our experience, an abomination and a
blunder, and with some ground birds we could mention it is
usually followed by fatal results. We hope it is unnecessary to
add, however, that, as a general rule, in a proper aviary, except
with a few ground birds when first introduced, the wings and
feathers of birds should never be tampered with. A fine Field¬
fare is a remarkably handsome bird ; we well remember some
men who were “doing up” the next house coming into the
adjoining garden to have a peep at the birds ; from their remarks
they evidently were not unacquainted with the show-bench;
the rare and bright-coloured foreign birds for them had no
attractions: they had eyes but for one bird, a grand old Fieldfare
in perfedt trim, whose bold markings entranced them — but they
thought it was a Song Thrush.

We wholly fail to see why .it should be inferred that the
likeness of the flight of the Fieldfare to that of the Missel
Thrush is such that they cannot be distinguished from one
another when on the wing ; the likeness is more apparent than
real ; and a trained eye can tell the one from the other at a
glance.

Interesting details of the nesting habits of the two birds
are given, but the somewhat Blackbird-like eggs are not illustra¬
ted. The illustrations of the birds are mostly good, especially
the foremost Fieldfare ; but Redwings in hard weather do not
seek their food in the open fields as represented so much as
under trees, especially little clumps in parks, where they may be
seen busily employed turning over and hunting amongst the
dead leaves for inseCts, pupae, etc.

CORRESPONDENCE.

WHAT IS A BRITISH BIRD ?

Sir, — There seems to be much difference of opinion amongst both
ornithologists and aviculturists as to what really constitutes a British bird.

Dr. Butler, writing in the Magazine for March, 1S95, in a report of
the birds at the Costal Palace Show, referring to the Mealy Redpoll being'
exhibited in a class for British birds, says “ The Mealies carried the prizes,
the English birds being only represented by two or three recentty-caught
examples. By-the-wav, should birds which do not breed in Great Britain
be admitted ? ” Now, with all respect to so high an authority, I think it
would be a most unfair rule to exclude from our list of native birds all
which do not breed in this country — such well-known birds as the Field¬
fare, Grey Shrike, Mealy Redpoll, and Jack Snipe would have to go;
while many strangers, such as the Sand Grouse (which, though occurring
each time in great numbers, has only paid us three visits in half-a-century)
would be included. I possess two clutches of eggs of this species, taken by
my late brother in Yorkshire, and the young having been found in Moray,
the fadt of their nesting in this country is placed beyond doubt.

At exhibitions of cage birds great confusion exists, and in the
British bird classes at the Crystal Palace Show I have noticed a bird
passed as foreign one year and a prize-winner the next ; such birds as the
Bearded Tit and Waxwing causing much trouble.

It would be well if the promoters of Cage Bird Shows could be
induced to follow the example of the last show at Brighton, and give a list
of the birds eligible to compete in each division ; and probably it would be
beneficial if the opinion of the Avicultural Society were given in the
matter, and, if possible, a rule passed as to what should be the status of a
British bird as recognised by them. The only definition of a British bird
which I have read, and which in my humble opinion is logical, is “A bird
which has at least once been taken in a truly wild state in this country ; ”
and if even this rule were accepted we should find authorities differ : for
instance, Seebohm includes in his magnificent work the Canary Finch,
this being omitted by Howard Saunders, Yarrell, and others; but the diffi¬
culty might, perhaps, be met by agreeing to accept any bird as British
which is so described by any one of three or four chosen writers.

While it may be a difficult task to describe what really constitutes a
British bird, I hope the Avicultural Society, which studies both British and
foreign birds, will at least endeavour to agree upon a definition acceptable
to its members.

George C. Swaiges.

[The question raised by Mr. Swailes is one of great interest, and we
should be glad of the opinion of the members upon it. It ought to be
possible to agree either upon a definition, or upon a list of species].

“AUTHORITIES” AND THEIR CRITICS.

[Further correspondence upon this subject is held over until next
month].

1 88

JOTTINGS FOR AUGUST.

Sir, — Since last month, I have had another nest of Zebra Finches
fly off. The old birds built a lovely nest in a bush. Another uest of four got
drowned in a heavy thunderstorm. A pair of Bengalese brought off one
youngster. Let me warn our readers against meddling with nests. It is
only requisite to touch a Zebra Finch’s nest to cause the birds to desert it
promptly. The great secret of success is to pretend never to notice a nest.

I see that my Aurora Finches have a most curious liking for aloe-
fibre; they will eat up every bit they can find.

My Diamond Finches have built a snug nest in a box, and I hope,
before long, that the hen will lay.

The young Blue Robins are coming into color and are in the pink of
health and condition.

I see that another pair of Bengalese are building, and have eggs.

Let me advise people of delicate feelings not to use wasp-grubs.
Birds like them very much ; but the awful work of getting them out
of the comb ! You have to pick each grub out separately, and it has a
horrible clammy death-like body; and a sickening habit of coming in halves,
with a result better imagined than described. No more wasp-grubs for me.

Has anyone often seen a Combassou in full feather? I rather doubt
it ; as I have one now with a tail the centre of which is quite four inches
long. I never saw such a tail on a Combassou before, and I have had many.
I fancy this must be the adult tail.

C. D. Farrar.

FOOD FOR INSECTIVOROUS BIRDS; THRUSHES; THE CAPE
CANARY; THE SONG OF THE WILD CANARY.

Sir, — Will you, or some of our members, kindly answer the following
queries : —

(1) . What is the name of a caterpillar, with greyish body and brown
head, about three-quarters of an inch long, found in dried-up cow pats? I
have found them to be much relished by my birds. As I have never read or
heard of them as being used as food for insectivorous birds, their existence
cannot be very generally known. I would strongly recommend anyone who
keeps delicate insectivorous birds to look for these caterpillars, if he can get
into a field where cows are grazed. If in turning over a dried-up cow pat
these caterpillars be not found, some slug or an earthworm may reward the
searcher.

(2) . In a small book on British Birds, I have seen it stated that there
are two varieties of the Song Thrush ; one I think described as the Wood
Thrush, and the other as the Heath Thrush. The song of the latter being
described as superior to that of the former. Are these varieties and
difference in song generally recognised ?

(3) . What is the scientific name of the Cape Canary ?

(4) . Does the song of the Wild Canary of the Canary Isles resemble
that of the domesticated bird, and which has the better song ?

C. Harrison

The following Reply was sent to Mr. Harrison

(1) . The grubs are probably larvae of rove-beetles ( Staphylinidce ) ; the
so-called Devil’s coach-horse is a member of the group : many insec¬
tivorous birds feed on grubs of beetles, and upon the beetles themselves,
which are to be found in manure.

(2) . I11 small books on British birds a good deal of nonsense is often

printed, as (for instance) that the brown, the grey, and the red Linnets are
distinct species.

The only Thrushes commonly met with in Great Britain are the true
Song-Thrush, the Red-wing, the Fieldfare, the Missel-Thrush, the Ring-
Ouzel, and the Blackbird. White’s Thrush, sometimes called the “Golden
Thrush,” is an occasional visitor, and single specimens of one or two others,
which may have escaped from confinement, have been shot in the British
Isles.

The common Song-Thrush is neither confined to woods nor to
heaths, and its song varies immensely in quality, in different individuals.

(3) . The scientific name of the Cape Canarj' is Serinus canicollis*

(4) . The song of the Wild Canary is inferior to that of the domesti¬
cated bird, as might be expected after centuries of careful training and
selection ; but this statement must be accepted with reservations, for some
Canaries are far better singers than others, and hand-reared Canaries make
wretched singers, unless taught by good performers : lastly, to my ear, the
song of a wild bird, if not (stribtly speaking) so good as that of its domesti¬
cated product, may be, as a whole, more pleasing, more abounding in
quaint surprises, than the stereotyped phrases which one alwaj^s expedts to
hear from the descendants of cage-birds. With the exception of the Hartz-
mountain Roller, most tame Canaries sing a good deal alike.

A. G. BuTRER.

BUDGERIGARS.

Sir, — I have some 22 or 23 pairs of Budgerigars in my aviaries, and
my breeding results have, so far, been very satisfactory, so much so that I
cannot count the young ones accurately — but somewhere between 150 and
200 have already left the nests, and the old ones are busy hatching out their
third set of eggs.

Twice, a couple of hens nested in the same husk; once rearing
successfully seven young ones, and the second time deserting the nest when
five young ones were not fully fledged. In another husk two hens reared a
nest of eight. In both these cases the two hens seemed to agree well
together.

I have had several nests of eight reared by one hen.

In most cases the young leave the nest in full plumage, but in three
or four cases the parents pluck the crowns of the young ones bare each
nest, and they leave the nest bald-headed, but soon regain full plumage.

* The name of “ Cape Canary” has however been indiscrimately, but incorrectly,
given to the St. Helena Seed-eater, the Sulphur Seed-eater, and the Alario-finch or
Mountain Canary of the Boers : possibly Mr. Harrison may mean one of these.

A. G. B.

One pair of old ones are not satisfied with plucking the feathers, hut also
bite the skin and sometimes even kill the young ones. Once, when
examining the nests, I found a young one (the sole occupant of a husk)
about a week old, with no trace of feathers at all, and a week later it was
still quite bare. Eventually it left the nest and was found running about
the floor of the aviary without the least trace of a feather except round
the beak. I took him into the house and put him in a cage for a few days
till the feathers began to grow, and now he is again running about the
aviary almost full}' feathered, but not quite able to fly. Have any members
of the Avicultural Society experienced this sort of thing ? I presume it is
the parents that do the mischief, seeing that each nest of the same pair
is treated in the same way.

At one time I had serious trouble with mice, and found they were
killing and eating the young Budgerigars almost every night. A little
vermin-killer, placed outside the aviary in their runs, soon stopped the
mischief.

The young Budgerigars are full of fun and mischief, and they lead
some of the other inmates of the aviary a fine dance : pulling the tails of
the Cockatiels and Pennants, and riding on the backs of the Doves.

J. C. Poop.

INSECTIVOROUS BRITISH BIRDS IN CAPTIVITY.

Sir, — I am at once glad and sorry to see “ Varet’s ” letter in the
Magazine for September. Sorry that such cruelty should be practised, aud
glad that it should be exposed.

I notice that “ Varet ” mentions such birds as Wagtails and Redstarts,
along with Willow-wrens, Chiffcliaffs, aud Flycatchers, as if they were
equally delicate in captivity, and I am surprised at this. I have always
found Wagtails and Redstarts fairly easy birds to keep— easy that is for
small insectivorous birds ; but I have never succeeded in keeping Willow-
wrens and Chiffcliaffs for more than a few weeks, and I never knew any¬
one who did. He also mentions Wood-wrens, but the Wood-wren is not a
cage bird at all. I have never seen a Wood-wren in a cage, and I doubt
whether “ Varet ” has.

Willow-wrens, Chiffcliaffs, Flycatchers, and Sedge-warblers should,
in my opinion, never be captured. It is practically impossible to keep them
alive for more than a very short time, and to condemn any bird to certain
death within a few weeks, or months at the outside, seems to me unjusti¬
fiable cruelty, and not legitimate aviculture. I have, in years gone by, tried
to keep these birds, but I would never do so again.

Wagtails and Redstarts are quite different, for with proper treatment
they may live for many months, and indeed for years. I do not think it
cruel to keep such birds, provided they are properly fed. At the same time
I do not think that they are really suitable birds for the aviary, or that their
capture should be encouraged. They are very much the reverse of hardy,
and do not take kindly to the artificial food with which we provide them.
I think it would be better for aviculturists to content themselves with seed-
eaters and the larger insectivorous species.

Septimus Perkins.

RESIGNATION OF THE SECRETARY.

It is with very much regret that I am compelled by the pressure of
other duties to resign the office of Secretary, which I have held (not, I
hope, altogether inefficiently) since the formation of the Avicultural
Society.

It is of great importance to the well being of the Society that this-
office should be held by one who is willing to devote to it a considerable
amount of time and labour ; more indeed than I am likely to be able to
afford in the future. I feel, therefore, that it is only fair to the Society that
another should take up the work, and I have the great satisfaction of
proposing as my successor Mr. H. R. Fillmer, whose devotion to the work
of the Avicultural Society is too well known to need any comment from me.

I have to offer my most hearty thanks to the officers and members of
the Society, and especially to the Executive Committee, for their unvarying
forbearance, kindness, and courtesy to me during my term of office.

Majr I, in conclusion, express the hope that I may still be permitted
to serve the Societj7, though in a less onerous position ?

Charges S. Simpson.

RULES FOR THE PRIZE ARTICLES.

( See page /77D

1. The articles should contain from 1,500 to 2,000 words.

2. The prizes will be awarded by the Executive Committee, whose

decision shall be final, and who shall have power to withhold either
or both prizes.

3. The competition will be limited to those members of the Society who

do not hold office.

4. The articles must reach the Secretary before the first of December,,

1896. They must not be signed, but should be distinguished by a,
motto or nom de plume , the name of the writer being communicated
to the Secretary in an accompanying letter signed by the competitor.

5. The names of the competitors will not be communicated to the-

Executive Committee until after they have made their decision.

6. Both prizes will not be awarded to the same competitor, but both may

be competed for by the same member.

7. The prize articles will appear in the Magazine, and the right is reserved

of publishing, in the Magazine, all or any of the unsuccessful articles..

THE

flviealtaral Society

FOR THE STUDY OF

FOREIGN AND BRITISH BIRDS.

OFFICERS FOR THE YEAR 1895-6.

©resident :

THE HON. & REV. F. G. DUTTON.

Dice=fl>resident :

THE RIGHT HON. THE BARONESS BERKELEY.

Council

The Rev. H. D. ASTEEY.
Mr. J. L. BONHOTE.

Sir H. S. BOYNTON, Bart.

Mr. O. E. CRESSWEEE-
Miss E. C. D. EEEWEEYN.
Mr. R. PHIEEIPPS.

Mr. J. SERGEANT.

Mr. W. SWAYSEAND.

Dr. G. C. WIEEIAMSON.

Dr. A. G. BUTEER.
Mr. H. T. T. CAMPS.
Mr. V. CASTEEEAN.

lEjecutive Committee :

Dr. A. G. BUTEER, Mr. O. E. CRESSWEEL, Mr. R. PHIEEIPPS.

Ibon. Secretary:

Dr. C. S. SIMPSON, 2, Portland Road, Hove.

{Treasurer :

Mr. H. R. FILEMER, 52, Ship Street, Brighton.

Scrutineer :

Mr. THOMAS MARSHALL, 189, East India Road, London, E.

auditor :

Mr. W. H, BETTS.

11.

LIST OF MEMBERS.

Corrected to ist November , 1895.

Abrahams, Mr. Joseph, 191 & 192, St. George’s Street. London, E.
AinlEy, Mr. John William, 16, Dalton Green, Dalton, Huddersfield.
Arthur, Mr. C. P., Market Place, Melksham.

Ashmore, Mrs. 33, Denmark Villas, Hove.

ASTLEY, Rev. H. D., Chekers Court, Tring.

Austen, Mr. Ernest E., 104, Minet Avenue, Harlesden, N.W.

Baker, Mr. A. J., Westgate, Foxgrove Road, Beckenham.

Bamford, Miss Ella C., St. Cuthbert’s Leys, Bedford.

Barkley, Mrs., 6, Crichlade Street, Cirencester.

Barnes, Mrs., Bloxholm Rectory, Lincoln.

BECTivE, The Countess of, Barnacre Lodge, Garstang.

BELL, The Rev. Canon, The Rectory, Cheltenham.

BEnTuEY, Mr. David, 80, St. Hubert Street, Great Harwood, nr. Blackburn.
BERKELEY, The Baroness, Martin’s Heron, Bracknell, Berks.

BerTeing. Mr. A. E. L., 4, St. Germains Road, Forest Hill, S.E.

BETTS, Mr. W. H., 36, Great James Street, Bedford Row, W.C.

Blackburn, Mrs., Dolforgan, Exmouth.

Blake, Mr. R. S., 2, Priory Villas, High Street, Lewisham, S.E.
BlathwayT, Mr. A. P., Frogmore, Watford, Herts.

BonhoTE, Mr. J. LEWIS, 27, Trinity Street, Cambridge.

BOTTOMLEY, Mr. W. Me C., India Buildings, Halifax.

Boynton, Sir H. S., Bart., Burton Agnes, Hull.

Bramwell, Mr. W. J., 5, Richmond Road, Brighton.

Breysig, Miss E- W., Ashby, East Saville Road, Edinburgh.

BriGG, Mr. Stanley, Hawkstone, Keighley.

BROTHERSTON, Mr. G. M., 27, Lee Crescent, Portobello, N.B.

Browne, Miss Agnes M., 19, Roland Gardens, London, S.W.

Brown, Mr. G. A., in, North Street, Brighton.

Buckland, Rev. A. R., 24, Guildford Street, Russell Square, London, S.W.
Buckland, Dr. Francis O., 6, Lower Sloane Street, London, S.W.
BUTLER, Dr. A. G., 124, Beckenham Road, Beckenham, Kent.

Camps, Mr. H. T. T., Linden House, Haddenham, Isle of Ely.

Carter, Mr. Walter L ., Summergate Villa, Parkinson Lane, Halifax.
CarTmelL, Mr. J., 32, Vauxhall Road, Preston, Lancashire.

Castellan, Mr. Victor, Gidea Hall, Romford, Essex.

CaTLEUGH, Mr. W. T., Donniugton Road, Newbery, Berks.

CauSh, Mr. D. E-, 63, Grand Parade, Brighton.

Clarke, Mrs. Charles, 4, Vanburgh Park Road West, Blackheath, S.E.
CluTTERBUCK, Mrs., Coombe Royal, Bath.

Cooper, Mr. J., Killerby Hall, Scarborough.

Crafer, Mr. Alfred, Sydenham House, Atlingworth Street, Brighton.
Crathorne, Mr. Josiah, Estcourt House, Bridlington Quay.

CREE, Miss E. J., Ingleside, Lenzie, Glasgow.

CRESSWELL, Mr. O. E., J.P., Morney Cross, Hereford.

Cronkshaw, Mr. J., 85, Plantation Street, Accrington.

111.

Dale, Dr. F., Park Dea, Scarborough.

Dashwood, Mr. R., Daueburgh Hill, near Beccles.

DeasE, Mr. ConeEY, Superintendent of Post Offices, Arrali, Shahabad,
India.

Dewar, Mr. J. F., 2, St. Patrick’s Square, Edinburgh.

Dillon, Mr. M., 18, Ravenscourt Park, Doudon, W.

Dodson, Miss, Dacie Court, Abingdon.

Doughty, Mr. T., 63, Canal Walk, Southampton.

Dutton, The Hon. and Rev. F. G., Bibury, Fairford.

Edwards, Mr. Victor, 44, Devonshire Place, Brighton.

Eeeick, Mr. E. P. S., 52, Barrington Road, Crouch End, Hornsey,
London, N.

Farrar, Mr. H. Crawhaee, Bourn Terrace, Hartlepool.

Farrar, Rev. C. D., Micklefield Vicarage, South Milford, Yorks.

Fieemer, Mr. H. R., 25, Rugby Road, Brighton.

Fieemer, Mrs W., 27, Rugby Road, Brighton.

Finn, Mr. F., Indian Museum, Calcutta.

Fisher, The Rev. Wiefred, Parklands, Lustleigh, Newton Abbott.
FoweER, Mr. ChareES, 26, Broad Street, Blaenavon.

FrosTick, Mr. John, 16, Bedford Hill, Balham, S.W.

Fueejames, Mr. Henry J., 84, Sistova Road, Balham, S.W.

GabriEE, Mrs. G., 32, Palace Road, Streatham Hill.

Gibbins, Mr. Wieeiam B., Ettington, Stratford-on-Avon.

Greame, Mr. H. C., Brough, East Yorkshire.

Griffiths, Mr. E., Brislington House, Bristol

Hadow, Miss ISABELLA S., Pyrcroft, Westbourne Park Road, West Bourne¬
mouth.

Haeeam, Mr. E. G., Woodsley Villa, Musters Road, West Bridgford,
Nottingham.

Hamilton, Mrs., The Manor House, Seend, Melksliam, Wilts.

Hammond, Mrs. W. A. 2, Eaton Gardens, Hove.

Hardy, Miss, West London Hospital, Hammersmith.

Harker, Mr. T. P., Titchfield, Clermont Terrace, Preston, near Brighton.
Harrison, Mr. C. L., Chapra, Saran, Bengal, India.

Harrison, Miss Edith, Waterhouse, Bath.

Hawthorn, Miss Edith, Loose Hall, Hitcliam, near Ipswich.

Henwood, Mr. T. E., Auricula Villa, Hamilton Road, Reading.

Hodgson, Miss, Hernewood, Sevenoaks.

Holloway, Mr. H., Park Avenue, Barbourne Park, Worcester.

Hopwood, Miss E. M., Eastlea, Oxford Road, Worthing.

Housden, Mr. J. B., Brooklyn, Cator Road, Sydenham.

Hudson, Mr. A. F., 3, Hove Place, Hove.

Hughes, Mrs., no, Springfield Road, Brighton.

Jackson, Mrs., Danecourt, Parkstone, Dorset.

Jaeeard, Mr. G. H., West House, Horncastle, Lincolnshire.

Jardine, Mr. Andrew, Willowbank Cottage, 170, Gairbraid Street,
Maryhill, Glasgow.

Jones, Mr. Arthur, 37, Sydney Road, Homerton.

Jones, Mr. Norman H., Glasmoore, Bridlington Quay.

Kneen, Mr. T. E., 23, North Watt Street, Workington.

IV.

Laskey, Mr. W., 21, Salisbury Road, Wood Green, N.

LeadbeaTER, Mr. F. W., 5, Ellesmere Road, Sheffield.

Leadbetter, Mr. Richard, 21, Trinity Road, Penge.

Lennie, Mr. Joseph C., Rose Park, Trinity Road, Edinburgh.

Leeweeyn, Miss, 1S8, Earl’s Court Road, London, S.W.

Long, Mrs. Hume, Dolforgan, Exmouth.

LoTT, Mr. W. A., 8, Lansdowne Road, Stockwell.

Low, Mrs., Kilshane, Tipperarj", Ireland.

Lydon, Mr. A. F., 35, Northfield Road, Stamford Hill, N.

Lyon, Lieut. Col. F.L.H., R.A., J.P., Harwood, Horsham.

Macdonald, Lady, Woolmer, Liphook.

Mackenzie, Rev. J. W. A., Whitwick Vicarage, Leicester.

Marshall, Mr. Thomas, 189, East India Road, London, E.

Marsh, Mrs, 49, Sackville Road, Hove.

Meade-Waldo, Mr. E. G. B., Rope Hill, Lymington, Hants.

MiLLES, The Hon. Mariouita, Middleton Hall, King’s Lynn.

MorSHEad, Lady, Forest Lodge, Binfield, Bracknell, Berks.

MoERSCHELL, Mr. F., Imperial Hotel, Malvern.

Mortimer, Mrs., Wigmore, Holmwood, Surrey.

O’Reilly, Mr. Nicholas S., 9, Royal Crescent, Ramsgate.

OsbaldESTon, Mr. W., 2, St. John Street, Preston, Lancashire.

Osborn, Mrs., Widcombe Lodge, St, Alban’s Road, Watford, Herts.

Owen, Mr. J. A., 41, King’s Road, Brighton.

Perkins, Mr. Septimus, The Caledonian Hotel, Inverness.

PERRiNG, Mr. C. S. R., 144a, Queen Victoria Street, London, E. C.
Phillipps, Mr. R., 26, Cromwell Grove, West Kensington Park, London, W.
PhillippS, Mrs. R., 26, Cromwell Grove, West Kensington Park, London, W_
Phillipps, Mr. Alexander T. L., Alexandria, Egypt.

Phillips, Mrs. L. E., St. Kilda, Devonshire Road, Forest Hill.

Pike, Mr. H. L. , St. Clair, Reading.

PiTT, Dr. G. Newton, 24, St. Thomas Street, London, S.E.

Pitt, Mrs., The Nest, Torquay.

Pool, Mr. J. C., 12, Carr’s Lane, Birmingham.

Prince, Mr. C., Royal Oak Hotel, Bowlee, near Middleton.

Prowse, Mr. E. J., Chalfont Terrace, Kingswood, Bristol.

Reid, Mrs., Funchal, Madeira.

Reid, Mr. William, 26, Fountainliall Road, Edinburgh.

RETTich, Mr. A., 10, Nortliauger Road, Streatliam Common, S.W.
Ricketts, Mrs., Knighton Vicarage, Radnorshire.

Richard, Mr. E., Hotel Metropole, Brighton.

Robinson, Miss PI. M., The Newlands, Leamington Spa.

Rooper, Lieut. Hugh B., R.N., 9, The Croft, Tenby.

RoThera, Mr. C. L., B.A., Hazlewood, Forest Grove, Nottingham.

Salt, Dr. E. G„ 50, George Square, Edinburgh.

Savage, Mr. A., 3, Rue Bihorel, Bihorel, Rouen, Seine Inferieure, France,.
Scrivens, Miss, The Firs, Bexliill-on-Sea, Sussex.

Secretary, The, Natural History Society, Rugby School, Rugby.
Sergeant, Mr. J., 10, London Street, Southport.

Seth-SmiTh, Mr. David, Wilford House, Folkestone.

V.

Sharp, Miss, M. D., Spring Gardens, Ringwood, Hants.

Shaw-Lefevre, Lady Constance E., Oldbury Place, Ightham, Sevenoaks.
Simpson, Dr. C. S., 2, Portland Road, Hove.

Simpson, Miss, 76, Finsbury Road, Wood Green, N.

Simpson, Mrs. Thomas, 16, Ship Street, Brighton.

SLATER, Mr. Arthur A., Windleshaw House, St. Helens.

Smart, Mr. John, 12, Royal Crescent, Edinburgh.

Smith, Mr. H. B., Grangefield, Park Road South, Birkenhead.

Speed, Mr. Charles, Penrhyn Park, Bangor.

Speed, Mr. Hedeey, 4, Fronhenlog Terrace, Bangor, North Wales.
Spencer, Mr. Thomas, 12, Mill Street, Driffield.

Steward, Mrs. Falcon, Bardsey, Bath Road, Reading.

STOREY, Mr. J., 7, Blenheim Terrace, St. John’s Wood, N.W.

St. OuinTin, Mr. W. H., Scampston Hall, Rillington, York.

Swailes, Mr. George C., The Nurseries, Beverley, Yorkshire.
Swaysland, Mr. Walter, 184, Western Road, Brighton.

Taylor, Mr. E-, 22, Thornton’s Arcade, Leeds.

Thom, Mr. A. A,, Birkacre House, Birkacre, near Chorley.

Thomas, Mr. Henry, 78, Harlow Terrace, Harrogate.

Thompson, Mr. Arthur H., St. Medard’s, Darlington.

Thoyts, Miss E. E., Sulhamstead Park, Berkshire.

Thursby, Mrs., Bank Hall, Burnley.

Todd, Mr. R. A., Honeyden, Foots Cray, Kent.

Topham, Mr. William, The Hill, Spondon, Derby.

Townend, Mr. Frank H., Sussex House, Howard Road, Woodside, S.E.

Vivian, Mrs., 5, Upper Brook Street, Grosvenor Square, W.

Walker, Miss H. K. O., Chesham, Bury, Lancashire.

Wilkinson, Miss Beatrice, End Cliffe, Manor Road, Edgbaston,
Birmingham.

Williams, Mr. Howard, 4, Highbury Grove, London, N.

Williams, Mrs. Leslie, 10, Lansdown Crescent, Bath.

Williamson, Dr. G. C., The Mount, Guildford.

Winchilsea and Nottingham, The Dowager Countess of, 6, Bedford
Square, London, W.C.

Wordsworth, Miss A. M., Maer Hall, Newcastle, Staffs.

Young, Mr. J., 222, Darnle}' Street, Pollokshields, Glasgow.

VI.

RULES OF THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY

As Revised by the Council, September, iSgj.

1. — The name of the Society shall be “ The AvicueTurae Society,”
and its object shall be the study of Foreign and British Birds. Poultry,
Pigeons and Canaries shall be outside the scope of the Society.

2. — The officers of the Society shall be elected annually by the mem¬
bers in manner hereinafter provided, and shall consist of a President, a
Vice-President, a Treasurer, a Secretary, an Auditor, a Scrutineer, and a
Council of 12 members. The Secretary and Treasurer shall be ex-officio
members of the Council.

3. — Each member shall pay an annual subscription of 5/-, to be due
and payable in advance on the 1st of November in each year. New mem¬
bers shall pay an entrance fee of 2/6. Any member whose subscription 01-
entrance fee shall be four months overdue shall cease to be a member of
the Society, and notice of his having ceased to be a member, and of the
cause, shall be inserted in the Magazine.

4. — New members shall be proposed in writing; and the name and
address of eveiy person thus proposed, with the name of the member
proposing him, shall be published in the next issue of the Magazine.
Unless the candidate shall, within two weeks after the publication of his
name in the Magazine, be objected to by at least two members, he shall be
deemed to be duly elected. If five members shall lodge with the Secre¬
tary objections to any candidate he shall not be elected, but the signatures
to the signed objections must by verified by the Scrutineer. If two or more
members (but less than five) shall object to any candidate, the Secretary
shall announce in the next number of the Magazine that such objections
have been lodged (but shall not disclose the names of the objectors), and
shall request the members to vote upon the question of the election of such
candidate. Members shall record 1 heir votes in sealed letters addressed to
the Scrutineer, and a candidate shall not be elected unless two-thirds of the
votes recorded be in his favour ; nor shall a candidate be elected if five or
more votes be recorded against his election.

5. — The Magazine of the Society shall be issued on the first day of
every month, and forwarded, post free, to each member. The Secretary
shall have an absolute discretion as to what matter shall be published in
the Magazine (subject to the control of the Council). The Secretary shall
refer all matters of doubt or difficulty to the Council. The decision of the
majority of the Council shall be final and conclusive in all matters.

6. — The election of officers shall take place every year between the
1st and 14th of October. All candidates must be proposed by one member
and seconded by another member (in writing), before the}’ shall be eligible for
election ; but this shall not apply to officers willing to stand for re-election
to the same office. All such proposals which have been duly seconded
must be sent to the Secretary before the 14th of September. The Secretary
shall prepare a voting paper containing a list of the candidates, showing the
offices for which the}’ are respectively seeking election or re-election, and
shall send a copy of such voting paper to each member of the Society,

Vll.

with the October number of the Magazine. Each member shall make a
cross (X) opposite the names of those for whom he desires to vote, and shall
sign the voting paper at the foot, and send it to the Scrutineer in a sealed
envelope before the 14th of October. The Scrutineer shall prepare a written
return of the officers elected, showing the number of the votes recorded for
each candidate, and send it to the Secretary before the 21st of October, for
publication in the November number of the Magazine. In the event of an
equality of votes the President shall have a casting vote.

7. — It shall be lawful for the Council to delegate any of their powers
to a Committee of not less than three.

S. — The Council (but not a Committee of the Council) shall have
power to alter and add to the Rules, from time to time, in any manner they
may think fit.

9. — The Council shall have power to expel an}’ member from the
Society at any time, without assigning any reason.

10. — All members intending to resign their membership at the end of
the current year of the Society shall give notice of their intention to the
Secretary before the 14th of October, and all members who do not so give
notice shall continue to be members for the year following, and shall be
liable for their subscriptions accordingly.

11. — Neither the office of Scrutineer, nor the office of Auditor, shall
be held for two consecutive years by the same person.

12. — The Scrutineer shall not reveal to any person how any member
shall have voted.

13. — If any office shall become vacant at any time, other than at the
end of the Society’s year, the Council shall have power to nominate any
member of the Society to fill the vacancy, until the expiration of the then
current year.

>«

E-

W

►h

o

o

CO

<

CC

o

E*

3

Q

►H

>

<

W

K

E-

<0

On

Pi

<1

W

><

tt

tc

H

Pi

O

Pp

H

W

W

w

co

W

O

£

<!

•4

<1

CP

VO

o

M

o

VO

O

M

03

to

M

CO

M

N

N

CS

S3

ON

1^-

O

O

w

VO

to

M

VO

S3

-o

<3

o.

S-B

£

to

4>

W)

u

CP

o

4)

0)

o

to

I a

oj

bo

ctf

bO

jh

P

rH

3

b*

m

5

H->

oj

H->

co

03

bO

cd

-*->

03

O

Ah

j-.

o3

03

Jh

Jh

03

03

<u

03

Ah

0)

o

5

u

w

Td

03

O

• i—i

h->

.&
*Jh

a

03

.O

3 A

CO CO

03

03

• rH

J— 1

'Tj

Jh

<13

Jh

A

03

a3

03

Jh

Ctf

rS

( 13
CJ

Oj

pq

CJ

03

u

u

o

CJ

nd

t— ]

3

,o

nd

rH

03

03

Jh

03

&

a

o

>

P

W

Q

co

P

O

ffi

pq

co

W

*6

o

VO

VO

VO

o

o

o

to

Tj-

M

03

o

M

cs

M

M

<0

o

h-i

hH

HH

VO

OJ

N

Tj-

o

CO

w

o

M

M

O

CV

VO

VO

S3

o3

X

w

3-

*5

u

£

NO <D

•y 'S'

CO

a

o

• ?h

H-»

.2"

'u

o

03

A

CO

^03

Vt

03

•Q

H

a

<u

CO

CD

to

a

o

• rH

i-i

_Oh

’)h

O

to

Pb

co

«

d

4>

PC

a

4)

to

CP

CP

CP

>■>

-u

41

o

o

CO

CP

cJ

pp

M

ro -«

ON >N

CO V,

1-1 4)

O

o

CO

4)

4->

aj

£

O

CO

•

<D

a

• T— <

CP

4)

Pi

rO

*

03

-M

rH

p

r-H

*Jh

a

VO

<N

SJ

a3

b^O

W

03

-4-J

03

0)

a

03

p-J

oj

pq

rH

o

-*->

a

03

aj

S

CO

CP

3

03

3

rH

03

03

•T— <

H-»

0)

o

-M

41

JH

03

<D

V+-H

O

03

d)

a

Pp

03

Jh

Ph

03

0)

03

v>

Jh

0)

>

nd

r3

-M

Uh

<a

o

CP

3

• rH

CJ

vd

<D

O

rH

3

u

*Pp

o

O

Uh

M

P

<4-1

Jh

• i-p

pq

Uh

0)

>

c

<!

^03

Jh

0)

o

3

Jh

W)

a

• rH

03

03

nd

03

03

O

o

O

0)

r^

03

r£

03

W

03

4)

0)

T-H

nd

aj

3

0)

Oj

03

r-H

lo

vo

"3

co

13

CO

a3

CO

Jh

H

Jh

H

a

a

!-.

4)

a

INDEX TO SUBJECTS.

* This mark signifies “In the Correspondence Columns."

“ Accidents to Birds,” Review of ...

Account of My Bird -room, by Mar¬
garet Williams ...

A Few Notes on Breeding some Aus¬
tralian Parrakeets, by John
Sergeant

Agapornis, The Genus
•Alario Finches

*“ Among British Birds in their
Nesting Haunts ”

Anatidce, The, by D. Seth -Smith
* Apropos of Bought food for Insectiv¬
orous Birds

Aquarium, A Visit to the Bird Show
at the Royal, by Dr. G. C.
Williamson

•Aquarium, Bird Show at the Royal

48, 61,

Aspect of the Bird-room, by H. R.
Fillmer

•Australian Green - winged Dove,
Colour of the Bill of
*“ Authorities ” and their Critics 155,

Aviaries and their Inmates, My, by
R. A. Todd

Aviculture a Hundred Years ago, by
C. S. Simpson ...

PAGE

18

96

40

173

hi

112

63

76

107

64

187

81

146

Balance Sheet for 1894-5
Bearded Tit ...

Bird-room, An Account of My, by
Margaret Williams
Bird-room, the Aspect of the, by
H. R. Fillmer ...

BirdShowat Brighton, by H. R. Fillmer
Bird Show at the Royal Aquarium, A
Visit to the, by Dr. G. C.
Williamson ... ... ... 21

•Bird Show at the Royal Aquarium 48, 61, 76

Vlll.

45

18

107

118

•Bird Skin Sales, Fancy Feather and
•Birds at Bazaars

“ Birds, Beasts, and Fishes of the
Norfolk Broadlands,” Review of
Bittern, The, and the Herons, by
J. L. Bonhote ...

Black-tailed Hawfinch
Black-vented Bishop, by A. G. Butler,

Ph. D .

Blue Robin ...

•Blue Robin ...

Bluish Finch

Blue- winged Dove-birds ... 40

•Breeding Cockatoos
•Breeding Cordon Bleus
•Breeding Grey Parrots
Breeding in the Open Air at Mickle-
field Vicarage, by the Rev. C. D.
Farrar ...

•Breeding Kestrels

•Breeding Redrumps in a Confined
Space ...

•Breeding Results ... ... 14,29.60,79

Breeding Season of 1896, by J. Lewis
Bonhote

Brighton, Bird Show at, by H. R.
Fillmer

British Birds at the Crystal Palace,
by J. L. Bonhote

“ British Birds, their Nests and

Eggs,” Review of ... ... 181

80

i75

43

23

53

137

157

58

144

139

M3

46

137

77

159

178

118

65

PAGE

•British Bird ? What is a ... ... 187

British Ducks, Our, by J. Lewis

Bonhote ... ... ... 160

•Budgerigars ... 30, 32, no, 140, 189

Bullfinch, The Desert Trumpeter,

by E. G. B. Meade-Waldo ... 87

Cages, Foreign Finches in, by A. F.

Wiener ...

•Canary, Cape
•Canary, Wild
•Cape Canary

Council, Report of, for 1895-6
Cardinal, The Red-crested ... ...8,

Cardinal, The Virginian ... 105,

Chaffinch, The Madeiran, by A. G.
Butler, Ph. D. ...

Chaffinch Singing Match, by Albert
Rettich...

Chinese Greenfinch ...

•Citril Finches
•Cockatoo Breeding ...

•Colour of the Bill of the Australian
Green-winged Dove
•Cordon Bleus. Breeding
Council of Avicultural Society for
1895-6 ...

Council, Report of, for 1895-6
Cresswell, Mr., on Parrakeets, A
Criticism, by V. Castellan
A Reply, by O. E. Cresswell
Crimson - banded Whydah, by H. J.
Fulljames

Crystal Palace Show: —

British Birds, by J. L. Bonhote ...
Foreign Birds, by C. S. Simpson ...
P'oreign Finches, by H. R. Fillmer
By R. Phillipps ...

•Crystal Palace Show
Cuba Finch
Cuckoo’s Eggs
•Cuckoo Fed by Parrakeet

Dangerous Birds, by Charles L
Rothera, B.A.

•Dangerous Birds
Dark-blue Grosbeak
•Definition of British Bird ...

Desert Trumpeter Bullfinch, by E. G.

B. Meade-Waldo
•Diamond Sparrow ...

Difficulties of the Aviculturist, Some,
by C. L. Rothera, B.A. ...

Doves, Identification of Rare, by
O. E- Cresswell .

Ducks, Foreign

Ducks, Our British, by J. L. Bonhote
Dtvarf Finch
•Dwarf Finch

i4f

150

188

188

188-

176

105

165

117

114

25

142-

139

64
143

■ -i.
176

40

41'

84

65
&9'
73-
89

108-

99

28

143

105

158

27

187

87

157

33

112

160

138

no

13

*Eclectus

Egret, The Lesser, as a Pet, by the

Rev. H. D. Astley, M.A. ... 17

Elegant Parrakeet ... ... ... 98-

•Ethics of Exhibiting ... 14, 29, 78-

•Exhibiting, Ethics of ... 14, 29, 78-

•Fancy Feather and Bird Skin Sales... 80
•Feeding Parrots on Mice ... .. 12

Fieldfare ... ... ... ... 184

•Food for Insectivorous Birds 32, 63 77, 188-

Index to Subjects — continued .

PAGE

‘Food, Insect ... ... ... 76

Foreign Birds at the Crystal Palace

Show of 1896, by C. S. Simpson... 69
“ Foreign Fancy Birds,” Review of... 92

Foreign Finches at the Crystal Palace,

by H. K. Fillmer ... ... 73

Foreign Finches in Cages, by A. F.

Wiener... ... ... ... 150

“ Foreign Finches in Captivity,”

Reviews of ... 10, 43, 125, 170

* Foreign Finches, Seeds for .. ... 96

Forsten’s Lorikeet ... ... 91, 92.2

‘Foster-Mother, A Strange ... ... 143

Fruit Pigeon, Something about a, by

the Rev. H. D. Astley ... ... 59

Goldfinch ... ... ... 44, 61

‘Gouldian Finches ... ... ... 46

Gouldian Finches, Notes on theTreat-
ment of Newly Imported, by W.

H. St. Ouintin... ... ... 163

‘Gouldian Finches, Treatment of

Newly Imported ... ... 173

Great Tit ... ... ... ... 106

Green Avadavat .. ... ... 138

Green Cardinal ... ... ... 61

Greenfinch ... ... ... ... 24

‘Greenfinch, The Song of ... ... 48

Green Malabar Honeysucker, by C.

S. Simpson ... ... ... 36

‘Green-winged Dove, Colour of the Bill

of the Australian ... ... 64

Grey-headed Sparrow, by A. G.

"Butler, Ph. D. ... ... ... 5

‘Grey Parrots, Breeding .. ... 46

‘Grit Dangerous to Parrots ? Is,

12, 31, 47, 62, 93

Grosbeaks, The, by H. R. Fillmer

The Greenfinch ... ... ... 24

The Chinese Greenfinch... ... 25

The Black-tailed Hawfinch ... 25

The Hawfinch .. ... ... 26

The Yellow-bellied Grosbeak .. 26

The Dark-blue Grosbeak ... 27

The Genus S'fiertnornii/a, ... ... 55

The White-throated Finch ... 56

The Half-white Finch ... ... 56

The Plumbeous Finch ... .. 57

The Reddish Finch ... ... 57

The Spectacled Finch ... ... 57

The Bluish Finch ... ... 58

The Guttural Finch .. ... 58

The Lined Finch ... ... 59

The Cuba Finch... ... ... 99

The Jacarini Finch ... ... 153

The Thick-billed Cardinal ... 154

The Virginian Cardinal ... ... 165

Guttural Finch ... ... ... 58

Half-white Finch
Hawfinch

Herons, The Bittern and the, by J. L.
Bonhote

‘Honeysuckers, Tanagers and 156,

Honeysucker, The Green Malabar, by
C. S. Simpson ...

Hundred Years Ago, Aviculture a,
by C. S. Simpson

56

26

1

Ho

36

146

Identification of Rare Doves, by O. F.

Cresswell ... ... ... 33

‘Insect Food ... ... ... ... 76

‘Insectivorous Birds, Food for, 32, 63, 77
‘Insectivorous Birds, Silkworms for ... 13

‘Insectivorous British Birds, A Warn¬
ing to Purchasers of ... ... 174

‘Insectivorous British Birds in Cap¬
tivity ... ... ... ... 190

*Is Grit Dangerous to Parrots ?

12, 31, 47, 62, 93

PAGK

‘Jacarini Finch ... ... ... 153

‘Jottings for August ... ... ... 188

‘Kestrels, Breeding ... ... ... 77

Lesser Egret, The, as a Pet, by the

Rev. H. D. Astley, M.A. ... 17

Lined Finch ... ... ... 59

Liothrix ... ... ... ... 135

List of Members of Avicultural Society ii .
“ Lloyd’s Natural History,” Review of, 172
Lories ... ..." ... ... 90

Love-bird, Nesting of the Rosy-faced,

by R. Phillipps... ... ... 128

Love-birds ... ... ... ... 40

Love Bird, The, by R. Phillipps ... 49

Madeiran Chaffinch, by A. G. Butler,

Ph. D. ... ... ... ... 117

Malabar Honeysucker, The Green, by

C. S. Simpson ... ... ... 36

Mallard ... ... ... ... 162

‘Meat for Parrots ... ... ... 31

Members of Aviculture Society, List of ii.
‘Mice, Feeding Parrots on, ... 12

Migratory Birds, bv C. L- l<othera,B.A. 102
Millet, by E. G. Sa'lt, L.R.C.P. ... 38

Missel Thrush ... ... ... 182

Moorish House Bunting", by E. G. B.

Meade- Waldo ... ... ... 52

Mr. Cresswell on Parrakeets :

A Criticism, by V. Castellan ... 40

A Reply, by O. E. Cresswell ... 41

My Aviaries and their Inmates, by

R. A. Todd ... ... ... 81

My Bird Room, An Account of, by

Margaret Williams ... ... 18

My Passerine Parrakeets, by O. E.

Cresswell ... ... ... 144

Nesting of the Rosy-faced Love-bird,

by R. Phillipps... ... ... 128

‘New Zealand Parrakeet ... 14, 79

Nightingale ... ... ... 102

Northrepps Hall, The Parrots at ... 108

Notes on the Treatment of Newly-
Imported Gouldian Finches, by
W. H. St. Ouintin ... ... 163

‘Nuthatches, Tits and ... ... 79

Officers of Avicultural Society for

1895-6 ... ... ... i.

Our British Ducks, b}. J. L- Bonhote 160

Palace .Show, The, by R. Phillipps ... 89

‘Palace Show, The ... ... ... 108

Parrakeets, A Few Notes on Breed¬
ing Some Australian, by John
Sergeant ... ... ... 96

Parrakeets. Mr. Cresswell on :

A Criticism, by V. Castellan

40

A Reply, by O. E. Cresswell

41

Parrot Finch

... 83

Parrots at Northrepps Hall ...
‘Parrots ? Is grit dangerous to,

108

12, 31,

47. 62, 93

‘Parrots, Meat for

31

‘Parrots on Mice, Feeding ...

12

‘Parrots’ Perches

. 31

Passerine Parrakeets, My, by O.

E.

Cresswell

... 144

Pectoral Rail, bj. D. Seth-Smith

103

Pekin Nig'htingale ...

135

Pennant’s Parrakeet...

97

‘Perches, Parrots’

31

‘Perruche Ingambee of Levaillant
Pied Wagtail, The,— A Warning,

13

by

John Sergeant ...

9

Pin -tailed Whydah ...

7

Plumbeous Finch

57

Index to Subjects — continued.

PAGE

Prize Articles, Rules for ... 177, 191

’Problems in Bird Breeding' ... 126, 156

’Quail Finch ... ... ... 111

’Rare Birds, Some ... ... ... 93

Rare Doves, Identification of, by O.

E. Cresswell ... ... ... 33

Rare Foreign Birds (Second Series)

I. The Grey-headed Sparrow,

by A. G. Butler, Ph. D. ... 5

II. The Green Malabar Honey-

sucker, by C. S. Simpson 36

III. The Moorish House Bunting,

by E. G. B. Meade-Waldo 52

IV. The Black-vented Bishop,

by A. G. Butler, Ph. D. ... 53

V. The Crimson - banded

Whydah, by H. J.

Fulijames ... ... 84

VI. The Desert Trumpeter

Bullfinch, by E. G. B.

Meade-Waldo ... ... 87

VII. The Pectoral Rail, by D.

Seth -Smith ... ... 103

VIII. The Madeiran Chaffinch,

by A. G. Butler, Ph. D _ 117

Red-crested Cardinal ... 8, 105

Reddish Finch ... ... ... 57

•Redrump ... ... ... ... 14

’Redrumps in a Confined Space,

Breeding ... ... ... 159

•Red-sided Tit ... ... 109, no

Redwing ... ... ... ... 184

Report of the Council for 1895-6 ... 176

’Resignation of the Secretary ... 19 1

Reviews : —

“ Foreign Finches in Captivity”

10, 43. 125, 170
“ Accidents to Birds ” ... ... n

“ The Royal Natural History ” ... 28

“ Birds, Beasts and Fishes of the

Norfolk Broadlands”... ... 43

“ Foreign Fancy Birds ” ... ... 92

“ Lloyd’s Natural History ” ... 172

“ British Birds, their Nests and

Eggs ” ... ... ... 181

Robins ... ... ... 45, 106

’Rosa’s Parrakeet ... ... ... 61

Rosella ... ... ... ... 96

Rosy-faced Love-Bird, Nesting of The

bv7 R. Phillipps... ... ... 128

Roundabout Paper, A, by Mrs. Leslie

Williams ... ... ... 134

“ Royal Natural History,” Review of 28
•Rufous-uecked Weaver ... ... 32

Rules of Avicultural Society ... vi.

Rules for Prize Articles... ... 177, 191

’Secretary, Resignation of ...

’Seeds for Foreign Finches ...

Serin Finch, by S. Perkins ...

Shama

’Show Circular, The ...

’Silkworms for Insectivorous Birds ...
*Slender-bill Cockatoo at the Crystal
Palace ...

Small -billed Cardinal
Some Difficulties of the Aviculturist,
by C. L. Rothera, B.A. ...

’Some Rare Birds

Something about a Fruit Pigeon
from Samoa, by the Rev. H. D.
Astley

’Song of the Greenfinch
Song Thrush

Sparrow, The Grey-headed, by A. G.

Butler, Ph. D. ...

Spectacled Finch
Spermophila, The Genus
’Strange Foster-Mother, A ...

’Stray Notes for July
*Sycalis arvetisis

PAGE

191

96-

152

9

95

75. 94

83

6

93-

59'

48-

183

5

57"

55;

143

J57

142-

’Tauagers and Honeysuckers 156,

Texan Cardinal ..*

Thick-billed Cardinal
Thrushes
•Thrushes

’Tits and Nuthatches
’Tits Nesting in a Letter-box
’Treatment of Newly - Imported
Gouldian Finches
Turquoisines

173

83

154

182

188

79'

126-

173

98-

Virginian Cardinal ... 105, 165

’Virginian Cardinal ... ... 14

Visit to the Bird Show at the Royal
Aquarium, by Dr. G. C. William¬
son ... ... ... ... 21

Wagtail, The Pied,— A Warning, by

J. Sergeant ... ... ... 9

’Warning to Purchasers of Insec¬
tivorous British Birds ... ... 174

’Washing Cockatoos ... ... 126

’Weaver, The Rufous-necked ... 32

•What is a British Bird ? ... ... 187

White-throat ... ... ... 102

White-throated Finch ... ... 56

Whydah, The Crimson-banded, by H.

J. Fulijames ... ... ... 84

’Wild Canary ... ... ... 189

Yellow-bellied Grosbeak ... ... 26'

Yellowish Weaver ... ... ... 74

•Yellowish Weaver ... ... 93, 175.

INDEX TO AUTHORS.

* This mark signifies “ In the Correspondence Columns."

PAGE

.Abrahams, J.

*The Quail Finch ... ... ... in

Arthur, C. P.

’’■Feeding Parrots on Mice... ... 12

♦Budgerigars ... ... ... 140

Asti.ey, Rev. H. D.. M.A.

The Lesser Egret... ... ... 17

Something about a Fruit Pigeon

from Samoa ... ... ... 59

* Apropos of Bought Food for In¬
sectivorous Birds ... ... 63

Fertling, A.

“Fancy Feather and Bird Skin Sales 80

Bonhote, J. Lewis .

The Bittern and the Herons ... 1

British Birds at the Costal Palace 65
Our British Ducks ... ... 160

The Breeding Season of 1896 ... 178

Butler, A. G., Ph. D.

The Grey-headed Sparrow ... 5

“The Rufous-necked Weaver ... 32

“The Song of the Greenfinch ... 48

The Black- vented Bishop ... 53

“Breeding Results for 1895 bo

The Madeiran Chaffinch ... 117

“Food for Insectivorous Birds ;
Thrushes ; the Cape Canary ;
the Song of the Wild Canary 189

■Camps, H. T. T., F.Z.S.

“The Ethics of Exhibiting ... 78

*The Slender-bill Cockatoo at the

Crystal Palace ... ... 94

page

Farrar, Rev. C. D.

Breeding in the Open-Air at

Micklefield Vicarage ... 137

“Stray Notes for July ... ... 137

■“Jottings for August ... ... 188

Fillmer, H. R.

'Hie Grosbeaks ... 24, 55, 99, 153, 165

“Breeding Results... ... ... 31

“Bought Food for Insectivorous

Birds ... ... ... ... 63

Foreign Finches at the Crystal
Palace ... ... ... ... 73

“Tits and Nuthatches ... ... 79

“The Show Circular ... ... 95

“Seeds for Foreign Finches ... 96

The Aspect of the Bird Room ... 107

The Bird Show at Brighton ... 118

“Citril Finches ... ... ... 142

““Authorities” and their Critics... 155

“Problems in Bird Breeding ... 156

♦Dangerous Birds... ... ... 158

♦Alario Finches ... ... ... 173

Fui.ijames, Henry J.

♦The Ethics of Exhibiting ... 15

“The Aquarium Show ... ... 61

The Crimson-banded Whydah ... 84

“The Palace Show ... ... 108

Harrison, C.

♦Is Grit Dangerous to Parrots ? ... 93

♦Food for Insectivorous Birds.
Thrushes ; the Cape Canary ; the
Song of the Wild Canary ... 188

Hawthorn, Miss Edith

“Washing Cockatoos .. ... 126

•Castellan, V.

♦Silkworms for Insectivorous Birds 13
Mr. Cresswell on Parrakeets, A

Criticism ... ... ... 40

•Catleugh, W. T.

♦The Dwarf Finch... ... ... no

♦Breeding Cordon Bleus ... ... 143

■Cresswell, O. E-

Identification of Rare Doves ... 33

Mr. Cresswell on Parrakeets,

A Reply ... ... ... 41

♦“Among British Birds in their

Nesting Haunts ” ... ... in

My Passerine Parrakeets ... 144

Cronkshaw, J.

♦Breeding Results ... ... 30

♦Meat for Parrots ... ... 31

Dutton, The Hon. and Rev. F. G.

♦Is grit dangerous to newly-im¬
ported Parrots ? ... ... 12

♦Breeding Grey Parrots ... ... 46

♦The Bird Show at the Royal

Aqudrium ... ... ... 48

♦Tanagers and Honeysuckers ... 173

Housdf.n, James B.

“Birds at Bazaars ... ... 175

Jones, Norman IP.

“Budgerigars ... ... ... 32

Marshall, '1'.

“Food for Insectivorous Birds ... 77

Meade-Waldo, E. G. B.

The Moorish House Bunting ... 52

The Desert Trumpeter Bullfinch ... 87

Oshaldkston, W.

“Some Rare Birds ... ... ... 93

Perkins, Septimus

“The Ethics of Exhibiting 14, 29

♦The Slender-bill Cockatoo at the

Crj'stal Palace ... ... 75

The Serin Finch ... ... _ ... 152

♦“Authorities ” and their Critics ... 155

♦Insectivorous Birds in Captivity... 190

Phillipps, Reginald

♦Is Grit Dangerous to Newly-

Imported Parrots ? ... ... 31

The Love-Bird ... ... ... 49

The Palace Show... ... ... 89

The Nesting- of the Rosy-Faced

Love Bird ... ... ... 128

Index to Authors— continued.

PAGE

Phillips, Mrs. X,. E.

♦The Rufous-necked Weaver ... 32

Pool, J. C.

♦Budgerigars ... ... ... 189

Rettich, Albert

A Chaffinch Singing Match ... 114

Rothera, Charles G., B.A.

Some Difficulties of the Avicul-

turist ... ... ... 6

♦Breeding Results... ... ... 29

Migratory Birds ... ... ... 102

Dangerous Birds ... ... ... 105

♦Problems in Bird Breeding ... 126

Salt, E. G., E.R.C.P.

Millet ... ... ... ... 38

Savage, A.

♦Breeding Results ... ... 14, 79

♦Breeding Redrumps in a Confined

Space... ... ... ... 159

♦The Treatment ofNewly-Imported

Gouldiau Finches ... ... 173

Sergeant, John

The Pied Wagtail— A Warning ... 9

A Few Notes on Breeding some

Australian Parrakeets ... 96

♦Dangerous Birds ... ... ... 141

Seth-Smith. D.

♦Colour of the Bill of the Austra¬
lian Green-winged Dove ... 64

The Pectoral Rail ... ... 103

'The Anatidce ... ... ... 112

Sharp, Miss, M. D.

♦Parrot’s Perches ... ... ... 31

*Insect Food ... ... ... 76

Simpson, C. S., E.R.C.P., M.R.C.S.

♦The Ethics of Exhibiting ... 15

The Green Malabar Hone\'sucker 36
♦Is Grit Dangerous to Newly-Im¬
ported Parrots ? ... ” 47, 62

Foreign Birds at the Crystal

Palace Show of 1896 ... 69

Aviculture a Hundred Years Ago 146

Resignation of the Secretary ... 191

page

Slater, Arthur A.

♦The Show Circular ... ... qs

Storey, James

♦Perruclie Ingambee of Devaillant 13
St. Quintin, W. H.

♦Gouldiau Finches ... ... 46

•Breeding Kestrels ... ... 77

Notes on the Treatment ofNewly-

Imported Gouldian Finches... 163

SWAILES, G. C.

♦Citril Finches ... ... ... 142

♦What is a British Bird ? ... ... 187

Thom, A. A.

♦Budgerigars ... ... ... no

Todd, R. A.

My Aviaries and their Inmates ... 81

♦The Red-Sided Tit ... ... no

“ Varet ”

*A Warning to Purchasers of In¬
sectivorous Birds ... ... 174

Wiener. A. E-

♦Breeding Cockatoos ... ... 139

♦A Strange Foster-Mother ... 143

Foreign Finches in Cages ... 150

♦Tanagers and Honeysuckers ... 156

Williams, Mrs. Deslie

An Account of My Bird Room ... 18

*Food for Insectivorous Birds ... 32

A Roundabout Paper ... ... 134

♦“ Authorities ” and their Critics... 155

Williamson, Dr. Geo. C.

A Visit to the Bird Show at the

Royal Aquarium ... ... 21

♦The Aquarium Show ... ... 76

ERRATA.

Page 32, two lines from bottom, for Texter Weaver read Textor Weaver.
Page 15S, eight lines from top, for what read that.